HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-17-2016 HEARING EXAMINER AGENDA
HEARING EXAMINER
February 17, 2016
5:30 p.m.
City Council Chambers
25 West Main Street
I. Case No: CAO15-0004
Applicant: Ryan L. Vondra, Capital Projects Manager
Comm. Dev. & Public Works Dept.
City of Auburn
25 West Main ST
Auburn, WA 98001-4998
Request: Critical Area Variance pursuant to City Code Section 16.10.160 to
implement a 35 percent reduction from the standard 75-foot buffer,
to an average 48.75 feet, either side of the approximately 5-foot wide
ordinary high water mark width of a new stream channel. The
request is related to a component of the City’s S 277th Street
Corridor Capacity & Non-Motorized Trail Improvements Project
(Project # C222A).
Project Location: 700 block of S 277th Street. The vacant site is located within the
NE quarter, of the NW quarter of Section 31, Township 22 North,
Range 5 East, W.M. King County, Washington. Assessor’s Parcel
No. 936060-0320 & -0325.
WRITTEN STATEMENT addressing how the proposed Critical Areas Variance complies with the
following criteria:
1. There are unique physical conditions peculiar and inherent to the affected property which makes
it difficult or infeasible to strictly comply with the provisions of this section;
The City proposes reduced mitigation stream buffers for this project because of the limited and
constrained nature of land available for a mitigation stream and stream buffer in the vicinity of
the project. The proposed stream buffers would be a 35 percent reduction of the standard 75-foot-
wide buffer, to an average 48.75 feet on either side of the approximately 5-foot ordinary high
water width of the new stream channel. These stream buffer reductions are in accordance with
ACC 19.10.090.E.2.e. The proposed mitigation stream and its buffer will constitute a new and
enhanced 105-foot-wide riparian corridor that connects to Auburn Creek and to the Green River.
The stream channel will meander within the 105-foot-wide corridor, but a minimum 25 -foot-wide
vegetated buffer will be maintained in all locations.
Please see the attached Figure C-1 for reference.
2. The variance is the minimum necessary to accommodate the building footprint and access;
Not applicable. There are no buildings proposed with this project.
3. The proposed variance would preserve the functions and values of the critical area, and/or the
proposal does not create or increase the risk to the public health, safety, and general welfare, or to
public or private property;
Yes, the proposal will preserve the functions and values of the critical land and does not create or
increase the risk to public health, safety, and general welfare, or to public or private property.
The entire mitigation corridor, including buffers, will be preserved in a conservation easement.
Stream channel and buffer enhancement measures are included in the mitigation plan to improve
fish and wildlife habitat. These measure would include:
• The new buffer will be planted with a variety of native trees and shrubs.
• Large black cottonwoods and conifers will be retained in the buffer to the extent practicable.
• Downed logs will be placed in the buffer for added wildlife habitat.
• Large woody debris will be added to the stream channel in selected locations to increase fish
habitat.
• Spawning gravels will be placed in the stream for the benefit of any adult fish using the
stream.
• In addition, the stream will be hydrologically supported by treated stormwater, substantially
improved from current conditions.
• The existing 18 inch culvert under South 277th Street is a partial fish barrier and will be
removed.
• A new fish passable box culvert will be constructed to convey the new stream under South
277th and into the ditches north of the road. These ditches connect to Auburn Creek and to
the Green River.
4. The proposed variance would not adversely affect surrounding properties adjoining the
development site;
The reduced stream buffers would not adversely affect surrounding properties adjoin the site.
The City is working in conjunction with the Robertson Properties Group, who owns the old drive-
in movie theater complex, to assure the work that is being completed fits in with their overall
future development plan. The property directly to the east is owned by the Port of Seattle. This
property acts as a gateway to their floodplain mitigation site and will not be affected as a result of
this project.
5. Adverse impacts to critical areas resulting from the proposal are minimized;
There are no adverse impacts. The proposed new stream channel and its vegetated buffer will be
a substantial improvement to aquatic and wildlife habitat functions and values compared to
existing conditions.
6. The special circumstances or conditions affecting the property are not a result of the action of the
applicant or previous owner.
No, the special circumstances are as a result of the limited area for the mitigated stream and its
buffers.
DATE: September 25, 2015 FILE: FIGUREC1_MITIGATIONPLAN
0
SCALE IN FEET
100
S 277th Street Corridor
Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan
Figure C-1
Stormwater
Detention Pond
(Flow Control)
Stormwater
Wetland
(Runoff
Treatment)
"Offsite Wetland A"
Buffer Per Jeff Jones
(Proposed 50' Std. Reduced
By 35% to 32.5')
Mitigation Stream
974 LF @ 0.20% Gradient
(OHW = 8' Wide)
Pond Access Road
15' Min Width
AREA 4
(Stormwater
Management)
STEIN PARCEL
30
'
Ex. G Street NE ROW
"Offsite Wetland A"
2015 Delineation By Jeff Jones
(To Be Confirmed
With USACE)
7:1 MAX
New Fish-Passable Culvert
L=120'
(Replaces Two Ex.
Flood Culverts)
EL=44.25
Utilize Ex Roadside Ditch
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
105.0' Min Stream Buffer Corridor
(Proposed Conservation Easement)
25.0' Min
Stream
Buffer (Typ)
Interim Conveyance Ditch
AREA 2
AREA 5
(Stormwater Management)
Existing Channel
(Continues to S 277th St.
Survey Pending)
Proposed Pond
Easement
15' Min Between
Stream Excavation
And Ex. Wetland, Typ.
(Clearance For Construction
And Wetland Hydrology
Protection)
Interim Ditch At Toe Of
Proposed S 277th Street
Road Embankment (Typ)
Approx. Limit of
4:1 Transition Slopes
Port of Seattle Property
"Offsite Wetland D"
Approx. Limits Shown
(To Be Confirmed by
Jeff Jones With USACE)
FUTURE
I STREET NE
48.75' Min
Stream Buffer
(Port of Seattle
Property Side)
Flow Control Structure
25
'
M
i
n
Str
e
a
m
Bu
f
f
e
r
25' Min
Proposed S 277th Street Widening
Stormwater Inlet
Proposed R/W
(1' Min Beyond 2'
Wide Trail Shoulder)
Proposed Slope And
Drainage Easement
Ex. R/W
Ex. Stein Parcel
Access Easements
(To Be Extinguished)
Existing 20' Access Easement
"Offsite Wetland D"
Buffer (Proposed 50'
Std. Reduced
By 35% to 32.5')
Interim Culvert Under
Unimproved G Street
5' Wide O.H.W.
Split Rail Fence (Typ. Along
Conservation Easement Line)
Chain Link Fence
Stream
Buffer
Gate
Existing "Offsite Wetland A" Buffer
(Existing Recorded Conservation
Easement on Area 4)
Portion of Existing Conservation
Easement To Be Vacated
Critical Areas Variance Application Supplemental Documentation
City Project C222a0 – S 277th St Corridor Capacity & Non-motorized Trail Improvements
LEGAL DECRIPTIONS
PTN SEC 31 TWP 22N RGE 5E, KING COUNTY
APN: 936060-0320-05
PARCEL C:
THAT PORTION OF THE W. A. COX D.L.C., IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST,
W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID W. A. COX D.L.C.;
THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE THEREOF 210.15 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 839 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTH LINE OF SOUTH 280TH STREET AT A POINT
210.37 FEET WEST OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID D.L.C.;
THENCE EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 210.37 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID D.L.C.;
THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EAST LINE 838.2 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING ;
EXCEPT THE SOUTH 414.56 FEET THEREOF.
(ALSO KNOWN AS A PORTION OF LOTS 40 AND 41, WHITE RIVER VALLEY HOME TRACTS 2ND
ADDITION, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF.)
2. Map-Customer
First American Title
First American Title
First American Title
First American Title
First American Title
First American Title
PTN SEC 31 TWP 22N RGE 5E, KING COUNTY
APN: 936060-0325-00
PARCEL A:
THE SOUTH 414.56 FEET OF THAT PORTION OF W.A. COX DONATION LAND CLAIM IN TOWNSHIP 22
NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID W.A. COX DONATION LAND CLAIM;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID DONATION LAND CLAIM 420.15 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 839.74 FEET MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE COUNTY ROAD "SOUTH
280TH STREET" AT A POINT 420.31 FEET WEST FROM THE EAST LINE OF SAID DONATION LAND
CLAIM;
THENCE EAST ALONG SAID COUNTRY ROAD 420.31 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID DONATION LAND
CLAIM;
THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID DONATION LAND CLAIM 838.2 FEET TO THE
PLACE OF BEGINNING.
(BEING KNOWN AS THE SOUTH 414.56 FEET OF TRACTS 40 AND 41, SECOND ADDITION TO WHITE
RIVER VALLEY HOME TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF.)
PARCEL B:
A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THAT PORTION OF SAID W.A. COX
DONATION LAND CLAIM, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID W.A. COX DONATION LAND CLAIM;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID W.A. COX LAND CLAIM 230.15 FEET TO THE
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS EASEMENT;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 40.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHERLY TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE COUNTRY ROAD "SOUTH 280TH
STREET" WHICH IS 190.37 FEET WEST OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID COX DONATION LAND CLAIM;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID ROAD 40.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTHERLY TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
EXCEPT THE SOUTH 414.56 FEET;
PARCEL C:
A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR ROAD OVER THE EAST 40 FEET OF THE WEST 230 FEET OF THAT
PORTION OF SAID TRACT 41, LYING NORTHERLY OF SAID SOUTH 414.56 FEET.
Tax Parcel Number: 936060-0325-00
2. Map-Customer
First American Title
First American Title
First American Title
First American Title
First American Title
First American Title
CAO15-0021
Printed Date:
Information shown is for general reference
purposes only and does not necessarily
represent exact geographic or cartographic
data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no
warranty as to its accuracy.
Map Created by City of Auburn eGIS
2/3/2016
CAO15-0021
Printed Date:
Information shown is for general reference
purposes only and does not necessarily
represent exact geographic or cartographic
data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no
warranty as to its accuracy.
Map Created by City of Auburn eGIS
2/3/2016
WETLANDS AND STREAMS DISCIPLINE REPORT
South 277th Street Corridor Capacity
and Non-Motorized Trail Improvements
Submitted to
City of Auburn Public Works
25 West Main Street
Auburn, WA 98001
Prepared for
Federal Highway Administration
and
Washington State Department of Transportation
Prepared by
Parametrix, Inc.
719 2nd Avenue, Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98104
May 2015
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
i
Contents
1 Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1
2 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 5
3 Project Description .................................................................................................................. 7
3.1 Project Purpose and Need ............................................................................................................ 7
3.2 Project Overview ......................................................................................................................... 7
3.3 Project Area and Setting .............................................................................................................. 7
4 Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 11
4.1 Methods of Analysis .................................................................................................................. 11
4.1.1 Wetland Identification and Delineation .......................................................................... 11
4.1.2 Wetland Classification and Rating .................................................................................. 13
4.1.3 Wetland Functional Assessment ..................................................................................... 13
4.1.4 Stream Identification ....................................................................................................... 14
4.2 Studies and Coordination ........................................................................................................... 14
4.2.1 Review of Existing Information ...................................................................................... 14
4.2.2 Field Investigation ........................................................................................................... 14
4.2.3 Regulations ...................................................................................................................... 14
5 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................ 17
5.1 General Habitat Characteristics of the Project Area .................................................................. 17
5.1.1 Watershed ........................................................................................................................ 17
5.1.2 Land Use ......................................................................................................................... 17
5.1.3 Topography ..................................................................................................................... 18
5.1.4 Soils ................................................................................................................................. 18
5.1.5 Vegetation ....................................................................................................................... 18
5.1.6 Fish and Wildlife ............................................................................................................. 18
5.2 Wetlands in the Project Area ..................................................................................................... 20
5.3 Streams in the Project Area ....................................................................................................... 36
5.3.1 Stream Type .................................................................................................................... 36
5.3.2 Stream Hydrology ........................................................................................................... 36
5.3.3 Water Quality .................................................................................................................. 37
5.3.4 Fish Habitat ..................................................................................................................... 37
5.3.5 Fish Presence ................................................................................................................... 37
5.3.6 Stream Buffer Conditions................................................................................................ 37
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
ii MAY 2015
6 Impacts .................................................................................................................................. 39
6.1 Wetlands .................................................................................................................................... 39
6.1.1 Permanent Impacts on Wetlands ..................................................................................... 39
6.1.2 Permanent Impacts on Wetland Buffers .......................................................................... 40
6.1.3 Temporary Impacts on Wetlands and Buffers ................................................................. 40
6.1.4 Indirect Impacts on Wetlands .......................................................................................... 40
6.1.5 Streams ............................................................................................................................ 41
6.1.6 Indirect Impacts on Streams ............................................................................................ 41
7 Mitigation .............................................................................................................................. 43
7.1 Avoidance and Minimization Measures .................................................................................... 43
7.2 Restoration of Temporary Impacts ............................................................................................ 43
7.3 Compensatory Mitigation .......................................................................................................... 44
7.3.1 Wetlands Mitigation ........................................................................................................ 44
7.3.2 Stream Mitigation ............................................................................................................ 45
8 References ............................................................................................................................. 49
List of Tables
Table 4-1. Key to Plant Indicator Status Categories ............................................................................ 12
Table 4-2. Criteria for Wetland Rating Categories as Specified by Ecology and the City of Auburn . 13
Table 5-1. Summary of Wetlands in the Project Area .......................................................................... 31
Table 5-2. Summary of Wetland Functions for Wetlands in the Project Area ..................................... 31
Table 6-1. Wetland, Stream, and Buffer Impacts ................................................................................. 39
List of Figures
Figure 3-1. Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................................ 8
Figure 3-2 Project Overview .................................................................................................................. 9
Figure 5-1. Wetlands and Streams and Project Impacts ....................................................................... 21
Figure 7-1. Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan ................................................................................... 47
List of Appendices
A Wetland Determination Data Forms
B Wetland Rating Forms
C Wetland Functions and Values Forms
D Site Photographs
E Supplementary Information
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
iii
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ACC Auburn City Code
BMP best management practice
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
City City of Auburn
Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DNR Washington Department of Natural Resources
Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FAC Facultative
FACU Facultative Upland
FACW Facultative Wetland
HGM hydrogeomorphic classification
HPA Hydraulic Project Approval
HUC Hydrologic Unit Code
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NWI National Wetlands Inventory
OBL Obligate
PEM palustrine emergent
Sound Transit Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority
SPCC Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (plan)
SR State Route
TNW Traditional Navigable Water
UPL Upland
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
WAC Washington Administrative Code
WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
WRIA Water Resource Inventory Area
WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 1
1 SUMMARY
This Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report is intended to provide information to the City of Auburn
(City) to assist with project planning and facilitate regulatory approvals and permitting for the S 277th St
Corridor Capacity and Non-motorized Trail Improvements Project in Auburn, Washington. This report
describes wetlands in the project area; evaluates potential impacts to wetlands, streams, and buffers from the
proposed project; and presents avoidance and minimization measures included in the project design and
conceptual mitigation for unavoidable impacts. This Wetland and Stream Discipline Report supports a
National Environmental Policy Act categorical exclusion for the S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-
motorized Trail Improvements Project.
S 277th St in Auburn is the only remaining two-lane segment on the corridor between State Route (SR) 99
and SR 18. This causes tremendous congestion, delays, and degradation of safety for the transportation
network in the entire region. This project’s purpose is to complete the final unimproved segment on this vital
arterial connection. On a typical weekday, the S 272nd St/277th St corridor carries more than 24,000
vehicles, including a high percentage of trucks. High traffic volumes regularly overwhelm the system in this
constrained segment of the corridor causing delay and unreliability for all users. This project is needed to
eliminate this bottleneck and improve an essential connection to Puget Sound urban and industrial centers by
improving safety, reducing travel time, expanding reliability, and improving freight movement across the
Green River Valley.
This project consists of intersection improvements and major roadway widening on S 277th St NE from
Auburn Way N to L St NE. Project components include adding two new eastbound through lanes, one new
westbound through lane, a Class I separated non-motorized trail, street lighting improvements, storm
drainage improvements, streetscape improvements, intelligent transportation system improvements,
intersection capacity and safety improvements, and auxiliary turn lanes at Auburn Way N, D St NE, and the
future I St NE. The project length is approximately 3,300 feet. The project would also include a fish-passable
culvert under S 277th St and construction of a compensatory stream mitigation site.
Biologists delineated portions of three Category III wetlands (Wetlands A, B, and C) in the road project area.
Wetland A includes the ditches south of S 277th St from G St NE extending eastward to the east boundary of
the Port of Seattle property. Wetland B is located on the north side of S 277th St, and Wetland C is located
on the opposite (south) side of the road. Three other wetlands were identified off-site on the Robertson
Properties Group (RPG) but were not delineated for this project.
One stream (Stream 1) was mapped within the project area. Stream 1 is confined to the bottom of a ditch
along the south side of S 277th St, just north of the area that was historically a drive-in movie theater. The
defined channel occurs in two sections separated by a culvert under a driveway. These two segments of the
ditch were classified as stream instead of wetland because they lack native hydric soils. Stream 1 is
approximately 900 linear feet long and 2 to 5 feet wide, with a total surface area of approximately 4,604
square feet. Reed canarygrass is the predominant cover type in these two segments of the ditch. Drift lines and
trash were readily observed, indicating the high water mark.
A few dead juveniles and adult coho salmon were observed in the ditch on two separate occasions in 2013.
Because of the presence of fish in the area, the stream was classified as a Class II stream in the city of Auburn.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
2 MAY 2015
This ditch is not expected to provide spawning or rearing habitat for fish, and the quality of foraging or refuge
habitat, if either is present, is poor. The location of the ditches and adjoining areas within the maintained
right-of-way of S 277th St limits the available functioning riparian habitat.
Construction of this project would affect approximately 7,219 square feet of Wetland A and 4,343 square feet
of Wetland C, totaling 11,562 square feet or 0.27 acre of on-site wetlands. These wetland impacts would
result from filling them for widening of S 277th St and construction of the proposed trail. There would be no
permanent wetland effects to Wetland B, because it is on the north side of S 277th St outside of the main
road construction occurring on the south of the existing roadway. Additional turn lanes would be added on
the south and north sides of the intersection with Auburn Way N but would not affect the wetlands. A
portion of an off-site wetland (Off-Site Wetland E) also would be impacted by the project. It is estimated that
1,543 square feet (0.04 acre) of this wetland would be filled for the road prism. Thus, impacts to wetlands as
a result of this project would total 13,105 square feet (0.31 acre).
A total of approximately 250 square feet of temporary impacts to the project area wetland buffers are
anticipated as a result of this project. These buffers are generally low functioning and are composed primarily
of grasses and forbs along the existing road edge.
Construction of this project would also affect approximately 900 linear feet of Stream 1. These impacts would
occur from filling and widening of S 277th St; however, no permanent impacts on stream buffers would
occur from the proposed road improvements. The stream is confined by the road prism on the north and the
gravel embankment of the old drive-in movie theatre parking areas to the south. These areas are not
functioning buffers.
This project would affect a total of 0.31 acre of existing wetlands, and mitigation is needed to compensate for
these impacts. The project would mitigate impacts to wetlands by proceeding in accordance with the
mitigation sequencing requirements established by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Clean
Water Act, and Auburn wetland protection programs (Auburn City Code [ACC] 16.10). A high priority was
placed on designing the project to include measures and features that avoid and minimize adverse effects on
wetland and buffer impacts. The wetlands in the project area have been avoided to the greatest extent feasible
while still achieving the project’s purpose and need.
Parametrix reviewed past project documents of the original 272nd/277th North Corridor Project constructed
by the City of Kent to assess if potential mitigation areas remain for use by Auburn for its current project. In
total, 0.61 acre of wetland mitigation is potentially available to this project (0.26 acre of over-constructed
mitigation and 0.35 acre of reduced impacts). The Kent mitigation site has been established for over a decade.
The City of Kent has granted permission for Auburn to use this excess mitigation, if approved by the Corps.
Auburn proposes that because mitigation was established in advance of the proposed project impacts, a 1:1
mitigation ratio is appropriate for the proposed project. Thus, existing mitigation credits would be sufficient
to cover the project’s anticipated wetland impacts.
The affected reaches of Stream 1 comprise 900 linear feet of roadside ditches. They currently convey
untreated stormwater to other downstream ditches that eventually drain northward to Auburn Creek and the
Green River. The existing stream channel habitat and functions are very low. Fish stranding has occurred just
downstream of the project area stream reaches.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 3
For this project, on-site stream mitigation design would occur on the RPG property south of South 277th
and east of G Street. The mitigation would include constructing at least 900 linear feet of a Class 2, fish-
habitable stream channel, with a minimum 48.75-foot buffer from the neighboring property boundaries, and
a total 105-foot-wide corridor for fish and wildlife habitat. Wetlands on the RPG properties would be
avoided by the mitigation construction. A detailed mitigation plan will be submitted in a separate report. In
addition, one fish-passable culvert would be constructed beneath S 277th St. This culvert is necessary to
provide a fish-passable connection between the new stream channel south of S 277th St and the
stream/wetland channel north of S 277th St and Auburn Creek farther north.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 5
2 INTRODUCTION
This Wetland and Stream Discipline Report is intended to provide information to assist project planning and
facilitate permitting. This report describes wetlands in the project area; evaluates potential impacts to
wetlands, streams, and buffers from the proposed project; and presents avoidance and minimization measures
included in the project design and conceptual mitigation for unavoidable impacts.
This report combines aquatic resources—namely wetlands and streams—into one report. This approach was
chosen because both resources are highly degraded in the project area. They occur primarily in a roadside
ditch system that has been maintained for decades and provides minimal habitat functions. Thus, a separate
fish resources discipline report was not prepared for the project.
This report follows the guidance for report format listed in for the Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) Wetlands Discipline Report Checklist. It also contains the elements of a typical
Wetland and Stream Assessment Report. However, this discipline report has been modified from the typical
format so it can be used for multiple purposes, including compliance with WSDOT’s NEPA requirements,
compliance with the Clean Water Act Section 404 permitting program administered by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (Corps), and partial compliance with the Auburn City Code critical areas regulations. A separate
critical areas report, including mitigation, will be submitted to the City to satisfy critical areas requirements.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 7
3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 Project Purpose and Need
S 277th St in Auburn is the only remaining two-lane segment on the corridor between SR 99 and SR 18.
This causes tremendous congestion, delays, and degradation of safety for the transportation network in the
region. This project’s purpose is to complete the final unimproved segment on this important arterial
connection. On a typical weekday, the S 272nd St/277th St corridor carries more than 24,000 vehicles,
including a high percentage of trucks. High traffic volumes regularly overwhelm the system in this
constrained segment of the corridor causing delay and unreliability for all users. This project is needed to
eliminate this bottleneck and improve an essential connection to the urban and industrial centers in the
region by improving safety, reducing travel time, expanding reliability, and improving freight movement
across the Green River Valley.
3.2 Project Overview
This proposed project would improve access to the urban centers in Auburn, Kent, Federal Way, and
Covington, including three Sound Transit bus and rail stations. In addition to the valuable motorized
improvements, this project would complete a separated non-motorized trail connection between the
Interurban Trail and Green River Trail systems and connect with the City of Kent’s Trail across the Green
River (Figure 3-2).
The project consists of intersection improvements and major roadway widening on S 277th St NE from
Auburn Way N to L St NE. Project components include adding two new eastbound through lanes, one new
westbound through lane, a Class I separated non-motorized trail, street lighting improvements, storm
drainage improvements, streetscape improvements, intelligent transportation system improvements,
intersection capacity and safety improvements, and auxiliary turn lanes at Auburn Way N, D St NE, and the
future I St NE. The project would also include a fish-passable culvert under S 277th St and construction of a
compensatory mitigation site. The project length is approximately 3,300 feet.
3.3 Project Area and Setting
The project area is a generally linear corridor mostly within an existing road corridor. Most of the project area
is located in Section 31, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian; the western end of the
project area is in Section 36, Township 22 North, Range 4 East. The approximate latitude/longitude
coordinates are 47.3538°N, 122.2210°W (Figure 3-1).
The project area is in the Lower Green River sub-basin of Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 (Green-
Duwamish Watershed), and identified in Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) number 171100130304, Mill
Creek-Green River.
The east terminus is located at the intersection of S 277th St and L St NE, which is the entrance for a
residential development. The western terminus is located at the intersection of S 277th St and Auburn Way
N, where there is a convenience store/gas station. To the north of S 277th St is agricultural land and these
fields are actively being farmed. Ditches are located parallel to S 277th St on both the north and south sides of
the roadway. On the south side of S 277th St, near the center of the project alignment, is an area historically
used as a drive-in movie theater, but this property is currently abandoned. Generally, the shoulders and the
ditches located near the road are degraded from heavy use (Figure 3-2).
DATE: March 17, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 3-1
0
Project
Location
Kent
Auburn
Project
Location
Seattle
Tacoma
Kent
Auburn
S 277th St
Au
b
u
r
n
W
a
y
N
E
V
a
l
l
e
y
H
w
y
SCALE IN FEET
10.5
Auburn Creek
Green River
Vicinity Map
Figure 3-1
TO GRE
E
N
R
I
V
E
R
,
VIA AUB
U
R
N
C
R
E
E
K
TW
I
N
B
O
X
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
S
18
"
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
ST
R
E
A
M
PO
R
T
O
F
S
E
A
T
T
L
E
F
L
O
O
D
CO
N
T
R
O
L
C
H
A
N
N
E
L
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
ST
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
DE
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
P
O
N
D
48
"
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
CU
L
V
E
R
T
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
T
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
TR
E
A
T
M
E
N
T
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
DATE: March 30,
2
0
1
5
F
I
L
E
:
P
S
1
9
3
1
0
2
4
F
I
G
3
-
2
0SCALE IN FEET 500
So
u
t
h
2
7
7
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
Fi
g
u
r
e
3
-
2
LE
G
E
N
D
Wa
t
e
r
B
o
d
y
Wa
t
e
r
C
o
u
r
s
e
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
C
u
l
v
e
r
t
Ne
w
F
u
l
l
D
e
p
t
h
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
Ne
w
N
o
n
-
M
o
t
o
r
i
z
e
d
T
r
a
i
l
PV
C
P
i
p
e
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 11
4 METHODOLOGY
This discipline report is based on a review of existing information and field investigations. The goal of these
efforts is to document existing information to reflect current site conditions and to collect new information to
assess impacts.
4.1 Methods of Analysis
4.1.1 Wetland Identification and Delineation
The methods specified in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory
1987) were used by project biologists to delineate on-site wetlands. Additionally, the methods specified in the
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and
Coast Region (Corps 2010) were used. These methods comply with those in the Washington State Wetland
Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1997) which is the most current wetland delineation manual
designated for use in the City (ACC 16.10.090.C.1.
Wetlands are defined as those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. An area must have at least one positive
indicator for each of the following: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology to be
considered a wetland. The delineated wetlands were instrument-surveyed by professional land surveyors.
Wetland determination data forms from the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Corps 2010) were recorded for each wetland.
4.1.1.1 Vegetation
The dominant plants and their wetland indicator status were evaluated to determine if the vegetation was
hydrophytic. Hydrophytic vegetation is generally defined as vegetation adapted to prolonged saturated soil
conditions. To meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion, more than 50 percent of the dominant plants must
be Facultative (FAC), Facultative Wetland (FACW), or Obligate (OBL), based on the plant indicator status
category assigned to each plant species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (Reed 1988, 1993).
Table 4-1 lists the definitions of the indicator status categories.
Scientific and common plant names follow currently accepted nomenclature. Most names are consistent with
the National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar 2013) and the PLANTS Database (U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Natural Resources Conservation Service [USDA, NRCS] 2013a). During the field investigations, dominant
plant species were observed and recorded on data forms for each sample plot.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
12 MAY 2015
Table 4-1. Key to Plant Indicator Status Categories
Plant Indicator Status Category Symbol Definition
Obligate Wetland Plants OBL Plants that almost always (> 99% of the time) occur in
wetlands, but which may rarely (< 1% of the time)
occur in non-wetlands.
Facultative Wetland Plants FACW Plants that often (67% to 99% of the time) occur in
wetlands, but sometimes (1% to 33% of the time)
occur in non-wetlands.
Facultative Plants FAC Plants with a similar likelihood (33% to 66% of the
time) of occurring in both wetlands and non-wetlands.
Facultative Upland Plants FACU Plants that sometimes (1% to 33% of the time) occur
in wetlands, but occur more often (67% to 99% of the
time) in non-wetlands.
Upland Plants UPL Plants that rarely (< 1% of the time) occur in wetlands,
and almost always (> 99% of the time) occur in non-
wetlands.
Source: Environmental Laboratory (1987).
4.1.1.2 Soils
Generally, an area must have hydric soils to be a wetland. Hydric soil forms when soils are saturated, flooded,
or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part.
Biological activities in saturated soil result in reduced oxygen concentrations that result in a preponderance of
organisms using anaerobic processes for metabolism. Over time, anaerobic biological processes result in
certain soil color patterns, which are used as indicators of hydric soil. Typically, low-chroma colors are formed
in the soil matrix. Brightly-colored redoximorphic features form within the matrix under a fluctuating water
table. Other important hydric soil indicators include organic matter accumulations in the surface horizon,
reduced sulfur odors, and organic matter staining in the subsurface. Soils were examined by excavating sample
plots to a depth of 18 inches or more to observe soil profiles, colors, and textures. The depths of the sample
plots ranged between 18 and 20 inches deep with varying widths, with the exception of two upland sample
plots that were shallower because of the presence of quarry spalls or cobbles. Munsell color charts (Greytag
Macbeth 2000) were used to describe soil colors.
4.1.1.3 Hydrology
The project area was examined for evidence of wetland hydrology. An area is considered to have wetland
hydrology when soils are ponded or saturated consecutively 12.5 percent (sometimes 5 to 12.5 percent) of the
growing season. In King County (Kent station), the growing season generally lasts from late March (March
24) to mid-November (November 11) (USDA, NRCS 2002); ponding or saturation must be present for
approximately 29 consecutive days. Primary indicators of wetland hydrology include surface inundation and
saturated soils. Secondary indicators of wetland hydrology include drainage patterns, watermarks on
vegetation, water-stained leaves, and oxidized root channels.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 13
4.1.2 Wetland Classification and Rating
Delineated wetlands were classified according to the USFWS Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al. 1979). Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) classifications were assigned
to wetlands using Corps methods established in a Hydrogeomorphic Classification System for Wetlands
(Brinson 1993). Wetlands were rated according to ACC 16.10.070.C and the Washington State Wetland
Rating System for Western Washington – Revised (Hruby 2004) (Appendix B). This rating system was used
because wetlands were delineated in 2013 and rated in 2014. Table 4-2 summarizes the state and local
jurisdiction wetland rating criteria for each wetland category. Buffer widths assigned to wetlands in the project
area reflect the requirements of ACC 16.10.090.E.1.
Table 4-2. Criteria for Wetland Rating Categories as Specified by Ecologya
and the City of Auburnb
Category I Wetlands of exceptional value in terms of protecting water quality, storing flood water and
stormwater, and/or providing habitat for wildlife as indicated by a rating system score of 70 points
or more. These are wetland communities of infrequent occurrence that often provide
documented habitat for sensitive, threatened, or endangered species and/or have other
attributes that are very difficult or impossible to replace if altered.
Category II Wetlands that have very important resources as indicated by a rating system score of between
51 and 69 points. These wetlands occur more commonly than Category I wetlands but still
require a high level of protection.
Category III Wetlands that have important resource value as indicated by a rating system score of between
30 and 50 points.
Category IV Wetlands that are of limited resource value as indicated by a rating system score of less than
30 points. They typically have vegetation of similar age and class, lack special habitat features,
and/or are isolated or disconnected from other aquatic systems or high quality upland habitats.
a Hruby (2004)
b ACC16.10.070
4.1.3 Wetland Functional Assessment
Functions of individual wetlands were assessed using the WSDOT Wetland Functions Characterization Tool
for Linear Projects (Null et al. 2000). This method allows evaluation of wetland function, using best
professional judgment and readily observed environmental characteristics. For example, an area of open water
may provide habitat for waterfowl or aquatic animals. The upland habitats and buffers surrounding wetlands
were also considered in the evaluation, because adjacent land uses affect the performance of wetland
functions. Biologists reviewed the indicator characteristics present for each wetland and assigned a summary
rating of low, moderate, or high for each wetland function.
Functions that were considered most relevant to this project are grouped into three categories: habitat, water
quality, and hydrologic support. Habitat functions include providing fish, avian species, and other wildlife
access to food, cover, and breeding and rearing opportunities. Hydrologic functions assessed include
groundwater recharge/discharge, base flow support, and flood flow alteration (storage and desynchronization).
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
14 MAY 2015
Water quality functions include protection and enhancement through sedimentation, erosion protection, and
nutrient retention/nutrient transformation.
4.1.4 Stream Identification
The City of Auburn’s critical areas regulations (ACC 16.10.020) define streams as follows:
“Streams” means those areas where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed that
demonstrates clear evidence of the passage of water and includes, but is not limited to, bedrock
channels, gravel beds, sand and silt beds and defined-channel swales. The channel or bed need not
contain water year-round. This definition is not intended to include artificially created irrigation
ditches, canals, storm or surface water devices, or other entirely artificial watercourses unless they are
used by salmonids or created for the purposes of stream mitigation.
Project area streams were identified and classified using the above definition. Streams were also classified
according to the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) water typing system (DNR 2014;
Washington Administrative Code [WAC] 222.16.030). The classifications were applied to the stream reaches
located within the project area. Generally, wetland areas within the project area were determined to be
streams if the areas were ditched, had defined channels, lacked native hydric soils, and did not fully meet the
criteria of wetlands.
4.2 Studies and Coordination
4.2.1 Review of Existing Information
Prior to conducting field work, biologists reviewed maps and materials including, but not limited to:
NRCS Web Soil Survey (USDA, NRCS 2013b)
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), Online interactive mapper (USFWS 2013)
Washington DNR Natural Heritage Program (DNR 2013)
A catalog of Washington streams and salmon utilization, Volume 1, Puget Sound Region
(Williams et al. 1975)
King County iMap (King County 2013)
4.2.2 Field Investigation
Field investigations in the project area occurred over multiple site visits between November and December
2013. Several observations of water flow in project area ditches occurred in 2014 during other incidental site
visits.
4.2.3 Regulations
Wetlands and streams in the project area (S 277th St right-of-way) are within the jurisdiction of the City and
therefore regulated under ACC 16.10. A separate critical areas study will be submitted to the City at a later
date.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 15
Wetlands, streams, and other sensitive resources in the project vicinity are also subject to federal and state
regulations. At the federal level, wetlands and streams are regulated by the Clean Water Act, Section 404,
which regulates placement of fill in waters of the United States. The Corps is responsible for issuing permits
under Section 404. Activities that affect wetlands and streams may also require a water quality certification
(Section 401 of the Clean Water Act), which is administered at the federal level by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and implemented at the state level by the Washington State Department of
Ecology (Ecology). Ecology reviews projects for compliance with state water quality standards and makes
permitting and mitigation decisions based on the nature and extent of impacts, as well as the type and
quality of wetlands or streams being affected. Activities that use, divert, obstruct, or change the flow of a
Water of the State, including some wetlands, typically require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) permit.
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) is responsible for implementing HPAs under
the State Hydraulic Code.
The Corps and EPA issued a joint memorandum in June 2007, which was revised in December 2008, that
clarifies Clean Water Act jurisdiction following the Supreme Court’s decision in the Rapanos case. Guidance
in the memorandum identifies situations where a developer may need to obtain a Section 404 permit before
completing work in wetlands, tributaries, or other Waters of the United States.
Clean Water Act jurisdiction may also be extended to waters that are not Traditional Navigable Waters
(TNWs) of the United States if either of the following two standards is met. The first standard extends
regulatory jurisdiction to non-navigable tributaries of TNWs that are relatively permanent and wetlands that
directly abut (there is a surface connection) these waters. The second standard requires a case-by-case
determination (“significant nexus” analysis) for tributaries that are considered not relatively permanent and
adjacent wetlands that have characteristics that may significantly affect TNWs.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 17
5 EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section describes the existing conditions of the aquatic resources, including wetlands and streams within
the project area. General fish and wildlife habitat characteristics are also described.
5.1 General Habitat Characteristics of the Project Area
The study area for the wetland investigation is defined as the area within the right-of-way of S 277th St, south
of the road, from Auburn Way N to the entrance of the Trail Run Townhomes at L St NE, and north of S
277th St between Auburn Way N and an access road between Auburn Way N and 86th Ave S.
Characteristics of the project area, including the watershed, land use, topography, soils, vegetation, fish and
wildlife, and wetlands, are described below.
5.1.1 Watershed
The project area is in the Lower Green River sub-basin of WRIA 9, HUC number 171100130304, Mill
Creek-Green River. The Green River, which is located to the north and east of the project area, originates in
the Cascade Mountains about 30 miles northeast of Mount Rainier. Within the Lower Green River sub-
basin, the river meanders over a relatively gentle gradient of the broad valley floor that is characterized by
considerable expanses of open farm land with occasional thickets of mixed conifer and deciduous growth
(Williams et al. 1975).
Most of the lower portion of the basin is highly modified by urban, commercial, industrial, and agricultural
uses. Levees and revetments are present along many portions of the middle and lower river. Agriculture and
urban development have degraded the hydrology, water quality, floodplain, channel diversity, and riparian
areas of most lowland streams in WRIA 9. Water temperatures in the Green River have exceeded lethal levels
for salmonids (Coffin et al. 2011) largely due to inadequate shade. Today, 97 percent of the Green-
Duwamish River estuary has been filled, 70 percent of the area of the former Green-Duwamish River
watershed has been diverted out of the drainage basin, and about 90 percent of the once-extensive floodplain
of the Green-Duwamish River is no longer inundated on a regular basis (Fuerstenberg et al. 1999).
The human population in WRIA 9 has increased dramatically since the beginning of the 19th century. Thirty
percent of WRIA 9 is within urban growth area boundaries and the Lower Green River sub-basin watershed is
largely urban. These factors have degraded or eliminated habitat and the natural ecosystem and geomorphic
processes important to maintain abundant and productive natural salmonid populations.
5.1.2 Land Use
The primary land use in the areas surrounding the project is agricultural, residential, and commercial.
Agricultural fields are located to the north of the project area and an abandoned drive-in movie theater is
located immediately south of the project area. A development of townhomes is located to the east and a gas
station/convenience store is located to the west. The area historically has been used primarily for agriculture.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
18 MAY 2015
5.1.3 Topography
The project area is quite flat, sloping very gently down from the east and the west. There is also a gentle slope
from the south down to the north. Elevations in the project area range from approximately 40 to 46 feet in
the roadside ditch bottom to approximately 50 to 51 feet along S 277th St.
5.1.4 Soils
The majority of the project area is mapped as either Woodinville silt loam or Oridia silt loam, and the
western end of the project area is mapped as Briscot silt loam (USDA, NRCS 2013b). The Woodinville series
consists of deep, poorly drained soils formed in recent alluvium on flood plains and low terraces. Slopes are 0
to 2 percent. Both the Oridia series and Briscot series consist of very deep, poorly drained soils formed in
recent alluvium on floodplains. The slope grades are 0 to 2 percent. Information on soils observed during
field investigations is provided in Section 5.2.
5.1.5 Vegetation
Vegetation within the project area consists of both wetland and upland species. Wetlands in the project area
contain primarily emergent habitats. Dominant vegetation includes reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea)
and broad-leaf cattail (Typha latifolia).Wetland habitats on the site are further detailed in Section 5.2.
Upland plant communities within the project area consist primarily of upland forest and herbaceous
vegetation. Vegetation includes red alder (Alnus rubra), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), reed canarygrass,
Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), western swordfern
(Polystichum munitum), ornamental maple (Acer sp.), common velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), English plantain
(Plantago lanceolata), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), and mowed grasses and forbs. North of the project
are actively farmed agricultural crops.
Information from the DNR Natural Heritage Program indicates that no populations of rare plants are known
to occur within 5 miles of the project area (DNR 2013).
5.1.6 Fish and Wildlife
Wildlife species typically present in the project area are adapted to a wide variety of conditions. Characteristic
species include European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris), American crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos), dark-eyed
juncos (Junco hymalis), spotted towhees (Pipilo maculatus), house finches (Carpodacus mexicanus), house
sparrows (Passer domesticus), black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus), Virginia opossums (Didelphis
virginiana), raccoons (Procyon lotor), deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), and Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus).
During site investigations in the fall of 2013, trumpeter swans (Cygnus buccinator) were observed to the
northwest of the project area, foraging in fields. The field to the north of the project area is mapped as having
waterfowl concentrations by WDFW (2013). No swans were observed within the project area.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 19
Several species of resident and anadromous salmonids are present at various times of the year in the Green
River. Based on data from WDFW (2014, 2015), the following salmonids are known or expected to be
present in the Green River near the confluence of Auburn Creek:
Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)—fall run (spawning)
Steelhead (O. mykiss)—summer (rearing) and winter (occurrence/migration) runs
Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) (presence)
Coho salmon (O. kisutch) (rearing)
Chum salmon (O. keta)—fall run (occurrence/migration)
Sockeye salmon (O. nerka) (occurrence/migration)
Pink salmon (O. gorbuscha) (occurrence/migration)
Coastal cutthroat trout (O. clarki clarki) (occurrence/migration)
Under most conditions, fish in the Green River are unable to enter the waterway (Auburn Creek) that drains
the project area. Auburn Creek discharges to the Green River through a 48-foot-long, 66-inch-diameter
concrete culvert fitted with a flood gate (Northwest Hydraulic Consultants 2004). The flood gate is a top-
hinged cast iron structure 5 to 6 feet in diameter. Under most flow conditions, the culvert is perched several
feet above the surface of the Green River, preventing fish from entering Auburn Creek under most
conditions. When flows on the Green River exceed about 3,000 cubic feet per second, water from the Green
River starts to impose backwater effects on Auburn Creek (Northwest Hydraulic Consultants 2004). At even
higher flows, hydraulic pressure closes the flood gate and prevents fish from passing into or out of Auburn
Creek. Fish are thus able to enter Auburn Creek when flows in the Green River are greater than 3,000 cubic
feet per second, but not when flows are substantially higher.
Data from WDFW (2014, 2015) indicate that coho salmon and cutthroat trout have been documented in
Auburn Creek throughout its mapped length (i.e., up to a point approximately 1,500 feet downstream from
the project area), and winter steelhead have been documented in the lowest 600 feet of Auburn Creek. Fall
Chinook salmon are listed as potentially present in Auburn Creek, but excluded by the presence of an
artificial barrier (WDFW 2014). None of these species is expected to use Auburn Creek for spawning or
rearing (WDFW 2014). It is not known whether these fish usage data are based on information collected
before or after the installation of the flood gate on Auburn Creek in the 1990s. WDFW (2014, 2015) and
DNR (2014) do not provide any information about fish presence in the ditches in the project area because
those waterbodies are not mapped as potentially fish-bearing streams in the state’s databases.
Although the ditches in the project area have not been mapped as streams (fish-bearing or otherwise) by
WDFW (2014) or DNR (2014), it is nevertheless possible that fish could venture into these waterbodies. In
fact, three dead juvenile coho salmon were observed near the eastern end of the ditch on the south side of S
277th St during a site visit in October 2013. A dead adult coho salmon was observed at the same location in
November 2013 (Jeff Jones pers. comm. 2015). It is not clear how those fish got to that location, which is at
least 3,800 feet upstream of any streams in which fish are known or expected to occur (WDFW 2014, 2015),
nor is it known whether the fish were alive when they arrived at the location where they were observed.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
20 MAY 2015
5.2 Wetlands in the Project Area
5.2.1 Wetlands in the Project Area
General wetland characteristics are discussed below. Also included in this report is specific information for
each of the sample plots (Appendix A), wetland rating forms (Appendix B), wetland function assessment
forms (Appendix C), site photographs (Appendix D), and supplementary information (Appendix E).
The NWI does not identify any wetlands in the project area. Four palustrine emergent wetlands with a
seasonally or temporarily flooded hydrologic regime and one palustrine aquatic bed wetland with a
permanently flooded hydrologic regime were mapped to the north of the project area. A palustrine scrub-
shrub wetland with a temporarily flooded hydrologic regime is mapped to the east of the project area
(USFWS 2013).
Biologists delineated portions of three wetlands (Wetlands A, B, and C) in the project area (Figure 5-1).
Wetland A includes the ditch south of S 277th St from G St NE extending eastward to the east boundary of
the Port of Seattle property. This ditch is connected to another ditch that extends southward several hundred
feet along the RPG and Port of Seattle property lines. Wetland A also intersects the Port of Seattle flood
control channel that extends south of the project to the Port of Seattle Third Runway Auburn Mitigation Site
(see Appendix E).
These wetlands are some of the same wetlands that were identified and mapped in the previously permitted
272nd/277th North Corridor Project constructed by the City of Kent under Corps permit (NWS- 94-4-
01283). In 1994 these wetlands were designated as Wetlands G, Areas I-IV. New letter designations were
used in this 2015 report to distinguish the two wetland delineations.
The Port of Seattle property was subject to a Corps Individual Permit (NWS-1996-4-02325) and contains
mitigation for impacts incurred for the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Third Runway Expansion
project. As a condition of the permit and prior to mitigation construction, wetlands on the site were
delineated and verified by the Corps in 2003 (Parametrix 2003). The Parametrix study and earlier studies
found that the wetland boundaries on this site are highly influenced by precipitation patterns and past land
uses that have modified surface water flow and shallow groundwater. These factors have produced different
wetland boundaries over time. Hydric soils are mapped on most of the Port of Seattle site and the project
area. Rather than chase hydrology across the Port site again in 2014, the City of Auburn hereby adopts the
verified wetlands as shown in Figure 3, Wetlands on the Port of Seattle Construction Access Site – Auburn
(see Appendix E). According to this figure and the report, no wetlands occur in the Port of Seattle right-of-
way granted to the City for this project. A figure showing the construction access is also included in
Appendix E.
Wetland B is located on the north side of S 277th St. Wetland C is located in a wetland ditch on the opposite
(south) side of the road. Classifications of the delineated wetlands are provided in Table 5-1, and wetland
functions are summarized in Tables 5-2a and 5-2b.
1 2 3
4
5 6
7
DATE: March 27, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1 COVER
0
SCALE IN FEET
500
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Cover Sheet
Figure 5-1
A
u
b
u
r
n
W
a
y
N
C
e
n
t
r
a
l
A
v
e
S
S 277th St
D
S
t
N
E
8
6
t
h
A
v
e
S
I
S
t
N
E
L
S
t
N
E
A
u
b
u
r
n
W
a
y
N
C
e
n
t
r
a
l
A
v
e
S
S 277th St
RPG
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
2
o
f
7
DATE: March 30, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 1 of 7
Figure 5-1
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
Wetland C
(0.10 acre)
(Impact=4,343 sf/0.10 ac)
Wetland B
(0.13 acre on-site)
(No Impact)
WB-SP1
WB-SP2
Off-Site Wetland E
(Impact=1,543 sf/0.035 ac)
New Conveyance Ditch
S 277th St
D
S
t
N
E
8
6
t
h
A
v
e
S
RPG
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
3
o
f
7
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
1
o
f
7
DATE: March 27, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 2 of 7
Figure 5-1
Wetland C
(cont.)
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
WC-SP1
WC-SP2
New Conveyance Ditch
Extension of
48" Culvert
S 277th St
RPG
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
4
o
f
7
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
2
o
f
7
DATE: March 30, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 3 of 7
Figure 5-1
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
Stream 1
(900 lf)
(Impact=900 lf/4,604 sf/0.11 ac)
New Conveyance Ditch
S 277th St
G
S
t
N
E
RPG
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
5
o
f
7
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
3
o
f
7
DATE: March 27, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 4 of 7
Figure 5-1
Stream 1
(cont.)Wetland A
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
S 277th St
PORT OF SEATTLE
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
6
o
f
7
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
4
o
f
7
DATE: March 30, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 5 of 7
Figure 5-1
Wetland A (cont.)
(0.17 acre)
(Impact=7,219 sf/0.17 ac)
Ditch Continues South
Port of Seattle Flood
Control Channel
(Existing)
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
WA-SP1
Flood Conveyance
Ditch (New)
WA-SP2
S 277th St
L
S
t
N
E
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
5
o
f
7
DATE: March 27, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 6 of 7
Figure 5-1
Wetland A (cont.)
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
DATE: March 30, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 7 OF 70SCALE IN FEET 60'
S
2
7
7
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
St
o
r
m
W
a
t
e
r
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
o
n
R
P
G
S
i
t
e
Sh
e
e
t
7
o
f
7
Fi
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
ST
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
DE
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
P
O
N
D
ST
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
WE
T
L
A
N
D
EXISTING WETLAND BUFFERPER JEFF JONES(50' REDUCED BY 35%)Limits of FutureStream Impacts
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
RE
C
O
R
D
E
D
CO
N
S
E
R
V
A
T
I
O
N
EA
S
M
E
N
T
PRIOR W
E
T
L
A
N
D
DELINE
A
T
I
O
N
AC
C
E
S
S
R
O
A
D
15
'
M
I
N
W
I
D
T
H
AR
E
A
4
STEIN PARCEL
G
S
T
R
E
E
T
30'G STREET ROWREVISED WETLAND DELINEATIONBY JEFF JONES
7:
1
M
A
X
FI
S
H
-
P
A
S
S
A
B
L
E
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
(R
E
P
L
A
C
E
S
T
W
O
E
X
.
FL
O
O
D
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
S
)
RE
V
E
R
S
E
D
I
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
OF
G
S
T
.
D
I
T
C
H
S 277TH ST
FL
O
W
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
ST
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
TE
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
DI
T
C
H
WE
T
L
A
N
D
A
(c
o
n
t
.
)
RP
G
OFF-SITEWETLAND A
OF
F
-
S
I
T
E
WE
T
L
A
N
D
D
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 31
Table 5-1. Summary of Wetlands in the Project Area
Wetland
Area
(sf/ac)
City of Auburn
Category a
Minimum
Buffer Width
b (ft)
Ecology
Rating c
USFWS
Classification d
HGM
Classification
A
7219 /
~0.17
III 25 III PEM Depressional
B ~2 III 25 III PEM Depressional
C 4343 /
0.10 III 25 III PEM Riverine/
Depressional
a ACC 16.10.070.C
b ACC 16.10.090.E.1
c Hruby (2004)
d Cowardin et al. (1979). PEM = palustrine emergent; sf = square feet; ac = acre; ft = feet
Table 5-2. Summary of Wetland Functions for Wetlands in the Project Area
Wetland
Flood Flow
Alteration
Sediment
Removal
Nutrient
and
Toxicant
Removal
Erosion
Control and
Shoreline
Stabilization
Production
of Organic
Matter and
its Export
General
Habitat
Suitability
Habitat for
Aquatic
Invertebrates
A High Moderate Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate
B Low Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Low Low
C Low Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Low Low
Table 5-2. Summary of Wetland Functions for Wetlands in the Project Area (continued)
Wetland
Habitat for
Amphibians
Habitat for
Wetland-
Associated
Mammals
Habitat for
Wetland-
Associated
Birds
General
Fish
Habitat
Native
Plant
Richness
Education
or
Scientific
Value
Uniqueness
and
Heritage
A Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Low NA NA
B Low NA NA Low NA NA NA
C Low NA NA Low NA NA NA
Note: Functions assessed using WSDOT method (Null et al. 2000); see Appendix C for indicator characteristics present in each wetland.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
32 MAY 2015
5.2.1.1 Wetland A
Estimated Size: 0.17 acre (on-site only)
City of Auburn and Ecology Rating: Category III
Minimum Standard Buffer: 25 feet
USFWS Classification: Palustrine Emergent
HGM Classification: Depressional
Sample Plots: WA-SP1, WA-SP2
Wetland A is located in a ditch system on the south side of S 277th St, extending in places outside the project
area to the south (Figure 5-1). It connects with a ditch that extends south along the western property line of
the Port of Seattle property and connects to the Port of Seattle flood control channel (Figure 5-1).
Wetland hydrology is supported by stormwater runoff from nearby surfaces and a shallow groundwater table.
Water flow direction is not consistent within Wetland A. Because the area is very flat, water occasionally
backflows during storm events. Typically, water flows from the south to the north, and from multiple sources
and flows under S 277th St through multiple culverts, eventually flowing down Auburn Creek to the Green
River.
Within the project area, Wetland A is composed primarily of an emergent community. Vegetation is
dominated by reed canarygrass. Other species observed include black cottonwood, salmonberry, Himalayan
blackberry, red alder, Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis), and water parsley (Oenanthe sarmentosa). To the south,
outside of the project area, a portion of the wetland is dominated by shrubs or young trees, likely willows
(Salix spp.)
Soils in Wetland A (WA-SP1) was examined to a depth of 20 inches, consisting of three horizons. The top
horizon is a 12-inch layer of dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2) silt loam with strong brown (7.5YR 5/6)
redoximorphic features. The second horizon is a 4-inch layer of very dark gray (2.5Y 3/1) fine sandy loam
with strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) redoximorphic features. The third horizon is a 4-inch layer of dark grayish
brown (2.5Y 4/2) silt clay loam with yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) redoximorphic features. Soils in the
wetland are mapped by the NRCS as Oridia silt loam.
The buffer surrounding Wetland A (within the project area) consists of generally disturbed areas of upland
grasses and forbs near the shoulder of S 277th St, and primarily forested areas to the south of the wetland.
Vegetation in the generally forested buffer includes red alder, western swordfern, salmonberry, black
cottonwood, snowberry, and Himalayan blackberry. The vegetation in the maintained roadside shoulder is
dominated by Himalayan blackberry, grasses, and forbs.
Wetland A is a palustrine emergent/palustrine scrub-shrub wetland under the Cowardin (1979) system, and is
a depressional wetland under the HGM system (Brinson 1993). According to the City of Auburn (ACC
16.10.070.C) and Ecology, Wetland A is rated a Category III based on its score. The wetland scored 37
points on Ecology’s rating form (10 points for water quality, 16 points for hydrologic functions, and 11
points for habitat functions) (see Appendix B). The City of Auburn requires a minimum 25-foot buffer for
Category III wetlands (ACC 16.10.090.E.1).
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 33
5.2.1.2 Wetland B
Estimated Size: >2 acres
City of Auburn and Ecology Rating: Category III
Minimum Standard Buffer: 25 feet
USFWS Classification: Palustrine Emergent
HGM Classification: Depressional
Sample Plots: WB-SP1and WB-SP2
Wetland B is located north of S 277th St and east of 83rd Ave S (Figure 5-1). Wetland B is a wetland ditch
within the road right-of-way and extends outside of the project area into farmed land to the east and to the
north.
Wetland hydrology is supported by surface water coming from culverts located on both the south and north
sides of S 277th St. Additional hydrological sources may originate from a culvert to the west of Wetland B. A
shallow groundwater table is also present. Soils were saturated in some portions of the wetland and
inundation was observed in the bottom of the ditch. The wetland is seasonally inundated. Water flows from
Wetland C under S 277th St into Wetland B and Auburn Creek, which drains to the north into the Green
River.
Wetland B consists of an emergent community that is dominated by reed canarygrass. Some fringed
willowherb (Epilobium ciliatum) was also observed in the wetland. Some areas of the wetland contain pockets
of common cattail (Typha latifolia).
The sample plot was examined to a depth of 18 inches and consists of one layer that appears to have been
historically disturbed. Soils examined in Wetland B are composed of an 18-inch layer of gray (2.5Y 2.5/1) silt
loam with strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) redoximorphic features. Soils in the wetland are mapped by the NRCS
as Briscot silt loam.
The buffer of Wetland B consists primarily of upland grasses and forbs growing on fill to the south, and
actively farmed land to the north. Because the land is farmed to the north, the soils are disturbed and
vegetation is agricultural crops. The buffer is dominated by reed canarygrass, but also includes creeping
buttercup, common weedy forbs, and common velvet grass.
Wetland B is a palustrine-emergent wetland under the Cowardin (1979) system, but a depressional wetland
under the HGM system (Brinson 1993). According to the City of Auburn (ACC 16.10.070.C) and Ecology,
Wetland B is rated a Category III based on its score. The wetland scored 38 points on Ecology’s rating form
(10 points for water quality, 16 points for hydrologic functions, and 12 points for habitat functions) (see
Appendix B). The City of Auburn requires a minimum 25-foot buffer for Category III wetlands (ACC
16.10.090.E.1).
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
34 MAY 2015
5.2.1.3 Wetland C
Estimated Size: 0.10 acre
City of Auburn and Ecology Rating: Category III
Minimum Standard Buffer: 25 feet
USFWS Classification: Palustrine Emergent
HGM Classification: Riverine/Depressional
Sample Plots: WC-SP1
Wetland C is located south of S 277th St and east of Auburn Way N (Figure 5-1). It functions as a roadside
ditch for conveyance of stormwater from S 277th St.
Wetland hydrology is supported by surface water coming from a conveyance system in Auburn Way N (from
the west) and from a culvert under D St NE and south of S 277th St. A shallow groundwater table is also
present. During the field visit, soils were inundated in most of the bottom of the ditch. The wetland is
seasonally inundated. Water flows from Wetland C via a 48” culvert under S. 277th St. into Auburn Creek,
which drains northward to the Green River. On December 3, 2013, inundation was measured at 11 inches
deep.
Wetland C consists of an emergent community, which is dominated by reed canarygrass. Some Himalayan
blackberry overhangs the wetland. Wetland C was cleaned out to maintain conveyance in 2014.
The sample plot was examined to a depth of 20 inches and consists of what appears to be native soils. Soils
examined in Wetland C are composed of a 5-inch surface layer of very dark gray (2.5Y 3/1) silt loam with
strong dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/6) redoximorphic features. From 5 to 20 inches deep, soils are dark
gray (10YR 4/1) silty clay loam with strong dark-yellowish brown (10YR 4/6) redoximorphic features. Soils in
the wetland are mapped by the NRCS as Briscot silt loam.
The buffer of Wetland C consists primarily of upland grasses and forbs growing on fill to the north, and
inactive farm land to the south. The buffer is dominated by reed canarygrass, but also includes creeping
buttercup, common weedy forbs, and common velvet grass.
Wetland C is a palustrine-emergent wetland under the Cowardin (1979) system, and is a riverine-depressional
wetland under the HGM system (Brinson 1993). According to the City of Auburn (ACC 16.10.070.C) and
Ecology, Wetland C is rated a Category III based on its score. The wetland scored 38 points on Ecology’s
rating form (10 points for water quality, 16 points for hydrologic functions, and 12 points for habitat
functions) (see Appendix B). The City of Auburn requires a minimum 25-foot buffer for Category III
wetlands (ACC 16.10.090.E.1).
5.2.2 Off-Site Wetlands
Three wetlands occur outside the current ROW but in close proximity to the project. They are considered
off-site wetlands and are listed from west to east.
5.2.2.1 Off-Site Wetland E
A potential wetland area occurs in an adjacent parcel south of Wetland C and south of S 277th St between
Auburn Way N and D St NE (Figure 5-1, Sheet 1 of 7). This area was not delineated for this project. During
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 35
a field reconnaissance on March 12, 2015, the wetland boundaries were estimated based on topography,
vegetation, observations of past surface ponding, one shovel probe, and the measured distance from the top-
of-bank of Wetland C. Hydric soils are mapped in much of the surrounding area (see Appendix E).
Representative photographs are presented in Appendix D. The western and eastern edges of the potential
wetland were estimated by comparing topography and vegetation signatures to survey station stakes observed
along the ditch.
There appears to be a definite depression to the south that contains surface cracks and water marks. An
upland ridge south of the ditch, which also parallels the ditch, acts as a break in the surface water connection
from the potential wetland to Wetland C. A shovel probe was conducted that found saturation in the top 4
inches, but no saturation below for at least 16 inches. The side of Wetland C was also examined at this time
to compare observations in the soil pit (Appendix E). Water in the ditch was 3 inches deep and was barely
flowing from west to east. Surface water in the ditch was 32 inches below the top of bank. Saturation on the
side of the ditch was 18 inches below the top of bank. The ditch was maintained in February 2015 as part of
the City’s roadside ditch maintenance. The adjoining parcel has been farmed in the past.
This potential wetland was previously described in the Northeast Auburn/Robertson Properties Special Area
Plan, Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Addendum (ESA 2004). It was identified as Wetland E in the
Auburn Gateway II project area but was not delineated or categorized at that time. The EIS assumed it to be a
Category IV depressional wetland. In the EIS, the wetland was dominated by creeping buttercup (Ranunculus
repens) and reed canarygrass. Wetland E was preliminarily classified in the EIS (ESA 2004) to be a palustrine,
emergent, depressional wetland with a Category IV rating.
For the purposes of this report and to minimize confusion with other reports, this potential wetland will be
designated Off-Site Wetland E.
5.2.2.2 Off-Site Wetland A
Off-Site Wetland A occurs on the RPG property near the proposed stream mitigation site. It has been
previously delineated and rated by Jeff Jones in 2008 (J. S. Jones Associates 2008). The wetland boundary was
revised in 2015 by Jones and Associates. A Corps jurisdictional determination of the wetland boundary may
occur in 2015 (Jeff Jones pers. comm.). The wetland was rated a Class II wetland and would receive a 50-feet-
wide standard buffer under City code. A reduction of the buffer will be proposed to the City at a later date.
5.2.2.3 Off-Site Wetland D
Off-Site Wetland D occurs along the eastern boundary of the RPG property and the Port of Seattle property.
It is associated with the ditch bordering the properties. It would be rated a Class III wetland under City code.
A Corps jurisdictional determination of the wetland boundary may occur in 2015 (Jeff Jones pers. comm.).
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
36 MAY 2015
5.3 Streams in the Project Area
One stream (Stream 1) was identified within the project area. Stream 1 is confined to the bottom of a ditch
along the south side of S 277th St, just north of the area that was historically a drive-in movie theater (see
Figure 5-1). The defined channel occurs in two sections separated by a culvert under a driveway. These two
segments of the ditch were classified as stream instead of wetland because they lack native hydric soils. The
stream is approximately 900 linear feet long and 2 to 5 feet wide, with a total surface area of approximately
4,604 square feet. Reed canarygrass is the predominant cover type in these two segments of the ditch. Drift
lines and trash were readily observed, indicating the high water mark.
5.3.1 Stream Type
In 2010, the City of Auburn issued a stream determination letter (Auburn 2010) that stated that the drainage
segments within the project area are “intentionally created streams” as defined in ACC 16.10.020, and that
they do not have “documented recent or historic use by salmonids.” However, the letter also stated that the
determination may be revised if “the City becomes aware of additional information that would affect the
regulatory status of any of these drainages.” The observations of a few dead juveniles by Parametrix and dead
adult coho salmon in the ditch in 2013 (Jeff Jones pers. comm. 2015) suggest that a revision to this 2010
determination is possible. Because of the recent identification of fish in the area, the stream would likely be
classified as a Class II stream (ACC 16.10.070.D). At a February 12, 2015 site visit, Larry Fisher, WDFW
regional habitat biologist, confirmed that the stream reach would be considered to contain fish habitat (Larry
Fisher, pers. comm.). No streams were mapped in the project area by DNR (DNR 2014).In addition, in
2010 the Corps determined at that time, these reaches would be classified as streams (Corps 2010; in
Appendix E).
5.3.2 Stream Hydrology
Aerial photographs and data available through King County’s interactive mapping tool (iMAP) indicate that
the ditches in the project area allow Auburn Creek to be a contributing hydrologic source. After crossing
under S 277th St, water from these ditches flows north through farm lands via ditches along 86th Ave S for
approximately 1,500 feet before joining Auburn Creek, which then flows approximately 1,600 feet before
emptying into the Green River. The stream channel downstream of S 277th St is an open drainage channel
that is used for draining adjacent farm lands. There is limited in-stream habitat and vegetated cover to provide
thermal protection. These farm lands are protected under the King County Farmland Preservation Program
and are not generally available for resource mitigation. Several structures provide varying degrees of
hydrologic connectivity between the ditches on the north and south sides of S 277th St. The largest
connection at the elevation of the ditch bottom is a 75-foot-long, 48-inch-diameter concrete culvert near D
Street SE in the western portion of the project area. Under most conditions, the primary north-south
connection in the eastern portion of the project area is a 90-foot-long, 18-inch concrete culvert approximately
800 feet west of L St NE. Two adjacent 3-foot by 6-foot box culverts near the location of the 18-inch culvert
allow drainage during periods of high flows; the box culverts are approximately 2 feet above the ditch bottom
and therefore do not convey water except under higher flows. These were installed to provide flood
conveyance under S 277th St and across the floodplain at high flows. Additional flood drainage conveyance is
provided by several 12-inch PVC pipes that are located 3 to 4 feet above the ditch bottom at various locations
along the length of the ditch.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 37
5.3.3 Water Quality
No waterbodies within the project area are on the Ecology 303(d) list (Ecology 2014). The closest waterbody
on the list is the Green River, at 83rd Ave S, to the north-northwest of the project area. The Green River is
listed for exceeding dissolved oxygen and not meeting the temperature criteria (Ecology 2014).
No site-specific water quality data are available for Stream 1 or for Auburn Creek. In general, the quality of
water in the ditches in the project area is poor, with high levels of turbidity, trash, and pollutants from the
neighboring roadway.
5.3.4 Fish Habitat
Substrates consist primarily of quarry spalls, gravel, and sediment from the road and road embankment.
Vegetation, primarily reed canarygrass, is growing in much of Stream 1. The gradient of the stream is nearly
flat, sloping gradually from west to east through most of the project area. However, during rain events the
flow of water can reverse because of the generally flat terrain, partial culvert blockages, and a small outlet
culvert. Water flow is intermittent, and strongly influenced by rain events during the winter months. When
water is present, it is usually shallow (less than 6 inches deep) and slow-moving, although a water depth of 2
feet or more has been observed. No pools or riffles were observed during site investigations.
5.3.5 Fish Presence
See Section 5.1.6, Fish and Wildlife, for a more detailed discussion of the potential for fish presence in the
watercourses in the project area. The flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek severely limits the potential for
fish to gain access to the roadside ditches in the project area. The potential for fish to remain in the project
area for extended periods is diminished by poor habitat conditions. In-stream habitat in the roadside ditches
in the project area (including a silty and embedded streambed) is unlikely to support spawning or rearing
activities. Low and irregular flows at most times of the year and the absence of water during the summer
months further reduce the potential for fish use; moreover, there are no pools to provide refuge habitat. In
addition, the quality of water in the ditches is generally poor, with high levels of turbidity, trash, and
pollutants from the neighboring roadway. Lastly, the potential for development of fish habitat is limited by
periodic ditch maintenance work conducted by the City. For these reasons, this ditched portion of Stream 1 is
not expected to provide spawning or rearing habitat for fish, and the quality of foraging or refuge habitat, if
either is present, is poor.
5.3.6 Stream Buffer Conditions
The stream channel and banks of the ditches in the project area are dominated by low-growing non-native
species such as reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry. Riparian habitat along the ditches is degraded in
most locations, consisting of narrow vegetated strips dominated by grasses and forbs, but few woody plants.
The location of the ditches and adjoining areas within the maintained right-of-way of
S 277th St limits the potential for development of functioning riparian habitat.
A 10-foot-wide strip of ornamental trees (Arborvitae sp.) has been planted along the fence line south of the
south side of the ditch where it runs alongside the abandoned drive-in movie theater property. These trees are
approximately 15 feet tall and provide some shade to the ditch. Farther east, several large native and non-
native trees (primarily alder and cottonwood), as well as native shrubs such as snowberry and salmonberry, are
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
38 MAY 2015
present along the south bank of the ditch on the parcel immediately east of the drive-in movie property. The
overstory vegetation in that area provides shade during spring and summer (when the trees have leaves), as
well as possibly contributing woody debris.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 39
6 IMPACTS
6.1 Wetlands
Construction of this project would impact wetlands and their buffers. Impacts on these resources were
calculated by overlaying the proposed design onto the project base maps showing wetland and buffer
locations. Affected areas were determined as the area of intersection of the two graphic layers.
This section describes the extent and type of temporary and permanent (direct and indirect) impacts on
wetlands that would occur as a result of constructing the proposed project. Because of the proximity of
wetlands and their buffers to both sides of S 277th St, impacts to the wetlands and buffers are unavoidable
(Table 6-1; see Figure 5-1).
Table 6-1. Wetland, Stream, and Buffer Impacts
Wetland USFWS
Classification
City of Auburn
Rating a
Wetland/Stream Buffer
Perm. Impacts
(sf/ac)
Temp. Impacts
(sf/ac)
Perm. Impacts
(sf/ac)
Temp. Impacts
(sf/ac)
A PEM III 7,219/0.17 0/0.00 0/0 250/<0.01
B PEM III 0/0.00 0/0.00 0/0.00 0/0.00
C PEM III 4,343/ 0.10 0/0.00 0/0.00 0/0.00
On-Site Wetlands
Subtotal
11,562/0.27 0/0.00 0/0.00 250/<0.01
Off-Site Wetland E PEM III/IV 1,543/0.04 0/0.00 0/0.00 0/0.00
Off-Site Wetland A PFO\PEM II 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Off-Site Wetland D PFO\PEM III 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Off-Site Wetlands -
Total
1,543/0.04 0/0.00 0/0.00 0/0.00
Wetland Impacts -
Total
13,105/0.31 0/0.00 0/0.00 250/<0.01
Streams (U.S.
Waters)
II 900 lf (4,604
sf/0.11) 0 0 0
U.S. Waters Total 17,709/0.41 0/0.00 0/0.00 250/<0.01
a Wetland rating according to ACC 16.10.070.C
sf = square feet; ac = acre; lf = linear feet; Perm. = Permanent, Temp. = Temporary
6.1.1 Permanent Impacts on Wetlands
Construction of this project would impact approximately 7,219 square feet of Wetland A and 4,343 square
feet of Wetland C, totaling 11,562 square feet or 0.27 acre of on-site wetlands Table 6-1 (Figure 5-1). These
impacts would result from filling them for widening of S 277th St and construction of the proposed trail.
There would be no permanent wetland impacts to Wetland B, primarily because it is on the north side of S
277th St and road construction would occur mostly on the south side of the existing roadway. Additional
turn lanes would be added at the intersection with Auburn Way N but would not impact Wetland B.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
40 MAY 2015
A portion of Off-Site Wetland E would be impacted by the project. It is estimated that 1,543 square feet
(0.04 acre) of this wetland would be filled for the road prism (see Figure 5-1). Thus, impacts to wetlands as a
result of this project would total 13,105 square feet (0.31 acre).
In addition, a portion of Off-Site Wetland E, approximately 1,800 square feet (120 linear feet x 5 feet wide x
3 feet deep), would be excavated for a new conveyance ditch that would parallel the road to collect and
convey floodwaters from off-site areas. The excavation would occur in hydric soils, and would remain a
wetland ditch after construction. This conveyance ditch would be in place until Auburn Gateway II is
constructed.
6.1.2 Permanent Impacts on Wetland Buffers
The project area wetlands are confined by the road prism on at least one of their sides. Wetland A has a
vegetated buffer to the south, including some forested areas, but on its north side is the road prism of
S 277th St. Similarly, Wetland C has a gravel roadway embankment on its north side and an herbaceous
community of reed canarygrass on its south side. Conversely, Wetland B has the road embankment on its
south side and a farmed wetland to the north. The road embankment areas are not functioning buffers.
Permanent impacts on the vegetated buffers of Wetlands A and C would result from road improvements. The
widening of the road would require adding a turn lane at Auburn Way N, which would impact the road
embankments of Wetland B and Wetland C. However, these road embankment areas are not considered
buffers by WSDOT.
In addition, this project would fill all of Wetland C in the project area. Similarly, all of Wetland A within the
right-of-way would be filled in the project area. Therefore, the project would not permanently impact the
buffers.
The buffers of Off-Site Wetlands A and D would be incorporated into the mitigation riparian corridor and be
in compliance with city code.
6.1.3 Temporary Impacts on Wetlands and Buffers
No temporary impacts to the wetlands are anticipated as part of the project construction. A very small portion
of the buffer (250 square feet; <0.01 acre) to a remaining ditch section of Wetland A would be excavated for
the new extension of the Port of Seattle flood control channel. It is expected that this area would revegetate
naturally to approximate existing vegetation conditions.
6.1.4 Indirect Impacts on Wetlands
Indirect impacts from a transportation project can include changes in land use induced by the proposed
action, provided such changes are reasonably certain to result from the proposed action. Completion of this
project would facilitate implementation of the proposed Auburn Gateway, a multi-phase (I and II) private
development on approximately 60 acres adjoining S 277th St. Notably, the potential impacts of the Auburn
Gateway development proposal have already been analyzed and disclosed in an EIS. The potential impacts on
wetlands from the Auburn Gateway are being evaluated here to comply with WSDOT NEPA analysis
guidelines.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 41
The Northeast Auburn/Robertson Properties Special Area Plan, EIS Addendum (ESA 2004) described the
proposed impacts on wetlands and streams proposed for the Auburn Gateway project. No wetlands would be
filled by Auburn Gateway I; therefore, no indirect impacts on wetlands are expected for this phase of that
project. On the other hand, Auburn Gateway II is proposed to fill all of Wetland E, which is located south of
S 277th St and between Auburn Way N and D St NE. This wetland has not been delineated; therefore, the
extent of wetland impacts is unknown. As a result, there would be an unknown indirect impact from S 277th
St corridor improvements.
6.1.5 Streams
6.1.5.1 Direct Impacts on Streams
Widening of S 277th St would fill the entire Stream 1 (see Figure 5-1) reach, which is approximately 900
linear feet, in the project area. However, no permanent impacts to stream buffers would occur from these road
improvements. The stream is confined by the road prism on the north and the gravel embankment of the
parking areas of the abandoned drive-in movie theatre to the south. These areas are not functioning buffers.
6.1.5.2 Temporary Impacts on Streams
No temporary impacts on streams or their buffers are anticipated as part of the S 277th St corridor
improvements. No stream buffers occur along Stream 1 because the area consists of roads, road
embankments, and gravel areas.
6.1.5.3 Indirect Impacts on Streams
The proposed Auburn Gateway project would fill a small, intermittent fish-bearing stream (approximately
100 feet) along G St NE (ESA 2004). This would be the extent of indirect impacts on streams related to the S
277th St corridor improvements.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 43
7 MITIGATION
The S 277th St corridor improvements would mitigate impacts to wetlands by proceeding in accordance with
the mitigation sequencing requirements established by NEPA, the Clean Water Act, and City of Auburn
wetland protection programs (ACC 16.10). According to NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR]
1508.20), the definition of mitigation is as follows:
a.) Avoiding the impact all together by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.
b.) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.
c.) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment.
d.) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the
life of the action.
e.) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.
7.1 Avoidance and Minimization Measures
Consistent with the above sequencing requirements, a high priority was placed on designing the project to
include measures and features that avoid and minimize adverse effects on wetlands and their buffers. The
wetlands in the project area have been avoided to the greatest extent feasible while still achieving the project’s
purpose and need. The City of Auburn would apply the following strategies to minimize wetland and buffer
impacts during the design, permitting, and construction phases:
Road widening would occur only to the south rather than widening in both directions to reduce
impacts on wetlands and streams.
Near wetlands and streams, earthwork would be done as much as possible in the dry season to reduce
the potential for sediment runoff.
Best management practices (BMPs) to control erosion would be implemented to reduce direct and
indirect impacts on aquatic resources during construction.
All construction activities would comply with water quality standards set forth in the 1998 Water
Quality Implementing Agreement between WSDOT and Ecology, as well as compliance with the
State of Washington Surface Water Quality Standards (WAC 173-201A).
A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan would be prepared prior to beginning
construction. The SPCC plan would identify the appropriate spill containment materials, which
would be available at the project site at all times.
7.2 Restoration of Temporary Impacts
Although not currently part of the project design plan, temporarily impacted areas would be restored to pre-
construction conditions and re-planted or seeded with native species. This restoration would support a level of
function that is the same, or greater, than under existing conditions.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
44 MAY 2015
7.3 Compensatory Mitigation
The mitigation strategy in this section describes conceptual compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts
on wetlands and streams.
The conceptual mitigation described in this section addresses the mitigation requirements set forth in
Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources; Final Rule (33 CFR Parts 325 and 332, April 10,
2008), hereafter referred to as the Final Rule on Compensatory Mitigation. This final rule was developed by
the Corps and the EPA and consolidates existing regulations and guidance to establish equivalent standards
for all types of mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section 404 regulatory program (Corps and EPA 2008).
All adverse impacts due to the project are not avoidable; therefore, compensatory mitigation is proposed.
In addition, City mitigation requirements are listed in Chapter 16.10.10 of the Auburn City Code. The
proposed mitigation addresses these requirements as well as those of WDFW. A more detailed mitigation plan
will be provided in a separate report. The mitigation plan will include the typical elements, including as
appropriate, mitigation goals, objectives, performance standards, monitoring, and site protection measures.
7.3.1 Wetlands Mitigation
The S 277th St corridor improvements would impact a total of 0.31 acre of existing wetlands; mitigation is
needed to compensate for these impacts. Parametrix reviewed past project documents of the 272nd/277th
North Corridor Project previously constructed by the City of Kent to assess if potential mitigation areas
remain for use by the City of Auburn for its proposed S 277th St road improvements.
Two wetland mitigation options have been identified from the 272nd/277nd North Corridor Project for use
by Auburn’s current project. More detailed discussion of these two wetland mitigation sources is provided in a
Parametrix memorandum dated April 11, 2014. A summary of this document is presented in Appendix E.
These wetland mitigation options are summarized below.
1) Over-Constructed Mitigation: Kent previously constructed mitigation for its 272nd/277th
North Corridor Project based on the regulatory definition of wetlands in 1994. In 1999, the
definition of wetlands changed, resulting in Kent constructing an excess of approximately 0.5
acre of mitigation. The balance of the over-constructed mitigation as of 2003 was 0.26 acre. The
City of Auburn proposes to use this excess mitigation as advanced mitigation at a 1:1 ratio, if the
regulatory agencies confirm that this mitigation is available for Auburn’s usage. Kent has issued a
letter that it is acceptable for Auburn to use this mitigation for its project (see Attachment E).
2) Reduced Impacts: Kent conducted mitigation for impacts to wetlands along the south side of S
277th St, but because Kent did not widen the south side of the roadway as originally designed,
permitted impacts to wetlands were not fully used. By Parametrix’s calculations, 0.35 acre of
impacts along the south side were mitigated for, but were not filled. The City of Auburn
proposes to use this excess mitigation if it is deemed sufficient and available to Auburn’s project.
The City of Kent has issued a letter that it is acceptable for Auburn to use these credits for its
project (Parametrix 2015).
In total, 0.61 acre of mitigation credits is potentially available to Auburn’s project (0.26 acre of over-
constructed mitigation and 0.35 acre of reduced impacts). Kent’s mitigation site has been established for over
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 45
a decade, and Kent has granted permission for Auburn to use these mitigation credits. Auburn proposes to use
the previously constructed mitigation in advance of current project impacts, at a 1:1 mitigation ratio for its
project. Thus, previously constructed mitigation would be sufficient to cover the project’s anticipated wetland
impacts.
7.3.2 Stream Mitigation
The impacted reaches of Stream 1 comprise 900 linear feet of roadside ditches. They currently convey
untreated stormwater to other downstream ditches that eventually drain to Auburn Creek and the Green
River. The existing stream channel habitat and functions are very low. Fish stranding has occurred just
downstream of the project area stream reaches.
7.3.2.1 Mitigation Requirements
In accordance with ACC 16.10.110, the project would be required to replace any impacted stream with one
that is functionally equivalent to or greater than the altered stream in terms of hydrological, biological,
physical, and chemical functions.
Similarly, the Federal Rule on Compensatory Mitigation requires that impacts on streams be mitigated at a
minimum of 1:1 replacement of linear feet and/or function of impacted stream. The proposed mitigation for
stream impacts addresses federal, WDFW, and City of Auburn mitigation requirements.
7.3.2.1.1 On-Site and In-Kind Mitigation
For the S 277th St corridor improvements, on-site mitigation refers to mitigation design options located on
properties immediately adjacent to the project site and available to the project. According to the mitigation
requirements, the on-site mitigation design would include constructing at least 900 linear feet of a Class 2
stream/wetland at a 1:1 mitigation ratio, a fish-habitable stream channel, a minimum 48.75-foot buffer on
the east side of the channel, a minimum 25-foot buffer all sides of the channel, and a total 105-foot-wide fish
and wildlife habitat corridor.
In addition, one fish-passable culvert would be constructed beneath S 277th St. The culvert is necessary to
connect the new stream channel south of S 277th St to the stream/wetland channel north of S 277th St. The
culvert was sized using the stream simulation design method from the WDFW Water Crossing Design
Guidelines (WDFW 2013). Accessibility to fish would be substantially increased from existing conditions.
The stream would originate from the southerly discharge point of a stormwater treatment facility south of S
277th St. The stormwater facilities would capture an off-site drainage basin at least as large as existing
conditions. The peak flow rates would be controlled according to the size and frequency of storms, to match
the hydrological patterns that occur under existing conditions. The “stacking of storms” is expected to
increase the duration of flow. The flow velocity cannot be increased because the area is nearly flat. The
channel grade would be approximately 0.2 percent. The proposed flow conditions would result in an
intermittent stream that would flow annually for short periods. However, water quality would be improved
from existing conditions, because the stormwater discharge would meet the criteria in the WSDOT
Stormwater Manual.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
46 MAY 2015
The channel bottom would be approximately 2 feet wide, and the width at the ordinary high water mark
(OHWM) would be approximately 6 feet. The stream would be 900 linear feet long, comprising 1,800 square
feet, and would have meanders occurring approximately every 100 feet. Spawning gravels would be placed
selectively for the rare individual adult fish that make it this far upstream. Large woody debris would be
placed along the banks and at the channel edge. The total buffer corridor would be 105-feet wide and include
3:1 to 4:1 slopes from the stream channel and adjacent areas (Figure 7-1). The buffer would be planted with
native trees and shrubs, and the mitigation stream and riparian zone will have equal or greater function for the
aquatic environment.
Table 7-1. Aquatic Resource Impacts and Mitigation Summary
Impacts Mitigation
Impact
(lf)
Area Impact
(sf)
Area Impact
(ac)
Linear Feet Square FeetAcres
Wetlands
Wetland A NA 7,219 0.17 NA 0.17
Wetland C NA 4,343 0.10 NA 0.10
Off-Site Wetlands 1,543 0.04 NA 0.04
Wetlands Sub-Total 13,105 0.31 NA 13,105 0.31
Streams
Stream 1 900 4,604 0.10 900 1800 0.04
Total 900 17,709 0.41 900 16,700 0.35
lf = linear feet; ac = acre; sf = square feet
DATE: March 30, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 7-10SCALE IN FEET 60'
S
2
7
7
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
Co
n
c
e
p
t
u
a
l
S
t
r
e
a
m
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Fi
g
u
r
e
7
-
1
ST
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
DE
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
P
O
N
D
ST
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
WE
T
L
A
N
D
EXISTING WETLAND BUFFERPER JEFF JONES(50' REDUCED BY 35%)974 LF STREAM@ 0.20% GRADIENT
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
RE
C
O
R
D
E
D
CO
N
S
E
R
V
A
T
I
O
N
EA
S
M
E
N
T
PRIOR W
E
T
L
A
N
D
DELINE
A
T
I
O
N
AC
C
E
S
S
R
O
A
D
15
'
M
I
N
W
I
D
T
H
AR
E
A
4
STEIN PARCEL
G
S
T
R
E
E
T
30'G STREET ROWREVISED WETLAND DELINEATIONBY JEFF JONES
7:
1
M
A
X
FI
S
H
-
P
A
S
S
A
B
L
E
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
(R
E
P
L
A
C
E
S
T
W
O
E
X
.
FL
O
O
D
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
S
)
EL=44.25
RE
V
E
R
S
E
D
I
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
OF
G
S
T
.
D
I
T
C
H
S 277TH ST
105' STREAMBUFFER CORRIDOR FL
O
W
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
ST
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
25
.
0
'
M
I
N
BU
F
F
E
R
(
W
E
S
T
)
48
.
7
5
'
M
I
N
BU
F
F
E
R
(
E
A
S
T
)
TE
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
DI
T
C
H
25' MIN BUFFER
WE
T
L
A
N
D
A
(c
o
n
t
.
)
105' STREAMBUFFER CORRIDOR 105' STREAMBUFFER CORRIDOR
RP
G
OFF-SITEWETLAND A
OF
F
-
S
I
T
E
WE
T
L
A
N
D
D
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 49
8 REFERENCES
Auburn, City of. 2010. City of Auburn stream determination letter. July 15, 2010. Auburn, Washington.
Brinson, M.M. 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands. Technical Report WRP-DE-4.
U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Coffin, C. S. Lee, and C. DeGasperi. 2011. Green River temperature total maximum daily load: water quality
improvement report. Washington State Department of Ecology report number 11-10-046. 163 pages.
Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) and EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2008.
Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources; Final Rule (33 CFR Parts 325 and 332, April
10, 2008).
Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2010. Regional supplement to the Corps of Engineers wetland
delineation manual: western mountains, valleys, and coast region. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2010. Letter from Matt Bennett, Corps, to Jeff Jones, J. S. Jones and
Associates, Inc. May 10, 2010.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater
habitats of the United States. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
DNR (Washington Department of Natural Resources). 2013. Natural Heritage Program GIS Layer.
Available at http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/gis/wnhpgis.html.
DNR (Washington Department of Natural Resources). 2014. Forest Practices water typing. Available at:
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/businesspermits/topics/forestpracticesapplications/pages/fp_watertyping.aspx.
Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology). 1997. Washington State wetland identification and
delineation manual. Publication #96-94. Olympia, Washington.
Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology) 2013. Water quality assessment for Washington.
Available at: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/wqamapviewer/default.aspx?res=1829x1029.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetland delineation manual. Technical Report Y-87-1,
Environmental Laboratory, Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
ESA. 2004. Northeast Auburn/Robertson Properties Special Area Plan, Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) Addendum. Prepared for the City of Auburn, November 2, 2011. Final Environmental Impact
Statement, July 2004.
Fisher L. 2015. Personal communication from Larry Fisher, WDFW, to Jeff Meyer, Parametrix, and others.
February 12, 2015.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
50 MAY 2015
Fuerstenberg, R., K. Nelson, and R. Blomquist. 1999. Draft ecological conditions and limitations to
salmonid diversity in the Green River, Washington, USA: Structure, function, and process in river
ecology. Unpublished report. King County Department of Natural Resources. Seattle, Washington.
Greytag Macbeth. 2000. Munsell soil color charts. New Windsor, New York.
Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington - Revised. Washington
State Department of Ecology, Publication No. 04-06-025.
Jones, J. S. and Associates, Inc. 2008. Wetland Assessment of the RPG-Valley 6 Theater Site. September 12,
2008.
Jones, J. S. 2015. Personal communication from Jeff Jones to Jeff Meyer, Parametrix. February 12, 2015.
Lichvar, R.W. 2013. The National Wetland Plant List: 2013 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2013-49:
1–241. Published 17 July 2013. ISSN 2153 733X.
Northwest Hydraulic Consultants, Inc. 2004. Hydraulic model report for the Cities of Auburn and Kent in
King County, May 17, 2004. Appendix to the supplemental downstream storm drainage analysis for
River Sand PUD, City of Auburn, Washington. 12 pages.
Null, W.S., G. Skinner, and W. Leonard. 2000. Wetland functions characterization tool for linear projects.
Washington State Department of Transportation Environmental Affairs Office. Olympia, Washington.
Parametrix, Inc. 2003. Wetland delineation report: Port of Seattle construction access site – Auburn. Seattle,
WA.
Parametrix 2015. Memorandum Jeff Meyer to Chuck Scott. Mitigation Credits Available for the South 277th
Street Corridor Improvements Project. April 11, 2014.
Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C.
Reed, P.B., Jr. 1993. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands, Northwest Region 9 Supplement.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C.
USDA, NRCS (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2013a. The
PLANTS Database. Available at: http://plants.usda.gov. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana.
USDA, NRCS (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2013b. Web soil
survey online interactive mapper. Available at:
<http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx>. Accessed December 2013.
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2013. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), Online interactive
mapper. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/.
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2014. Salmonscape fish database and mapping
application. Available at: https://fortress.wa.gov/dfw/salmonscape/. Accessed January 16, 2014.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 51
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2015. PHS on the Web: An interactive map of
WDFW priority habitats and species information for project review. Available at:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/. Accessed February 2, 2015.
Williams, W.R., R.M. Laramie, and J.J. Ames. 1975. A catalog of Washington streams and salmon
utilization. Volume 1, Puget Sound Region. Washington Department of Fisheries,
Olympia, Washington.
APPENDIX A
Wetland Determination Data Forms
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Supplement to the
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project Site: 277th Sampling Date: 10/23/13
Applicant/Owner: City of Auburn Sampling Point: WA-SP1
Investigator: M Maynard City/County: Auburn/King
Section, Township, Range: S31, T22N, R5E State: WA
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) Ditch Slope (%) 2 Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave
Subregion (LRR) A Lat Long Datum NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name Oridia silt loam NWI classification PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in remarks.)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present on the site? Yes No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology naturally problematic?
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: The sample plot is located in the roadside ditch west of the large floodway ditch, just east of the new development.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size 5M___________) Absolute %
Cover
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status
Dominance Test Worksheet
1.Populus balsamifera 60 Y FAC Number of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2
(A) 2.Salix lucida 3 N FACW
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
3
(B) 4.
63 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
67
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size 5M________)
1. Prevalence Index Worksheet
2. Total % Cover of Multiply by
3. OBL species x 1 =
4. FACW species x 2 =
5. FAC species x 3 =
= Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size 2M ) Column totals (A) (B)
1. Phalaris arundinacea 20 Y FACW
2. Prevalence Index = B / A =
3.
4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
5. X Dominance test is > 50%
6. Prevalence test is ≤ 3.0 *
7. Morphological Adaptations * (provide supporting
8. data in remarks or on a separate sheet)
9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants *
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation * (explain)
11.
20 = Total Cover * Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
Hydrophytic Vegetation
Present? Yes No
1.Rubus armeniacus 40 Y FACU
2.
40 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum ______
Remarks: Reduced vegetation plot size, because of narrow wetland (ditch).
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
SOIL Sampling Point WA-SP1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12 2.5Y 4/2 95 7.5YR 5/6 5 C M Silt Loam
12-16 2.5Y 3/1 80 7.5YR 4/6 20 C M Fine Sa Loam
16-20 2.5Y 4/2 85 10YR 5/6 15 C M Si Cl Loam
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Loc: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (explain in remarks)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric soil present?
Type: ________________________________________ Yes No
Depth (inches): _____________________________________
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Surface water (A1) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B)
High Water Table (A2) Water-Stained Leaves (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Other (explain in remarks)
Field Observations
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (in):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (in): Yes No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Yes No Depth (in): surface
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: Saturation at 13 inches observed on 10/23/13 (original sample plot date), but saturation to the surface observed on 11/7/13. Saturation and inundation
observed in ditch bottom at other locations along the ditch on 10/23/13.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Supplement to the
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project Site: 277th Sampling Date: 11/7/13
Applicant/Owner: City of Auburn Sampling Point: WA-SP2
M Maynard City/County: Auburn/King
Section, Township, Range: S31, T22N, R5E State: WA
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) forest floor Slope (%) 1 Local relief (concave, convex, none) convex
Subregion (LRR) A Lat Long Datum NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name NWI classification upland forest
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in remarks.)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present on the site? Yes No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology naturally problematic?
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: The sample plot is located approximately 30 feet south of 277th.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size 10M___________) Absolute %
Cover
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status
Dominance Test Worksheet
1.Populus balsamifera 40 Y FAC Number of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2
(A) 2.Fraxinus latifolia 25 Y FACW
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
5
(B) 4.
65 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
40
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size 5M________)
1.Symphoricarpos albus 40 Y FACU Prevalence Index Worksheet
2. Total % Cover of Multiply by
3. OBL species x 1 =
4. FACW species x 2 =
5. FAC species x 3 =
40 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size 2M ) Column totals (A) (B)
1. Polystichum munitum 10 Y FACU
2. Prevalence Index = B / A =
3.
4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
5. Dominance test is > 50%
6. Prevalence test is ≤ 3.0 *
7. Morphological Adaptations * (provide supporting
8. data in remarks or on a separate sheet)
9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants *
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation * (explain)
11.
10 = Total Cover * Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 5M )
Hydrophytic Vegetation
Present? Yes No
1.Rubus armeniacus 70 Y FACU
2.
70 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 50______
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
SOIL Sampling Point WC-SP3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-15 2.5Y 4/2 100 Cl Loam
15-18 2.5Y 4/3 99 2.5Y 4/6 1 C M Cl Loam
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Loc: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (explain in remarks)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric soil present?
Type: ________________________________________ Yes No
Depth (inches): _____________________________________
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Surface water (A1) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B)
High Water Table (A2) Water-Stained Leaves (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Other (explain in remarks)
Field Observations
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (in):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (in): Yes No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Yes No Depth (in): Surface to 2”
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: After rain event, soils were saturated in the upper 2 inches (dry below 2 inches).
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Supplement to the
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project Site: 277th Sampling Date: 11/5/13
Applicant/Owner: City of Auburn Sampling Point: WB-SP1
Investigator: M Maynard City/County: Auburn/King
Section, Township, Range: S31, T22N, R5E State: WA
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) Ditch Slope (%) 1 Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave
Subregion (LRR) A Lat Long Datum NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name Briscot silt loam NWI classification PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in remarks.)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present on the site? Yes No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology naturally problematic?
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: Sample Plot WB-SP1 is located approximately 30 feet east-northeast of the light pole, on the north side of the ditch, approximately 5 feet southeast of
Wetland Flag WB-5.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size 5M___________) Absolute %
Cover
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status
Dominance Test Worksheet
1. Number of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
1
(A) 2.
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
1
(B) 4.
= Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size 5M________)
1.Cornus sericea 5 N FACW Prevalence Index Worksheet
2. Total % Cover of Multiply by
3. OBL species x 1 =
4. FACW species x 2 =
5. FAC species x 3 =
5 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size 2M ) Column totals (A) (B)
1. Phalaris arundinacea 90 Y FACW
2.Epilobium ciliatum 5 N FACW Prevalence Index = B / A =
3.
4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
5. X Dominance test is > 50%
6. Prevalence test is ≤ 3.0 *
7. Morphological Adaptations * (provide supporting
8. data in remarks or on a separate sheet)
9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants *
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation * (explain)
11.
95 = Total Cover * Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
Hydrophytic Vegetation
Present? Yes No
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 10%______
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
SOIL Sampling Point WB-SP1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-18 2.5Y 2.5/1 90 7.5YR 4/6 2 C M Silt Loam
2.5Y 4/3 8
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Loc: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (explain in remarks)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric soil present?
Type: ________________________________________ Yes No
Depth (inches): _____________________________________
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Surface water (A1) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B)
High Water Table (A2) Water-Stained Leaves (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Other (explain in remarks)
Field Observations
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (in):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (in): Yes No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Yes No Depth (in): surface
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: Sample plot was located adjacent to inundation
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Supplement to the
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project Site: 277th Sampling Date: 11/5/13
Applicant/Owner: City of Auburn Sampling Point: WB-SP2
Investigator: M Maynard City/County: Auburn/King
Section, Township, Range: S31, T22N, R5E State: WA
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) bench Slope (%) 1 Local relief (concave, convex, none) convex
Subregion (LRR) A Lat Long Datum NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name Briscot silt loam NWI classification upland herbaceous
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in remarks.)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present on the site? Yes No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology naturally problematic?
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: The sample plot is located approximately 7 feet west-northwest of Wetland Flag WB-12, approximately 8 feet north-northeast of light pole, northeast of
the Auburn Way and 277th intersection.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size 10M___________) Absolute %
Cover
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status
Dominance Test Worksheet
1. Number of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3
(A) 2.
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
3
(B) 4.
= Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size 5M________)
1.Crataegus monogyna 10 Y FAC Prevalence Index Worksheet
2. Total % Cover of Multiply by
3. OBL species x 1 =
4. FACW species x 2 =
5. FAC species x 3 =
10 = Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size 2M ) Column totals (A) (B)
1. Phalaris arundinacea 60 Y FACW
2.Ranunculus repens 30 Y FAC Prevalence Index = B / A =
3. Holcus lanatus 10 N FAC
4. Cirsium vulgare 10 N FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
5. Tanacetum vulgare 10 N FACU Dominance test is > 50%
6. Rumex crispus 10 N FAC X Prevalence test is ≤ 3.0 *
7. Cardamine oligosperma 5 N FAC Morphological Adaptations * (provide supporting
8.Epilobium ciliatum 2 N FACW data in remarks or on a separate sheet)
9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants *
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation * (explain)
11.
137 = Total Cover * Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 5M )
Hydrophytic Vegetation
Present? Yes No
1.Rubus armeniacus 5 N FACU
2.
5 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 5%______
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
SOIL Sampling Point WB-SP2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-13 2.5Y 4/2 100 Gr Si Loam
13-18 2.5Y 4/2 98 7.5YR 4/6 2 C M Gr Si Loam
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Loc: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (explain in remarks)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric soil present?
Type: ________________________________________ Yes No
Depth (inches): _____________________________________
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Surface water (A1) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B)
High Water Table (A2) Water-Stained Leaves (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Other (explain in remarks)
Field Observations
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (in):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (in): Yes No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Yes No Depth (in):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Supplement to the
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project Site: 277th Sampling Date: 2/2/14
Applicant/Owner: City of Auburn Sampling Point: WC-SP1
Investigator: M Maynard City/County: Auburn/King
Section, Township, Range: S31, T22N, R5E State: WA
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) Ditch Slope (%) 1 Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave
Subregion (LRR) A Lat Long Datum NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name Briscot silt loam NWI classification PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in remarks.)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present on the site? Yes No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology naturally problematic?
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: Sample Plot WC-SP1 is located approximately 200 feet west of D Street, on the south side of the ditch.
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size 5M___________) Absolute %
Cover
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status
Dominance Test Worksheet
1. Number of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
1
(A) 2.
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
1
(B) 4.
= Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size 5M________)
1. Prevalence Index Worksheet
2. Total % Cover of Multiply by
3. OBL species x 1 =
4. FACW species x 2 =
5. FAC species x 3 =
= Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size 2M ) Column totals (A) (B)
1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 Y FACW
2. Prevalence Index = B / A =
3.
4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
5. X Dominance test is > 50%
6. Prevalence test is ≤ 3.0 *
7. Morphological Adaptations * (provide supporting
8. data in remarks or on a separate sheet)
9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants *
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation * (explain)
11.
100 = Total Cover * Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
Hydrophytic Vegetation
Present? Yes No
1.
2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum _____
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
SOIL Sampling Point WB-SP1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 2.5Y 3/1 85 10YR 4/6 15 C M Silt Loam
5-20 10YR 4/1 85 10YR 4/6 15
C M SiCLm
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Loc: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (explain in remarks)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric soil present?
Type: ________________________________________ Yes No
Depth (inches): _____________________________________
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Surface water (A1) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B)
High Water Table (A2) Water-Stained Leaves (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Other (explain in remarks)
Field Observations
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (in): +11”
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (in): Yes No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Yes No Depth (in): surface
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: Sample plot inundated
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Supplement to the
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project Site: 277th Sampling Date: 2/2/14
Applicant/Owner: City of Auburn Sampling Point: WC-SP2
Investigator: M Maynard/J. Meyer City/County: Auburn/King
Section, Township, Range: S31, T22N, R5E State: WA
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) bench Slope (%) 25% Local relief (concave, convex, none) convex
Subregion (LRR) A Lat Long Datum NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name Briscot silt loam NWI classification upland herbaceous
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in remarks.)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present on the site? Yes No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation , Soil, , or Hydrology naturally problematic?
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: The sample plot is located on south road embankment above Wetland C ditch
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size 10M___________) Absolute %
Cover
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status
Dominance Test Worksheet
1. Number of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
0
(A) 2.
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
0
(B) 4.
= Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
0
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size 5M________)
1. Prevalence Index Worksheet
2. Total % Cover of Multiply by
3. OBL species x 1 =
4. FACW species x 2 =
5. FAC species x 3 =
= Total Cover FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size 2M ) Column totals (A) (B)
1. Phalaris arundinacea 10 N FACW
Prevalence Index = B / A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
Dominance test is > 50%
Prevalence test is ≤ 3.0 *
Morphological Adaptations * (provide supporting
data in remarks or on a separate sheet)
9. Wetland Non-Vascular Plants *
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation * (explain)
11.
10 = Total Cover * Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 5M )
Hydrophytic Vegetation
Present? Yes No
1.Rubus armeniacus 65 Y FACU
2.
65 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 25 %______
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Interim Version
SOIL Sampling Point WC-SP2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-1+ Gravel
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Loc: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Other (explain in remarks)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric soil present?
Type: ________________________________________ Yes No
Depth (inches): _____________________________________
Remarks: SP in road embankment. Hard fill.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply): Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Surface water (A1) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B)
High Water Table (A2) Water-Stained Leaves (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A & 4B) (B9) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Frost-Heave Hummocks
Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (B7)
Other (explain in remarks)
Field Observations
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (in):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (in): Yes No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Yes No Depth (in):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
APPENDIX B
Wetland Rating Forms
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 1 of 9
WETLAND RATING FORM – WESTERN WASHINGTON
Version 2 – Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users
Updated Oct. 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats
Name of wetland (if known): A Date of site visit: 10/23/13
Rated by: M Maynard Trained by Ecology? Yes X No Date of training: 04/06
SEC: 31 TWNSHP: 22N RNGE: 5E Is S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes No X
Map of wetland unit: Figure Estimated size ~50 acres
SUMMARY OF RATING
Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: I II III X IV
Category I = Score > 70 Score for Water Quality Functions 10
Category II = Score 51 - 69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 16
Category III = Score 30 – 50 Score for Habitat Functions 11
Category IV = Score < 30 TOTAL Score for Functions 37
Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of Wetland I II Does not apply X
Final Category (choose the “highest” category from above”) III
Summary of basic information about the wetland unit.
Wetland Unit has Special
Characteristics Wetland HGM Class
used for Rating
Estuarine Depressional X
Natural Heritage Wetland Riverine
Bog Lake-fringe
Mature Forest Slope
Old Growth Forest Flats
Coastal Lagoon Freshwater Tidal
Interdunal
None of the above Check if unit has multiple
HGM classes present
Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will
need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland.
Check List for Wetlands that Need Additional Protection
(in addition to the protection recommended for its category) YES NO
SP1. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or
Endangered animal or plant species (T/E species)?
For the purposes of this rating system, “documented” means the wetland is on the appropriate
state or federal database.
X
SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or
Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, “documented” means the
wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species
are categorized as Category 1 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form).
X
SP3. Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? X
SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the
wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or
in a local management plan as having special significance.
X
To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated.
The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands in to those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland
functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands.
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 2 of 9
Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington
If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with
multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8.
1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)?
NO – go to 2 YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe
If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)?
YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine)
If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it
is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt
Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and
this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term “Estuarine” wetland is kept. Please
note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. _____ ).
2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water
runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit.
NO – go to 3 YES – The wetland class is Flats
If your wetland can be classified as a “Flats” wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands.
3. Does the entire wetland meet both of the following criteria?
______ The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any
vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8ha) in size;
______ At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)?
NO – go to 4 YES – The wetland class is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe)
4. Does the entire wetland meet all of the following criteria?
______ The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual).
______ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may
flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks.
______ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded?
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and
shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep).
NO – go to 5 YES – The wetland class is Slope
5. Does the entire wetland meet all of the following criteria?
______ The unit is in a valley or stream channel where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or
river.
______ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years.
NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding..
NO – go to 6 YES – The wetland class is Riverine
6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of
the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland.
NO – go to 7 YES – The wetland class is Depressional
7. Is the entire wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not
pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The
wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet.
No – go to 8 YES – The wetland class is Depressional
8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a
slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO
BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT
AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the
rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in
the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less
than 10% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area.
HGM Classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM Class to Use in Rating
Slope + Riverine Riverine
Slope + Depressional Depressional
Slope + Lake-fringe Lake-fringe
Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional
Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of
freshwater wetland
Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special
characteristics
If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes
within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating.
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 3 of 9
D Depressional and Flat Wetlands Points
WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. (only 1 score
per box)
D 1 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.38)
D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland:
Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) ........................................... points = 3
Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted, permanently flowing outlet ........ points = 2
Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) ....... points = 1
Unit is a “flat” depression (Q.7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface
outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch ........................... points = 1
(If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as “intermittently flowing”)Provide photo or drawing
Figure ___
2
D 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions)
YES points = 4 NO points = 0 0
D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest Cowardin class):
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 95% of area ............................................... points = 5
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/2 of area ................................................. points = 3
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/10 of area ............................................... points = 1
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation < 1/10 of area .................................................. points = 0
Map of Cowardin vegetation classes
Figure ___
3
D 1.4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is the area of the wetland that is ponded for at
least 2 months, but dries out sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is permanently
ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of 10 years.
Area seasonally ponded is > 1/2 total area of wetland .......................................................... points = 4
Area seasonally ponded is > 1/4 total area of wetland .......................................................... points = 2
Area seasonally ponded is < 1/4 total area of wetland .......................................................... points = 0
Map of Hydroperiods
Figure ___
0
Total for D 1 Add the p oints in the boxes above 5
D 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 44)
Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into
the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient
from the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit
may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity.
Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft
Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland
Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland
A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed
fields, roads, or clear-cut logging
Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland
Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen
Other
YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1
Multiplier
2
TOTAL – Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from D1 by D2; then add score to table on p. 1 10
HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland unit functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation.
D 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.46)
D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland unit
Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) ........................................... points = 4
Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet ......... points = 2
Unit is a “flat” depression (Q.7 on key) or in the Flats class, with permanent surface
outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch ........................... points = 1
(If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as “intermittently flowing”)
Unit has an unconstricted, or slig htly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) ....... points = 0
2
D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods. Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For
units with no outlet measure from the surface of permanent water or deepest part (if dry).
Marks of ponding are 3 ft. or more above the surface or bottom of the outlet ....................... points = 7
The wetland is a “headwater” wetland .................................................................................. points = 5
Marks of ponding between 2 ft. to < 3 ft. from surface or bottom of outlet ........................... points = 5
Marks are at least 0.5 ft. to < 2 ft. from surface or bottom of outlet ...................................... points = 3
Wetland is flat (yes to Q.2 or Q.7 on key)but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1
Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft ......................................................................................... points = 0
3
D 3.3 Contribution of wetland unit to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream
basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself.
The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of unit.................................................... points = 5
The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit ................................................. points = 3
The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit .......................................... points = 0
Entire unit is in the FLATS class ......................................................................................... points = 5
3
Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 8
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 4 of 9
D 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 49)
Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity,
it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive
flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide
gate, flap valve, reservoir etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from
groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which of the following
indicators of opportunity apply.
Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems.
Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems
Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or
stream that has flooding problems
Other
YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1
Multiplier
2
TOTAL – Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D3 by D4; then add score to table on p. 1 16
Comments:
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 5 of 9
These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points
HABITAT FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. (only 1 score
per box)
H 1 Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species?
H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see P. 72):
Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) – Size threshold for each class is
1/4 acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres.
Aquatic Bed
X Emergent plants
Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover)
Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover)
If the unit has a forested class check if:
The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-
cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon.
Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. If you have: Map of Cowardin vegetation classes
4 structures or more ....... points = 4 3 structures ................... points = 2
2 structures ....................points = 11 structure.................... points = 0
Figure ___
0
H 1.2 Hydroperiods (see p.73):
Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to
cover more than 10% of the wetland or 1/4 acre to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods).
Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3
Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 or more types present ...... points = 2
X Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present ................... points = 1
X Saturated only 1 type present .................... points = 0
Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland
X Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland
Lake-fringe wetland ................. = 2 points
Freshwater tidal wetland ......... = 2 points Map of hydroperiods
Figure ___
2
H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (see p. 75):
Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2 (different patches of the same
species can be combined to meet the size threshold)
You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple
loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species ...................... points = 2
5 – 19 species .................... points = 1
List species below if you want to: < 5 species ........................ points = 0
1
H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats (see p. 76):
Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation (described in H1.1), or
the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none.
Note: If you have 4 or more classes
or 3 vegetation classes and
open water, the rating is
always “high”.
Use map of Cowardin classes.
Figure ___
0
H 1.5 Special Habitat Features (see p. 77):
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points
you put into the next column.
Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in. diameter and 6 ft. long)
Standing snags (diameter at the bottom > 4 inches) in the wetland
Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft. (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least
3.3 ft. (1m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft. (10m)
Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning
(> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have
not yet turned grey/brown)
At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that
are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians)
Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants
NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error.
0
H 1 TOTAL Score – potential for providing habitat Add the points in the column above 3
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 6 of 9
H 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? (only 1 score
per box)
H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 80):
Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring
criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of “undisturbed”.
100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer
(relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use).. ........... points = 5
100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 50% circumference .................................................................................................... points = 4
50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 95% circumference .................................................................................................... points = 4
100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 25% circumference .................................................................................................... points = 3
50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
for > 50% circumference .............................................................................................. points = 3
If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above:
No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland >
95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK .................................. points = 2
No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for > 50% circumference.
Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK ................................................................... points = 2
Heavy grazing in buffer ................................................................................................ points = 1
Vegetated buffers are < 2m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% circumference
(e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) ............................. points = 0
X Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above .............................................................. points = 1
Arial photo showing buffers
Figure ___
1
H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (see p. 81)
H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian
or upland) that is at least 150 ft. wide, has at least a 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native
undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at
least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads,
are considered breaks in the corridor).
YES = 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2
H. 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian
or upland) that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to
estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-
fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above?
YES = 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.3
H. 2.2.3 Is the wetland:
Within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR
Within 3 miles of a large field or pasture (> 40 acres) OR YES = 1 point
Within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? NO = 0 points
1
Comments:
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 7 of 9
H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see p. 82): (see new and complete
descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm )
Which of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft. (100m) of the wetland unit?
NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed.
____ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre).
____ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native
fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152).
____ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
____ Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a
multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in)
dbh or > 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown
cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is
generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 - 200 years old west of the Cascade crest.
____ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the
oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158).
__X__ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.
____ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or
a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161).
__X__ Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to
provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.
____ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore,
and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in
WDFW report: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A).
____ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils,
rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.
____ Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft.
____ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt,
andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.
____ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics
to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 51 cm (20 in) in
western Washington and are > 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are > 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest
end, and > 6 m (20 ft) long.
If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points
If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points
If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points
Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are
addressed in question H 2.4)
3
H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits (see p. 84)
There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, and the connections between them are
relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating,
but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development .......... points = 5
The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe
wetlands within 1/2 mile ..................................................................................................... points = 5
There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections between them are
disturbed. ............................................................................................................................ points = 3
The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands
within 1/2 mile .................................................................................................................... points = 3
There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile ........................................................................... points = 2
There are no wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................. points = 0
3
H 2 TOTAL Score – opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores from H2.1, H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 8
TOTAL for H 1 from page 8 3
Total Score for Habitat Functions Add the points for H 1 and H 2; then record the result on p. 1 11
Comments:
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 8 of 9
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below
and circle the appropriate answers and Category.
Wetland Type – Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate
criteria are met.
SC1 Estuarine wetlands? (see p.86)
Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?
The dominant water regime is tidal,
Vegetated, and
With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt.
YES = Go to SC 1.1 NO X
SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural
Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC
332-30-151? YES = Category I NO = go to SC 1.2
Cat. 1
SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions?
YES = Category I NO = Category II
___ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has
less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp,. are only species
that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (I/II).
The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh
with native species would be a Category 1. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in
determining the size threshold of 1 acre.
___ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed
or un-mowed grassland
___ The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water,
or contiguous freshwater wetlands.
Cat. I
Cat. II
Dual
Rating
I/II
SC2 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 87)
Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as
either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or
Sensitive plant species.
SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This
question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR.)
S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site
YES Contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO X
SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened
or endangered plant species?
YES = Category 1 NO not a Heritage Wetland
Cat I
SC3 Bogs (see p. 87)
Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use
the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the
wetland based on its function.
1. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that
compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to
identify organic soils)? YES = go to question 3 NO = go to question 2
2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over
bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or
pond? YES = go to question 3 NO = is not a bog for purpose of rating
3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present,
consist of the “bog” species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more
than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)?
YES = Is a bog for purpose of rating NO = go to question 4
NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that
criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16” deep. If the pH is
less than 5.0 and the “bog” plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog.
4. Is the unit forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western
hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann’s spruce, or western white pine. WITH any of
the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant
component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)?
YES = Category I NO = Is not a bog for purpose of rating
Cat. I
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 9 of 9
SC4 Forested Wetlands (see p. 90)
Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish
and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland
based on its function.
Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least two three species forming a
multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare)
that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm or
more).
NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees
in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW
criterion is and “OR” so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter.
Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 – 200 years old
OR have an average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than
100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally
less than that found in old-growth.
YES = Category I NO = X not a forested wetland with special characteristics
Cat. I
SC5 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (see p. 91)
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated
from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks.
The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5
ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the
bottom.)
YES = Go to SC 5.1 NO X not a wetland in a coastal lagoon
SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?
The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing) and has
less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74).
At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed
or un-mowed grassland.
The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square ft.)
YES = Category I NO = Category II
Cat. I
Cat. II
SC6 Interdunal Wetlands (see p. 93)
Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or
WBUO)?
YES = Go to SC 6.1 NO X not an interdunal wetland for rating
If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.
In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:
Long Beach Peninsula -- lands west of SR 103
Grayland-Westport -- lands west of SR 105
Ocean Shores-Copalis – lands west of SR 115 and SR 109
SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger?
YES = Category II NO = go to SC 6.2
SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre?
YES = Category III
Cat. II
Cat. III
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
Choose the “highest” rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. 1.
If you answered NO for all types enter “Not Applicable” on p. 1
NA
Comments:
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 1 of 9
WETLAND RATING FORM – WESTERN WASHINGTON
Version 2 – Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users
Updated Oct. 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats
Name of wetland (if known): B Date of site visit: 11/5/13
Rated by: M Maynard Trained by Ecology? Yes X No Date of training: 04/06
SEC: 31 TWNSHP: 22N RNGE: 5E Is S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes No X _
Map of wetland unit: Figure Estimated size ~2 acres
SUMMARY OF RATING
Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: I II III X IV
Category I = Score > 70 Score for Water Quality Functions 10
Category II = Score 51 - 69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 16
Category III = Score 30 – 50 Score for Habitat Functions 12
Category IV = Score < 30 TOTAL Score for Functions 38
Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of Wetland I II Does not apply X
Final Category (choose the “highest” category from above”) III
Summary of basic information about the wetland unit.
Wetland Unit has Special
Characteristics Wetland HGM Class
used for Rating
Estuarine Depressional X
Natural Heritage Wetland Riverine
Bog Lake-fringe
Mature Forest Slope
Old Growth Forest Flats
Coastal Lagoon Freshwater Tidal
Interdunal
None of the above Check if unit has multiple
HGM classes present X
Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will
need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland.
Check List for Wetlands that Need Additional Protection
(in addition to the protection recommended for its category) YES NO
SP1. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or
Endangered animal or plant species (T/E species)?
For the purposes of this rating system, “documented” means the wetland is on the appropriate
state or federal database.
X
SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or
Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, “documented” means the
wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species
are categorized as Category 1 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form).
X
SP3. Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? X
SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the
wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or
in a local management plan as having special significance.
X
To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated.
The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands in to those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland
functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands.
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 2 of 9
Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington
If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with
multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8.
1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)?
NO – go to 2 YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe
If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)?
YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine)
If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it
is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt
Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and
this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term “Estuarine” wetland is kept. Please
note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. _____ ).
2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water
runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit.
NO – go to 3 YES – The wetland class is Flats
If your wetland can be classified as a “Flats” wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands.
3. Does the entire wetland meet both of the following criteria?
______ The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any
vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8ha) in size;
______ At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)?
NO – go to 4 YES – The wetland class is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe)
4. Does the entire wetland meet all of the following criteria?
______ The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual).
______ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may
flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks.
______ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded?
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and
shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep).
NO – go to 5 YES – The wetland class is Slope
5. Does the entire wetland meet all of the following criteria?
X _____ The unit is in a valley or stream channel where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or
river.
X _____ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years.
NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding..
NO – go to 6 YES – The wetland class is Riverine
6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of
the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland.
NO – go to 7 YES – The wetland class is Depressional
7. Is the entire wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not
pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The
wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet.
No – go to 8 YES – The wetland class is Depressional
8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a
slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO
BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT
AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the
rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in
the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less
than 10% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area.
HGM Classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM Class to Use in Rating
Slope + Riverine Riverine
Slope + Depressional Depressional
Slope + Lake-fringe Lake-fringe
Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional
Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of
freshwater wetland
Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special
characteristics
If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes
within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating.
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 3 of 9
D Depressional and Flat Wetlands Points
WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. (only 1 score
per box)
D 1 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.38)
D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland:
Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) ........................................... points = 3
Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted, permanently flowing outlet ........ points = 2
Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) ....... points = 1
Unit is a “flat” depression (Q.7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface
outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch ........................... points = 1
(If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as “intermittently flowing”)Provide photo or drawing
Figure ___
2
D 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions)
YES points = 4 NO points = 0 0
D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest Cowardin class):
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 95% of area ............................................... points = 5
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/2 of area ................................................. points = 3
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/10 of area ............................................... points = 1
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation < 1/10 of area .................................................. points = 0
Map of Cowardin vegetation classes
Figure ___
1
D 1.4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is the area of the wetland that is ponded for at
least 2 months, but dries out sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is permanently
ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of 10 years.
Area seasonally ponded is > 1/2 total area of wetland .......................................................... points = 4
Area seasonally ponded is > 1/4 total area of wetland .......................................................... points = 2
Area seasonally ponded is < 1/4 total area of wetland .......................................................... points = 0
Map of Hydroperiods
Figure ___
2
Total for D 1 Add the p oints in the boxes above 5
D 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 44)
Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into
the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient
from the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit
may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity.
Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft
Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland
Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland
A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed
fields, roads, or clear-cut logging
Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland
Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen
Other
YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1
Multiplier
2
TOTAL – Water Quality Functions Multiply thescore from D1 by D2; then add score to table on p. 1 10
HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland unit functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation.
D 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.46)
D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland unit
Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) ........................................... points = 4
Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet ......... points = 2
Unit is a “flat” depression (Q.7 on key) or in the Flats class, with permanent surface
outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch ........................... points = 1
(If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as “intermittently flowing”)
Unit has an unconstricted, or slig htly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) ....... points = 0
2
D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods. Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For
units with no outlet measure from the surface of permanent water or deepest part (if dry).
Marks of ponding are 3 ft. or more above the surface or bottom of the outlet ....................... points = 7
The wetland is a “headwater” wetland .................................................................................. points = 5
Marks of ponding between 2 ft. to < 3 ft. from surface or bottom of outlet ........................... points = 5
Marks are at least 0.5 ft. to < 2 ft. from surface or bottom of outlet ...................................... points = 3
Wetland is flat (yes to Q.2 or Q.7 on key)but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1
Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft ......................................................................................... points = 0
3
D 3.3 Contribution of wetland unit to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream
basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself.
The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of unit.................................................... points = 5
The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit ................................................. points = 3
The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit .......................................... points = 0
Entire unit is in the FLATS class ......................................................................................... points = 5
3
Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 8
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 4 of 9
D 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 49)
Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity,
it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive
flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide
gate, flap valve, reservoir etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from
groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which of the following
indicators of opportunity apply.
Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems.
Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems
Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or
stream that has flooding problems
Other
YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1
Multiplier
2
TOTAL – Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D3 by D4; then add score to table on p. 1 16
Comments:
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 5 of 9
These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points
HABITAT FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. (only 1 score
per box)
H 1 Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species?
H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see P. 72):
Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) – Size threshold for each class is
1/4 acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres.
Aquatic Bed
X Emergent plants
Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover)
Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover)
If the unit has a forested class check if:
The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-
cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon.
Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. If you have: Map of Cowardin vegetation classes
4 structures or more ....... points = 4 3 structures ................... points = 2
2 structures ....................points = 11 structure.................... points = 0
Figure ___
0
H 1.2 Hydroperiods (see p.73):
Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to
cover more than 10% of the wetland or 1/4 acre to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods).
Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3
X Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 or more types present ...... points = 2
X Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present ................... points = 1
X Saturated only 1 type present .................... points = 0
Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland
X Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland
Lake-fringe wetland ................. = 2 points
Freshwater tidal wetland ......... = 2 points Map of hydroperiods
Figure ___
3
H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (see p. 75):
Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2 (different patches of the same
species can be combined to meet the size threshold)
You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple
loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species ...................... points = 2
5 – 19 species .................... points = 1
List species below if you want to: < 5 species ........................ points = 0
1
H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats (see p. 76):
Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation (described in H1.1), or
the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none.
Note: If you have 4 or more classes
or 3 vegetation classes and
open water, the rating is
always “high”.
Use map of Cowardin classes.
Figure ___
0
H 1.5 Special Habitat Features (see p. 77):
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points
you put into the next column.
Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in. diameter and 6 ft. long)
Standing snags (diameter at the bottom > 4 inches) in the wetland
Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft. (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least
3.3 ft. (1m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft. (10m)
Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning
(> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have
not yet turned grey/brown)
At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that
are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians)
Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants
NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error.
0
H 1 TOTAL Score – potential for providing habitat Add the points in the column above 4
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 6 of 9
H 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? (only 1 score
per box)
H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 80):
Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring
criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of “undisturbed”.
100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer
(relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use).. ........... points = 5
100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 50% circumference .................................................................................................... points = 4
50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 95% circumference .................................................................................................... points = 4
100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 25% circumference .................................................................................................... points = 3
50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
for > 50% circumference .............................................................................................. points = 3
If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above:
No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland >
95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK .................................. points = 2
No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for > 50% circumference.
Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK ................................................................... points = 2
Heavy grazing in buffer ................................................................................................ points = 1
Vegetated buffers are < 2m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% circumference
(e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) ............................. points = 0
Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above .............................................................. points = 1
Arial photo showing buffers
Figure ___
1
H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (see p. 81)
H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian
or upland) that is at least 150 ft. wide, has at least a 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native
undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at
least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads,
are considered breaks in the corridor).
YES = 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2
H. 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian
or upland) that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to
estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-
fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above?
YES = 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.3
H. 2.2.3 Is the wetland:
Within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR
Within 3 miles of a large field or pasture (> 40 acres) OR YES = 1 point
Within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? NO = 0 points
1
Comments:
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 7 of 9
H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see p. 82): (see new and complete
descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm )
Which of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft. (100m) of the wetland unit?
NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed.
____ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre).
____ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native
fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152).
____ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
____ Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a
multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in)
dbh or > 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown
cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is
generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 - 200 years old west of the Cascade crest.
____ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the
oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158).
__X__ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.
____ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or
a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161).
_X___ Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to
provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.
____ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore,
and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in
WDFW report: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A).
____ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils,
rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.
____ Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft.
____ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt,
andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.
____ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics
to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 51 cm (20 in) in
western Washington and are > 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are > 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest
end, and > 6 m (20 ft) long.
If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points
If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points
If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points
Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are
addressed in question H 2.4)
3
H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits (see p. 84)
There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, and the connections between them are
relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating,
but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development .......... points = 5
The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe
wetlands within 1/2 mile ..................................................................................................... points = 5
There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections between them are
disturbed. ............................................................................................................................ points = 3
The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands
within 1/2 mile .................................................................................................................... points = 3
There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile ........................................................................... points = 2
There are no wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................. points = 0
3
H 2 TOTAL Score – opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores from H2.1, H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 8
TOTAL for H 1 from page 8 4
Total Score for Habitat Functions Add the points for H 1 and H 2; then record the result on p. 1 12
Comments:
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 8 of 9
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below
and circle the appropriate answers and Category.
Wetland Type – Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate
criteria are met.
SC1 Estuarine wetlands? (see p.86)
Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?
The dominant water regime is tidal,
Vegetated, and
With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt.
YES = Go to SC 1.1 NO X
SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural
Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC
332-30-151? YES = Category I NO = go to SC 1.2
Cat. 1
SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions?
YES = Category I NO = Category II
___ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has
less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp,. are only species
that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (I/II).
The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh
with native species would be a Category 1. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in
determining the size threshold of 1 acre.
___ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed
or un-mowed grassland
___ The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water,
or contiguous freshwater wetlands.
Cat. I
Cat. II
Dual
Rating
I/II
SC2 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 87)
Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as
either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or
Sensitive plant species.
SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This
question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR.)
S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site
YES Contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO X
SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened
or endangered plant species?
YES = Category 1 NO X not a Heritage Wetland
Cat I
SC3 Bogs (see p. 87)
Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use
the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the
wetland based on its function.
1. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that
compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to
identify organic soils)? YES = go to question 3 NO = go to question 2
2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over
bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or
pond? YES = go to question 3 NO = is not a bog for purpose of rating
3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present,
consist of the “bog” species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more
than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)?
YES = Is a bog for purpose of rating NO = go to question 4
NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that
criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16” deep. If the pH is
less than 5.0 and the “bog” plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog.
4. Is the unit forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western
hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann’s spruce, or western white pine. WITH any of
the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant
component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)?
YES = Category I NO = Is not a bog for purpose of rating
Cat. I
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 9 of 9
SC4 Forested Wetlands (see p. 90)
Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish
and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland
based on its function.
Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least two three species forming a
multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare)
that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm or
more).
NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees
in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW
criterion is and “OR” so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter.
Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 – 200 years old
OR have an average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than
100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally
less than that found in old-growth.
YES = Category I NO = X not a forested wetland with special characteristics
Cat. I
SC5 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (see p. 91)
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated
from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks.
The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5
ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the
bottom.)
YES = Go to SC 5.1 NO X not a wetland in a coastal lagoon
SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?
The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing) and has
less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74).
At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed
or un-mowed grassland.
The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square ft.)
YES = Category I NO = Category II
Cat. I
Cat. II
SC6 Interdunal Wetlands (see p. 93)
Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or
WBUO)?
YES = Go to SC 6.1 NO X not an interdunal wetland for rating
If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.
In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:
Long Beach Peninsula -- lands west of SR 103
Grayland-Westport -- lands west of SR 105
Ocean Shores-Copalis – lands west of SR 115 and SR 109
SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger?
YES = Category II NO = go to SC 6.2
SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre?
YES = Category III
Cat. II
Cat. III
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
Choose the “highest” rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. 1.
If you answered NO for all types enter “Not Applicable” on p. 1
Comments:
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 1 of 9
WETLAND RATING FORM – WESTERN WASHINGTON
Version 2 – Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users
Updated Oct. 2008 with the new WDFW definitions for priority habitats
Name of wetland (if known): C Date of site visit: 11/5/13
Rated by: M Maynard/Meyer Trained by Ecology? Yes X No Date of training: 04/06
SEC: 31 TWNSHP: 22N RNGE: 5E Is S/T/R in Appendix D? YesX No X _
Map of wetland unit: Figure Estimated size < 1/2 acre
SUMMARY OF RATING
Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland: I II III X IV
Category I = Score > 70 Score for Water Quality Functions 10
Category II = Score 51 - 69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 16
Category III = Score 30 – 50 Score for Habitat Functions 12
Category IV = Score < 30 TOTAL Score for Functions 38
Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of Wetland I II Does not apply X
Final Category (choose the “highest” category from above”) III
Summary of basic information about the wetland unit.
Wetland Unit has Special
Characteristics Wetland HGM Class
used for Rating
Estuarine Depressional X
Natural Heritage Wetland Riverine
Bog Lake-fringe
Mature Forest Slope
Old Growth Forest Flats
Coastal Lagoon Freshwater Tidal
Interdunal
None of the above Check if unit has multiple
HGM classes present X
Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will
need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland.
Check List for Wetlands that Need Additional Protection
(in addition to the protection recommended for its category) YES NO
SP1. Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or
Endangered animal or plant species (T/E species)?
For the purposes of this rating system, “documented” means the wetland is on the appropriate
state or federal database.
X
SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or
Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, “documented” means the
wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species
are categorized as Category 1 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form).
X
SP3. Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? X
SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the
wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or
in a local management plan as having special significance.
X
To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated.
The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands in to those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland
functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands.
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 2 of 9
Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington
If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with
multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8.
1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)?
NO – go to 2 YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe
If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)?
YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine)
If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it
is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt
Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and
this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term “Estuarine” wetland is kept. Please
note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. _____ ).
2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water
runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit.
NO – go to 3 YES – The wetland class is Flats
If your wetland can be classified as a “Flats” wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands.
3. Does the entire wetland meet both of the following criteria?
______ The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any
vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8ha) in size;
______ At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)?
NO – go to 4 YES – The wetland class is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe)
4. Does the entire wetland meet all of the following criteria?
______ The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual).
______ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may
flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks.
______ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded?
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and
shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep).
NO – go to 5 YES – The wetland class is Slope
5. Does the entire wetland meet all of the following criteria?
X _____ The unit is in a valley or stream channel where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or
river.
X _____ The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years.
NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding..
NO – go to 6 YES – The wetland class is Riverine
6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of
the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland.
NO – go to 7 YES – The wetland class is Depressional
7. Is the entire wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not
pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The
wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet.
No – go to 8 YES – The wetland class is Depressional
8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a
slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO
BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT
AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the
rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in
the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less
than 10% of the unit, classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area.
HGM Classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM Class to Use in Rating
Slope + Riverine Riverine
Slope + Depressional Depressional
Slope + Lake-fringe Lake-fringe
Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional
Depressional + Lake-fringe Depressional
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of
freshwater wetland
Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special
characteristics
If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes
within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating.
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 3 of 9
D Depressional and Flat Wetlands Points
WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. (only 1 score
per box)
D 1 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.38)
D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland:
Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) ........................................... points = 3
Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted, permanently flowing outlet ........ points = 2
Unit has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) ....... points = 1
Unit is a “flat” depression (Q.7 on key), or in the Flats class, with permanent surface
outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch ........................... points = 1
(If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as “intermittently flowing”)Provide photo or drawing
Figure ___
2
D 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions)
YES points = 4 NO points = 0 0
D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation (emergent, shrub, and/or forest Cowardin class):
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 95% of area ............................................... points = 5
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/2 of area ................................................. points = 3
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation > = 1/10 of area ............................................... points = 1
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation < 1/10 of area .................................................. points = 0
Map of Cowardin vegetation classes
Figure ___
1
D 1.4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is the area of the wetland that is ponded for at
least 2 months, but dries out sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is permanently
ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of 10 years.
Area seasonally ponded is > 1/2 total area of wetland .......................................................... points = 4
Area seasonally ponded is > 1/4 total area of wetland .......................................................... points = 2
Area seasonally ponded is < 1/4 total area of wetland .......................................................... points = 0
Map of Hydroperiods
Figure ___
2
Total for D 1 Add the p oints in the boxes above 5
D 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 44)
Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into
the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient
from the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit
may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity.
Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft
Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland
Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland
A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas, residential areas, farmed
fields, roads, or clear-cut logging
Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland
Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen
Other
YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1
Multiplier
2
TOTAL – Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from D1 by D2; then add score to table on p. 1 10
HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland unit functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation.
D 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.46)
D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland unit
Unit is a depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) ........................................... points = 4
Unit has an intermittently flowing, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet ......... points = 2
Unit is a “flat” depression (Q.7 on key) or in the Flats class, with permanent surface
outflow and no obvious natural outlet and/or outlet is a man-made ditch ........................... points = 1
(If ditch is not permanently flowing treat unit as “intermittently flowing”)
Unit has an unconstricted, or slig htly constricted, surface outlet (permanently flowing) ....... points = 0
2
D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods. Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For
units with no outlet measure from the surface of permanent water or deepest part (if dry).
Marks of ponding are 3 ft. or more above the surface or bottom of the outlet ....................... points = 7
The wetland is a “headwater” wetland .................................................................................. points = 5
Marks of ponding between 2 ft. to < 3 ft. from surface or bottom of outlet ........................... points = 5
Marks are at least 0.5 ft. to < 2 ft. from surface or bottom of outlet ...................................... points = 3
Wetland is flat (yes to Q.2 or Q.7 on key)but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1
Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft ......................................................................................... points = 0
3
D 3.3 Contribution of wetland unit to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream
basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself.
The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of unit.................................................... points = 5
The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit ................................................. points = 3
The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit .......................................... points = 0
Entire unit is in the FLATS class ......................................................................................... points = 5
3
Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 8
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 4 of 9
D 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 49)
Answer YES if the unit is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage, or reduction in water velocity,
it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive
flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide
gate, flap valve, reservoir etc. OR you estimate that more than 90% of the water in the wetland is from
groundwater in areas where damaging groundwater flooding does not occur. Note which of the following
indicators of opportunity apply.
Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems.
Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems
Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or
stream that has flooding problems
Other
YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1
Multiplier
2
TOTAL – Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D3 by D4; then add score to table on p. 1 16
Comments:
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 5 of 9
These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. Points
HABITAT FUNCTIONS – Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. (only 1 score
per box)
H 1 Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species?
H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see P. 72):
Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) – Size threshold for each class is
1/4 acre or more than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres.
Aquatic Bed
X Emergent plants
Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover)
Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover)
If the unit has a forested class check if:
The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-
cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon.
Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. If you have: Map of Cowardin vegetation classes
4 structures or more ....... points = 4 3 structures ................... points = 2
2 structures ....................points = 11 structure.................... points = 0
Figure ___
0
H 1.2 Hydroperiods (see p.73):
Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to
cover more than 10% of the wetland or 1/4 acre to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods).
Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3
X Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 or more types present ...... points = 2
X Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present ................... points = 1
X Saturated only 1 type present .................... points = 0
Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland
X Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland
Lake-fringe wetland ................. = 2 points
Freshwater tidal wetland ......... = 2 points Map of hydroperiods
Figure ___
3
H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (see p. 75):
Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2 (different patches of the same
species can be combined to meet the size threshold)
You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple
loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species ...................... points = 2
5 – 19 species .................... points = 1
List species below if you want to: < 5 species ........................ points = 0
1
H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats (see p. 76):
Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation (described in H1.1), or
the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none.
Note: If you have 4 or more classes
or 3 vegetation classes and
open water, the rating is
always “high”.
Use map of Cowardin classes.
Figure ___
0
H 1.5 Special Habitat Features (see p. 77):
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points
you put into the next column.
Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in. diameter and 6 ft. long)
Standing snags (diameter at the bottom > 4 inches) in the wetland
Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft. (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least
3.3 ft. (1m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft. (10m)
Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning
(> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have
not yet turned grey/brown)
At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that
are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians)
Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants
NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error.
0
H 1 TOTAL Score – potential for providing habitat Add the points in the column above 4
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 6 of 9
H 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? (only 1 score
per box)
H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 80):
Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring
criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of “undisturbed”.
100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer
(relatively undisturbed also means no grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use).. ........... points = 5
100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 50% circumference .................................................................................................... points = 4
50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 95% circumference .................................................................................................... points = 4
100m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 25% circumference .................................................................................................... points = 3
50m (170 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
for > 50% circumference .............................................................................................. points = 3
If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above:
No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland >
95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK .................................. points = 2
No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for > 50% circumference.
Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK ................................................................... points = 2
Heavy grazing in buffer ................................................................................................ points = 1
Vegetated buffers are < 2m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% circumference
(e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) ............................. points = 0
Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above .............................................................. points = 1
Arial photo showing buffers
Figure ___
1
H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (see p. 81)
H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian
or upland) that is at least 150 ft. wide, has at least a 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native
undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at
least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads,
are considered breaks in the corridor).
YES = 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2
H. 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian
or upland) that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to
estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-
fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above?
YES = 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.3
H. 2.2.3 Is the wetland:
Within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR
Within 3 miles of a large field or pasture (> 40 acres) OR YES = 1 point
Within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? NO = 0 points
1
Comments:
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 7 of 9
H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see p. 82): (see new and complete
descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in the PHS report
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phslist.htm )
Which of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft. (100m) of the wetland unit?
NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed.
____ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha (1 acre).
____ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native
fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152).
____ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
____ Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a
multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre) > 81 cm (32 in)
dbh or > 200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown
cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is
generally less than that found in old-growth; 80 - 200 years old west of the Cascade crest.
____ Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the
oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158).
__X__ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.
____ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or
a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161).
_X___ Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to
provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.
____ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore,
and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in
WDFW report: pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A).
____ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils,
rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.
____ Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft.
____ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt,
andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.
____ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics
to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 51 cm (20 in) in
western Washington and are > 2 m (6.5 ft) in height. Priority logs are > 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest
end, and > 6 m (20 ft) long.
If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points
If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points
If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points
Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are
addressed in question H 2.4)
3
H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits (see p. 84)
There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, and the connections between them are
relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating,
but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development .......... points = 5
The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe
wetlands within 1/2 mile ..................................................................................................... points = 5
There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, BUT the connections between them are
disturbed. ............................................................................................................................ points = 3
The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands
within 1/2 mile .................................................................................................................... points = 3
There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile ........................................................................... points = 2
There are no wetlands within 1/2 mile .................................................................................. points = 0
3
H 2 TOTAL Score – opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores from H2.1, H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 8
TOTAL for H 1 from page 8 4
Total Score for Habitat Functions Add the points for H 1 and H 2; then record the result on p. 1 12
Comments:
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 8 of 9
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below
and circle the appropriate answers and Category.
Wetland Type – Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate
criteria are met.
SC1 Estuarine wetlands? (see p.86)
Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?
The dominant water regime is tidal,
Vegetated, and
With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt.
YES = Go to SC 1.1 NO X
SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural
Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC
332-30-151? YES = Category I NO = go to SC 1.2
Cat. 1
SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions?
YES = Category I NO = Category II
___ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has
less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp,. are only species
that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (I/II).
The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh
with native species would be a Category 1. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in
determining the size threshold of 1 acre.
___ At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed
or un-mowed grassland
___ The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water,
or contiguous freshwater wetlands.
Cat. I
Cat. II
Dual
Rating
I/II
SC2 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 87)
Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as
either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or
Sensitive plant species.
SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This
question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR.)
S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site
YES Contact WNHP/DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 2.2 NO X
SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened
or endangered plant species?
YES = Category 1 NO X not a Heritage Wetland
Cat I
SC3 Bogs (see p. 87)
Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use
the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the
wetland based on its function.
1. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that
compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to
identify organic soils)? YES = go to question 3 NO = go to question 2
2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over
bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or
pond? YES = go to question 3 NO = is not a bog for purpose of rating
3. Does the unit have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present,
consist of the “bog” species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more
than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)?
YES = Is a bog for purpose of rating NO = go to question 4
NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that
criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16” deep. If the pH is
less than 5.0 and the “bog” plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog.
4. Is the unit forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western
hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann’s spruce, or western white pine. WITH any of
the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant
component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)?
YES = Category I NO = Is not a bog for purpose of rating
Cat. I
Wetland name or number B
Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington, Version 2 (7/06), updated with new WDFW definitions Oct. 2008 Page 9 of 9
SC4 Forested Wetlands (see p. 90)
Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish
and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland
based on its function.
Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least two three species forming a
multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre (20 trees/hectare)
that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 inches (81 cm or
more).
NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees
in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW
criterion is and “OR” so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter.
Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80 – 200 years old
OR have an average diameters (dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53 cm); crown cover may be less than
100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally
less than that found in old-growth.
YES = Category I NO = X not a forested wetland with special characteristics
Cat. I
SC5 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (see p. 91)
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated
from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks.
The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5
ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the
bottom.)
YES = Go to SC 5.1 NO X not a wetland in a coastal lagoon
SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?
The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing) and has
less than 20% cover of invasive plant species (see list of invasive species on p. 74).
At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed
or un-mowed grassland.
The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre (4350 square ft.)
YES = Category I NO = Category II
Cat. I
Cat. II
SC6 Interdunal Wetlands (see p. 93)
Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or
WBUO)?
YES = Go to SC 6.1 NO X not an interdunal wetland for rating
If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.
In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:
Long Beach Peninsula -- lands west of SR 103
Grayland-Westport -- lands west of SR 105
Ocean Shores-Copalis – lands west of SR 115 and SR 109
SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger?
YES = Category II NO = go to SC 6.2
SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre?
YES = Category III
Cat. II
Cat. III
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
Choose the “highest” rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. 1.
If you answered NO for all types enter “Not Applicable” on p. 1
Comments:
APPENDIX C
Wetland Functions and Values Forms
WA
_
F
A
.
d
o
c
Dec.2004
Su
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
V
a
l
u
e
s
We
t
l
a
n
d
I
.
D
.
A
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
:
S
o
u
t
h
2
7
7
th
S
t
r
e
e
t
As
s
e
s
s
e
d
b
y
:
M
M
a
y
n
a
r
d
Da
t
e
:
12/10/2013
Co
w
a
r
d
i
n
C
l
a
s
s
:
P
E
M
/
P
S
S
We
t
l
a
n
d
s
i
z
e
:
Ec
o
l
o
g
y
C
a
t
e
g
o
r
y
:
I
I
I
Lo
c
a
l
R
a
t
i
n
g
:
III
Fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
/
V
a
l
u
e
Oc
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
Y
N
Ra
t
i
o
n
a
l
e
(
a
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
a
n
d
/
o
r
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
o
r
s
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
)
Pr
i
n
c
i
p
a
l
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s
Comments
Fl
o
o
d
f
l
o
w
a
l
t
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
X
Th
e
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
h
a
s
a
co
n
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
o
u
t
l
e
t
a
n
d
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
b
l
e
f
l
o
o
d
st
o
r
a
g
e
.
H
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
m
o
s
t
o
f
i
t
i
s
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
t
h
e
s
t
u
d
y
ar
e
a
.
1,
2
,
4
,
6
H
i
g
h
Se
d
i
m
e
n
t
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
X
Se
d
i
m
e
n
t
s
o
u
r
c
e
i
s
ro
a
d
p
r
i
m
a
r
i
l
y
.
S
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
s
o
b
s
e
r
v
e
d
i
n
d
i
t
c
h
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
t
o
r
o
a
d
.
1,
3
,
4
,
5
,
6
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
Nu
t
r
i
e
n
t
a
n
d
t
o
x
i
c
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
X
To
x
i
c
a
n
t
s
f
r
o
m
ro
a
d
,
b
u
t
w
a
t
e
r
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
l
o
n
g
d
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
de
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
.
1,
2
,
4
,
5
L
o
w
Er
o
s
i
o
n
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
&
s
h
o
r
e
l
i
n
e
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
X
De
n
s
e
h
e
r
ba
c
e
o
u
s
v
e
g
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
,
b
u
t
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
.
1,
2
L
o
w
Pr
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
o
r
g
a
n
i
c
m
a
t
t
e
r
a
n
d
i
t
s
e
x
p
o
r
t
X
De
n
s
e
h
e
r
b
a
c
eo
u
s
v
e
g
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
,
b
u
t
e
x
p
o
r
t
i
s
s
o
m
e
w
h
a
t
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
by
c
o
n
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
o
u
t
l
e
t
.
1,
2
,
4
,
5
,
6
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
s
u
i
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
X
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
v
e
r
y
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
s
t
u
d
y
a
r
e
a
,
b
u
t
we
t
l
a
n
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
s
t
u
d
y
a
r
e
a
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
m
o
r
e
.
3,
6
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
(
L
o
w
i
n
s
t
u
d
y
area)
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
a
q
u
a
t
i
c
i
n
v
e
r
t
e
b
r
a
t
e
s
X
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
v
e
r
y
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
a
q
u
a
t
i
c
i
n
v
e
r
t
e
b
r
a
t
e
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
s
t
u
d
y
ar
e
a
,
b
u
t
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
s
t
u
d
y
a
r
e
a
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
m
o
r
e
.
1,
4
,
5
,
6
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
(
L
o
w
i
n
s
t
u
d
y
area)
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
a
m
p
h
i
b
i
a
n
s
X
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
v
e
r
y
li
m
i
t
e
d
a
m
p
h
i
b
i
a
n
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
s
t
u
d
y
a
r
e
a
,
b
u
t
we
t
l
a
n
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
s
t
u
d
y
a
r
e
a
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
m
o
r
e
.
1,
2
,
6
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
(
L
o
w
i
n
s
t
u
d
y
area)
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
-
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
m
a
m
m
a
l
s
X
Do
e
s
n
o
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
t
h
i
s
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
s
t
u
d
y
a
r
e
a
,
b
u
t
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
ou
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
s
t
u
d
y
a
r
e
a
l
i
k
e
l
y
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
d
o
e
s
.
1,
2
,
3
,
5
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
(
N
o
n
e
i
n
study area)
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
-
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
b
i
r
d
s
X
Do
e
s
n
o
t
p
r
ov
i
d
e
t
h
i
s
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
s
t
u
d
y
a
r
e
a
,
b
u
t
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
ou
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
s
t
u
d
y
a
r
e
a
l
i
k
e
l
y
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
d
o
e
s
.
2,
3
,
6
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
(
N
o
n
e
i
n
study area)
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
f
i
s
h
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
X
Wa
t
e
r
i
n
d
i
t
c
h
r
e
g
u
l
a
r
l
y
d
r
i
e
s
u
p
,
e
v
e
n
i
n
w
i
n
t
e
r
.
L
i
k
e
l
y
a
v
e
r
y
1
,
3
,
4
L
o
w
WA
_
F
A
.
d
o
c
Dec.2004
in
t
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
n
t
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
-
w
a
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
o
f
i
s
h
-
b
e
a
r
i
n
g
w
a
t
e
r
Na
t
i
v
e
p
l
a
n
t
r
i
c
h
n
e
s
s
X
2
Low
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
o
r
s
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
u
s
e
X
Un
i
q
u
e
n
e
s
s
&
h
e
r
i
t
a
g
e
X
Fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
/
V
a
l
u
e
Oc
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
Y
N
Ra
t
i
o
n
a
l
e
(
a
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
a
n
d
/
o
r
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
o
r
s
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
)
Pr
i
n
c
i
p
a
l
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s
Comments
WB
_
F
A
.
d
o
c
Dec.2004
Su
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
V
a
l
u
e
s
We
t
l
a
n
d
I
.
D
.
B
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
:
S
o
u
t
h
2
7
7
th
S
t
r
e
e
t
As
s
e
s
s
e
d
b
y
:
M
M
a
y
n
a
r
d
Da
t
e
:
12/10/2013
Co
w
a
r
d
i
n
C
l
a
s
s
:
P
E
M
We
t
l
a
n
d
s
i
z
e
:
Ec
o
l
o
g
y
C
a
t
e
g
o
r
y
:
I
I
I
Lo
c
a
l
R
a
t
i
n
g
:
III
Fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
/
V
a
l
u
e
Oc
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
Y
N
Ra
t
i
o
n
a
l
e
(
a
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
a
n
d
/
o
r
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
o
r
s
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
)
Pr
i
n
c
i
p
a
l
Fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
s
Comments
Fl
o
o
d
f
l
o
w
a
l
t
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
X
Po
r
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
w
a
t
e
r
f
r
o
m
d
i
t
c
h
e
d
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
o
r
st
r
e
a
m
,
b
u
t
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
l
y
j
u
s
t
f
l
o
w
s
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
2,
4
,
6
L
o
w
Se
d
i
m
e
n
t
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
X
Ti
l
l
a
g
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
a
s
o
u
r
ce
,
h
o
w
e
v
e
r
o
n
l
y
s
o
m
e
p
e
r
i
o
d
s
w
i
t
h
s
l
o
w
mo
v
i
n
g
w
a
t
e
r
.
1,
3
,
4
,
5
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
Nu
t
r
i
e
n
t
a
n
d
t
o
x
i
c
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
X
Fa
r
m
l
a
n
d
a
n
d
r
o
ad
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
n
u
t
r
i
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
to
x
i
c
a
n
t
s
,
b
u
t
n
o
l
o
n
g
du
r
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
w
a
t
e
r
d
e
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
1,
2
,
4
,
5
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
Er
o
s
i
o
n
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
&
s
h
o
r
e
l
i
n
e
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
X
He
rb
a
c
e
o
u
s
v
e
g
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
d
i
t
c
h
b
o
t
t
o
m
1,
2
L
o
w
Pr
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
o
r
g
a
n
i
c
m
a
t
t
e
r
a
n
d
i
t
s
E
x
p
o
r
t
X
De
n
s
e
h
e
r
b
a
c
e
o
u
s
v
eg
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
,
b
u
t
c
o
n
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
o
u
t
l
e
t
1,
2
,
4
,
5
,
6
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
s
u
i
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
X
Po
o
r
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
,
f
r
a
g
m
e
n
t
e
d
b
y
r
o
a
d
s
a
n
d
a
g
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
f
i
e
l
d
s
3
Low
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
a
q
u
a
t
i
c
i
n
v
e
r
t
e
b
r
a
t
e
s
X
Se
a
s
o
n
a
l
i
n
u
n
d
a
t
io
n
,
b
u
t
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
i
s
e
x
p
o
s
e
d
wi
t
h
f
l
u
c
t
u
a
t
i
n
g
w
a
t
e
r
de
p
t
h
s
1,
4
,
6
L
o
w
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
a
m
p
h
i
b
i
a
n
s
X
Sea
s
o
n
a
l
i
n
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
,
b
u
t
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
i
s
ex
p
o
s
e
d
w
i
t
h
f
l
u
c
t
u
a
t
i
n
g
w
a
t
e
r
de
p
t
h
s
1,
2
,
5
L
o
w
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
-
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
m
a
m
m
a
l
s
X
No
p
e
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
i
n
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
-
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
b
i
r
d
s
X
La
c
k
s
s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
o
p
e
n
w
a
t
e
r
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
f
i
s
h
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
X
Ma
y
b
e
s
o
m
e
f
i
s
h
u
s
e
a
t
l
o
w
e
r
e
n
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
s
t
u
d
y
a
r
e
a
1,
4
L
o
w
Na
t
i
v
e
p
l
a
n
t
r
i
c
h
n
e
s
s
X
Do
m
i
n
a
t
e
d
b
y
i
n
v
a
s
i
v
e
s
,
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
d
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
.
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
o
r
s
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
u
s
e
X
Un
i
q
u
e
n
e
s
s
&
h
e
r
i
t
a
g
e
X
WC
F
A
.
d
o
c
Dec.2004
Su
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
V
a
l
u
e
s
We
t
l
a
n
d
I
.
D
.
C
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
:
S
o
u
t
h
2
7
7
th
S
t
r
e
e
t
As
s
e
s
s
e
d
b
y
:
M
M
a
y
n
a
r
d
;
J
.
M
e
y
e
r
Da
t
e
:
12/10/2013
Co
w
a
r
d
i
n
C
l
a
s
s
:
P
E
M
We
t
l
a
n
d
s
i
z
e
:
Ec
o
l
o
g
y
C
a
t
e
g
o
r
y
:
I
I
I
Lo
c
a
l
R
a
t
i
n
g
:
III
Fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
/
V
a
l
u
e
Oc
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
Y
N
Ra
t
i
o
n
a
l
e
(
a
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
a
n
d
/
o
r
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
o
r
s
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
)
Pr
i
n
c
i
p
a
l
Fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
s
Comments
Fl
o
o
d
f
l
o
w
a
l
t
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
X
Po
r
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
w
a
t
e
r
f
r
o
m
d
i
t
c
h
e
d
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
o
r
st
r
e
a
m
,
b
u
t
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
l
y
j
u
s
t
f
l
o
w
s
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
2,
4
,
6
L
o
w
Se
d
i
m
e
n
t
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
X
Ti
l
l
a
g
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
a
s
o
u
r
ce
,
h
o
w
e
v
e
r
o
n
l
y
s
o
m
e
p
e
r
i
o
d
s
w
i
t
h
s
l
o
w
mo
v
i
n
g
w
a
t
e
r
.
1,
3
,
4
,
5
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
Nu
t
r
i
e
n
t
a
n
d
t
o
x
i
c
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
X
Fa
r
m
l
a
n
d
a
n
d
r
o
ad
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
n
u
t
r
i
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
to
x
i
c
a
n
t
s
,
b
u
t
n
o
l
o
n
g
du
r
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
w
a
t
e
r
d
e
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
1,
2
,
4
,
5
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
Er
o
s
i
o
n
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
&
s
h
o
r
e
l
i
n
e
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
X
He
rb
a
c
e
o
u
s
v
e
g
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
d
i
t
c
h
b
o
t
t
o
m
1,
2
L
o
w
Pr
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
o
r
g
a
n
i
c
m
a
t
t
e
r
a
n
d
i
t
s
E
x
p
o
r
t
X
De
n
s
e
h
e
r
b
a
c
e
o
u
s
v
eg
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
,
b
u
t
c
o
n
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d
o
u
t
l
e
t
1,
2
,
4
,
5
,
6
M
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
s
u
i
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
X
Po
o
r
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
,
f
r
a
g
m
e
n
t
e
d
b
y
r
o
a
d
s
a
n
d
a
g
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
f
i
e
l
d
s
3
Low
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
a
q
u
a
t
i
c
i
n
v
e
r
t
e
b
r
a
t
e
s
X
Se
a
s
o
n
a
l
i
n
u
n
d
a
t
io
n
,
b
u
t
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
i
s
e
x
p
o
s
e
d
wi
t
h
f
l
u
c
t
u
a
t
i
n
g
w
a
t
e
r
de
p
t
h
s
1,
4
,
6
L
o
w
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
a
m
p
h
i
b
i
a
n
s
X
Sea
s
o
n
a
l
i
n
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
,
b
u
t
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
i
s
ex
p
o
s
e
d
w
i
t
h
f
l
u
c
t
u
a
t
i
n
g
w
a
t
e
r
de
p
t
h
s
1,
2
,
5
L
o
w
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
-
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
m
a
m
m
a
l
s
X
No
p
e
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
i
n
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
f
o
r
w
e
t
l
a
n
d
-
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
b
i
r
d
s
X
La
c
k
s
s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
o
p
e
n
w
a
t
e
r
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
f
i
s
h
h
a
b
i
t
a
t
X
Ma
y
b
e
s
o
m
e
f
i
s
h
u
s
e
a
t
l
o
w
e
r
e
n
d
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
o
f
s
t
u
d
y
a
r
e
a
1,
4
L
o
w
Na
t
i
v
e
p
l
a
n
t
r
i
c
h
n
e
s
s
X
Do
m
i
n
a
t
e
d
b
y
i
n
v
a
s
i
v
e
s
,
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
d
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
.
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
o
r
s
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
u
s
e
X
Un
i
q
u
e
n
e
s
s
&
h
e
r
i
t
a
g
e
X
APPENDIX D
Site Photographs
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 D-1
Stream 1
Stream 1
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
D-2 MAY 2015
Wetland A
Wetland A
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 D-3
Wetland B
Wetland B
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
D-4 MAY 2015
Wetland C
Wetland C
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
MAY 2015 D-5
Wetland C
Off-site Potential Wetland
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
D-6 MAY 2015
Upland South of Wetland C (ditch)
APPENDIX E
Supplementary Information
National Wetland Inventory Map
NRCS Soils Map
Wetlands on the Port of Seattle Construction Access Site – Auburn Figure
Port of Seattle Mitigation Construction Staging Figure, 49th Street Culvert Crossing, Wetland Delineation,
2003
Available Mitigation Credits Technical Memorandum (Cover) (Entire document to be submitted separately)
Stream and Wetlands Map, Northeast Auburn/Robertson Properties 2009
Corps of Engineer Letter May 2010
277th
Dec 11, 2013
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not
responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All
wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on
the Wetlands Mapper web site.
User Remarks:
Soil Map—King County Area, Washington
(South 277th Street Corridor Improvements)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
3/25/2015
Page 1 of 3
47° 21' 31'' N
12
2
°
1
3
'
5
9
'
'
W
47° 21' 31'' N
12
2
°
1
2
'
3
9
'
'
W
47° 20' 56'' N
12
2
°
1
3
'
5
9
'
'
W
47° 20' 56'' N
12
2
°
1
2
'
3
9
'
'
W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84
035070014002100
Feet
0100200400600
Meters
Map Scale: 1:7,660 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line
placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting
soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate
calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of
the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: King County Area, Washington
Survey Area Data: Version 10, Sep 30, 2014
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000
or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 8, 2014—Jul 15,
2014
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting
of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Soil Map—King County Area, Washington
(South 277th Street Corridor Improvements)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
3/25/2015
Page 2 of 3
Map Unit Legend
King County Area, Washington (WA633)
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
Br Briscot silt loam 78.0 33.4%
Os Oridia silt loam 67.2 28.8%
Pu Puget silty clay loam 1.0 0.4%
Re Renton silt loam 18.8 8.1%
Ur Urban land 20.6 8.8%
W Water 0.6 0.3%
Wo Woodinville silt loam 47.4 20.3%
Totals for Area of Interest 233.8 100.0%
Soil Map—King County Area, Washington South 277th Street Corridor
Improvements
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
3/25/2015
Page 3 of 3
49th Street Culvert Crossing
Wetland Delineation Study
4
Figure 3. 2005 aerial photo showing site alterations. Temporary site access to the port mitigation
site runs west of the subject area. The permanent flood control channel cuts
through the subject area.
The Port widened and deepened an existing drainage ditch from the mitigation
site west and north through the subject area to the roadside ditch along S 277th
Street. The ditch was designed to hydrologically link the floodplains on either
side of S 277th. Its creation was a condition of the agreement between the Port
and the City of Auburn to build the mitigation site (Natural Resource Mitigation
Plan Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Master Plan Update, 2001).
Development of the large subdivision to the east required moving an off-site
field drainage ditch to the edge of the subject parcel. Before site modification, the
ditch ran north/south through the adjacent property, approximately 300 feet east
of the subject parcel. It currently lies along edge of the study area. The old and
new locations of the ditch are shown in Figure 3.
3.2 Wetland A
Wetland A is a palustrine emergent and scrub-shrub wetland located in the east
portion of parcel 0004200006. It crosses through the west half of the study area.
The ditch that was constructed in 2005 contained no surface water at the time of
our visit where it runs through Wetland A. Although we did not locate its
boundaries beyond our study area, the 2003 Parametrix, Inc. wetland report
shows that Wetland A (at the time) extended south and east onto the parcel now
Approximate
study area
Temporary
mitigation site
access road
Port of Seattle
Mitigation
Site
Permanent
flood control
channel
Field drainage
ditch in 2005
Alignment of
field drainage
ditch in 2012
411 108TH AVENUE NE, SUITE 1800
BELLEVUE, WA 98004-5571
T. 425.458.6200 F. 425.458.6363
www.parametrix.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 11, 2014
To: Chuck Schott
From: Jeff Meyer
Subject: Mitigation Credits Available for the South 277th Street Corridor Improvements Project
Project Number: 214-1931-024\04\04012
Project Name: The South 277th Street Corridor Capacity & Non-Motorized Improvements Project
MITIGATION FOR SOUTH 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
The City of Auburn’s S 277th St Corridor Capacity & Non-Motorized Trail Improvement Project (Project) will
impact existing wetlands and streams and mitigation is needed to compensate for these impacts. On behalf of the
City of Auburn (Auburn), Parametrix reviewed past project documents of the original 272nd/277th North
Corridor Project constructed by the City of Kent (Kent) to assess potential mitigation ‘credits’ remaining for use
by Auburn for the current Project.
Two “mitigation pots” of wetland mitigation credits are potentially available from the City of Kent’s original
272nd/277nd North Corridor Project for use by Auburn’s Project. These wetland mitigation pots are discussed
below.
1) Over-Constructed Mitigation: Kent constructed mitigation for its original 272nd/277th North Corridor
project based on the regulatory definition of wetlands in 1994. In 1999, the definition of wetlands
changed resulting in Kent constructing an excess of approximately 0.5 acre of mitigation. The balance of
the over-constructed mitigation as of 2003 was 0.26 acre. Wetland mitigation rules have changed since
2003; therefore, it is not clear if Auburn can utilize this “mitigation pot” for impacts related to Auburn’s
Project. Parametrix would need to confirm with the regulatory agencies that these credits are available to
Auburn’s Project, and that it is acceptable to Kent for Auburn to use these credits for its Project.
2) Reduced Impacts: Kent conducted mitigation for impacts to wetlands along the south side of S 277th St,
but because Kent did not widen the south side of the roadway as originally designed, permitted impacts to
wetlands were not fully used. By Parametrix’s calculations, 0.35 acre of impacts along the south side
were mitigated for, but not implemented. Parametrix would need to confirm with the agencies that these
credits are available to Auburn’s Project, and that it is acceptable to Kent for Auburn to use these credits
for its Project.
In total, 0.61 acre of mitigation credits is potentially available to Auburn’s Project (0.26 acre of Over-Constructed
Mitigation and 0.35 acre of Reduced Impacts). Because the Kent mitigation site is established and performing
well, Auburn’s Project is in a good position to argue a previously established 1:1 mitigation ratio is appropriate
for the Project, in which case existing mitigation credits would be sufficient to cover the Project’s anticipated
wetland impacts.
More detailed discussion of these two mitigation pots is provided in the attached information.
CRITICAL AREAS STUDY
South 277th Street Corridor Capacity
and Non-Motorized Trail Improvements
Submitted to
City of Auburn Public Works
25 West Main Street
Auburn, WA 98001
Prepared for
City of Auburn
Prepared by
Parametrix, Inc.
719 2nd Avenue, Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98104
September 2015
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
i
Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1-1
Project Overview ...................................................................................................................... 1-1
Purpose of Report ..................................................................................................................... 1-1
Project Area .............................................................................................................................. 1-1
2 METHODS ......................................................................................................................................... 2-1
Review of Existing Information ............................................................................................... 2-1
Field Investigations .................................................................................................................. 2-2
Regulations ............................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.3.1 Wetlands and Streams .................................................................................................... 2-2
2.3.2 Wildlife Habitat Areas ................................................................................................... 2-2
2.3.3 Groundwater Protection Areas ....................................................................................... 2-3
2.3.4 Geologic Hazard Areas .................................................................................................. 2-3
2.3.5 Flood Hazard Areas ........................................................................................................ 2-4
3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................... 3-1
Wetlands ................................................................................................................................... 3-1
Streams ..................................................................................................................................... 3-2
Wildlife Habitat ........................................................................................................................ 3-3
3.3.1 Critical Habitat ............................................................................................................... 3-3
3.3.2 Tertiary Habitat .............................................................................................................. 3-3
Groundwater Protection Areas ................................................................................................. 3-4
Geologic Hazard Areas ............................................................................................................. 3-4
Flood Hazard Areas .................................................................................................................. 3-4
4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................. 4-1
Wetlands ................................................................................................................................... 4-1
Streams ..................................................................................................................................... 4-2
Wildlife Habitat ........................................................................................................................ 4-2
Groundwater Protection Areas ................................................................................................. 4-2
Geologic Hazard Areas ............................................................................................................. 4-2
Flood Hazard Areas .................................................................................................................. 4-3
5 MITIGATION PLAN FOR WETLAND AND AQUATIC RESOURCES .................................. 5-1
Avoidance and Minimization Measures ................................................................................... 5-1
Restoration of Temporary Impacts ........................................................................................... 5-2
Compensatory Mitigation ......................................................................................................... 5-2
5.3.1 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 5-2
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
ii SEPTEMBER 2015
5.3.2 Stream Mitigation Goals and Objectives........................................................................ 5-6
5.3.3 Construction Plan ........................................................................................................... 5-7
5.3.4 Construction Observation ............................................................................................. 5-10
Monitoring Plan ...................................................................................................................... 5-10
Contingency Plan .................................................................................................................... 5-10
5.5.1 Hydrology .................................................................................................................... 5-10
5.5.2 Vegetation .................................................................................................................... 5-11
Maintenance and Adaptive Management ............................................................................... 5-11
Performance Security ............................................................................................................. 5-11
Site Protection / Long-term Preservation ............................................................................... 5-12
6 MITIGATION FOR WILDLIFE HABITATS, GROUNDWATER PROTECTION
AREAS, GEOLOGIC HAZARDS, AND FLOOD HAZARDS..................................................... 6-1
Wildlife Habitats ...................................................................................................................... 6-1
Groundwater Protection Areas ................................................................................................. 6-1
Geologic Hazards ..................................................................................................................... 6-2
Flood Hazards ........................................................................................................................... 6-2
7 References .......................................................................................................................................... 7-1
List of Tables
Table 3-1. Summary of Wetlands in the Project Area ......................................................................... 3-1
Table 3-2. Summary of Wetland Functions in the Project Areaa ........................................................ 3-1
Table 4-1. Wetland, Stream, and Buffer Impacts ................................................................................ 4-1
Table 5-1. Aquatic Resource Impacts and Mitigation Summary ........................................................ 5-6
Table 5-2. Planting List ....................................................................................................................... 5-9
List of Figures
Figure 1-1. Vicinity Map ..................................................................................................................... 1-3
Figure 1-2. South 277th Street Project Overview ................................................................................ 1-4
List of Appendices
A Wetland and Stream Impacts Maps
Groundwater Protection Zone Map
Seismic Hazard Map
Project Floodplain Map
B Parametrix Memorandum
City of Kent Letter
C Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
iii
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ACC Auburn City Code
BMP best management practice
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
City City of Auburn
Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DNR Washington Department of Natural Resources
Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FAC Facultative
FACU Facultative Upland
FACW Facultative Wetland
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GIS City of Auburn Geographic Information Services division
HGM hydrogeomorphic (classification)
HPA Hydraulic Project Approval
HUC Hydrologic Unit Code
NAVD88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NGVD29 National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NWI National Wetlands Inventory
PEM palustrine emergent
PHS Priority Habitats and Species
POS Site Port of Seattle wetland mitigation site
RPG Robertson Properties Group
Sound Transit Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority
SPCC Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (plan)
SR State Route
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
WAC Washington Administrative Code
WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
WRIA Water Resource Inventory Area
WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 1-1
1 INTRODUCTION
Project Overview
S 277th St in Auburn is the only remaining two-lane segment on the corridor between State Route (SR) 99
and SR 18. This causes tremendous congestion, delays, and degradation of safety for the transportation
network in the region. This project’s purpose is to complete the final unimproved segment on this important
arterial connection. On a typical weekday, the S 272nd St/277th St corridor carries more than 24,000
vehicles, including a high percentage of trucks. High traffic volumes regularly overwhelm the system in this
constrained segment of the corridor causing delay and unreliability for all users. This project is needed to
eliminate this bottleneck and improve an essential connection to the urban and industrial centers in the
region by improving safety, reducing travel time, expanding reliability, and improving freight movement
across the Green River Valley.
This proposed project would improve access to the urban centers in Auburn, Kent, Federal Way, and
Covington, including three Sound Transit bus and rail stations. In addition to the valuable motorized
improvements, this project would complete a separated non-motorized trail connection between the
Interurban Trail and Green River Trail systems and connect with the City of Kent’s Trail east of the
Green River.
The project consists of intersection improvements and major roadway widening on S 277th St from
Auburn Way N to L St NE. Project components include adding two new eastbound through lanes, one new
westbound through lane, a Class I separated non-motorized trail, street lighting improvements, storm
drainage improvements, streetscape improvements, intelligent transportation system improvements,
intersection capacity and safety improvements, and auxiliary turn lanes at Auburn Way N, D St NE, and the
future I St NE. The project would also include a fish-passable culvert under S 277th St and construction of a
stream compensatory mitigation site. The project length is approximately 3,300 feet.
Purpose of Report
Any activity that potentially affects a critical area or its buffer, unless otherwise exempt, is subject to the City
of Auburn (City) Critical Areas regulations (Auburn City Code (ACC) 16.10.030). To comply with ACC
16.10, this Critical Areas Report provides information on each critical area that would be affected by this
project. These critical areas include wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat areas, groundwater protection areas,
geologic hazard areas, and flood hazard areas. This report also discusses the methods for assessing the critical
areas, presents the results of field investigations, analyzes the potential impacts, and recommends mitigation
to offset those impacts.
Project Area
The project area is a mainly linear corridor mostly within the existing S 277th St right-of-way. Most of the
project area is located in Section 31, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian; the western
end of the project area is in Section 36, Township 22 North, Range 4 East. The approximate
latitude/longitude coordinates are 47.3538°N, 122.2210°W (Figure 1-1).
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
1-2 SEPTEMBER 2015
The project area is in the Lower Green River sub-basin of Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 (Green-
Duwamish Watershed), and identified in Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) number 171100130304, Mill
Creek-Green River.
The eastern terminus is located at the intersection of S 277th St and L St NE, which is the entrance for a
residential development to the south. The western terminus is located at the intersection of S 277th St and
Auburn Way N, where there is a convenience store and gas station at the southeast corner. North of S 277th St
is agricultural land and these fields are actively being farmed. Ditches are located parallel to S 277th St on both
the north and south sides of the roadway. On the south side of S 277th St, near the center of the project
alignment, is an area historically used as a drive-in movie theater, but this property is currently abandoned.
This property is currently owned by the Robertson Properties Group (RPG), the site of a future development
project known as the Auburn Gateway Project. Generally, the shoulders and the ditches located near the road
are degraded from heavy use (Figure 1-2).
DATE: March 17, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 3-1
0
Project
Location
Kent
Auburn
Project
Location
Seattle
Tacoma
Kent
Auburn
S 277th St
Au
b
u
r
n
W
a
y
N
E
V
a
l
l
e
y
H
w
y
SCALE IN FEET
10.5
Auburn Creek
Green River
Vicinity Map
Figure 1-1
TO GRE
E
N
R
I
V
E
R
,
VIA AUB
U
R
N
C
R
E
E
K
TW
I
N
B
O
X
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
S
18
"
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
ST
R
E
A
M
PO
R
T
O
F
S
E
A
T
T
L
E
F
L
O
O
D
CO
N
T
R
O
L
C
H
A
N
N
E
L
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
ST
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
DE
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
P
O
N
D
48
"
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
CU
L
V
E
R
T
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
T
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
TR
E
A
T
M
E
N
T
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
DATE: March 30,
2
0
1
5
F
I
L
E
:
P
S
1
9
3
1
0
2
4
F
I
G
3
-
2
0SCALE IN FEET 500
Fi
g
u
r
e
1-2
So
u
t
h
2
7
7
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
LE
G
E
N
D
Wa
t
e
r
B
o
d
y
Wa
t
e
r
C
o
u
r
s
e
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
C
u
l
v
e
r
t
Ne
w
F
u
l
l
D
e
p
t
h
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
Ne
w
N
o
n
-
M
o
t
o
r
i
z
e
d
T
r
a
i
l
PV
C
P
i
p
e
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 2-1
2 METHODS
This Critical Areas Report is based on a review of existing information, field investigations, and compliance
with ACC 16.10, the City’s Critical Area regulations. The goal of these efforts is to document existing
information reflecting current site conditions, collect new information to assess impacts, and propose
mitigation where appropriate.
Review of Existing Information
Prior to conducting fieldwork, and throughout the project design, scientists and engineers reviewed existing
information to identify wetlands, streams, vegetation patterns, topography, soils, wildlife habitats, geology,
drinking water sources, floodplains, and other natural resources in the project area. Existing data sources that
were reviewed for this report included, but were not limited to, the following:
City of Auburn Geographic Information Services (GIS) maps
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA, NRCS) Web soil
survey (USDA, NRCS 2013)
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) online wetlands mapper (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
[USFWS] 2013)
A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume 1, Puget Sound Region
(Williams et al. 1975)
SalmonScape online mapping tool (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife [WDFW] 2014)
Online Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) listed by the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife (WDFW 2015)
List of Sections that Contain Natural Heritage Features (Washington Department of Natural
Resources [DNR] 2013)
King County iMap (King County 2015)
Biological Assessment, South 277th Street Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Trail
Improvements (Parametrix 2015a)
Discipline reports for this project prepared under guidance of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), including Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report (Parametrix 2015b) and Floodplain
Discipline Report (Parametrix 2015c)
Draft Geotechnical Engineering Report for this project (AMEC 2015)
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Maps (FEMA 2015)
King County floodplain maps
Environmental Impact Statement Addendum for the NE Auburn/ Robertson Properties Special Area
Plan (ESA 2011).
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
2-2 SEPTEMBER 2015
Field Investigations
Field investigations in the project area were conducted during multiple site visits in November and December
2013. Water flow in the project area ditches was observed on several occasions in 2014 during other
incidental site visits. Geotechnical investigations were conducted in 2014 and 2015.
Regulations
Wetlands and streams in the project area (S 277th St right-of-way) are within the jurisdiction of the City’s
Critical Areas (ACC 16.10). Other critical areas that apply to this project include flood hazard areas, wildlife
habitat areas, groundwater protection areas, and geologic hazard areas.
2.3.1 Wetlands and Streams
Wetlands, streams, and other sensitive resources in the project vicinity are also subject to federal and state
regulations. At the federal level, wetlands and streams are regulated by the Clean Water Act, Section 404,
which regulates placement of fill in waters of the United States. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is
responsible for issuing permits under Section 404. Activities that affect wetlands and streams may also require
a water quality certification (Section 401 of the Clean Water Act), which is administered at the federal level
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and implemented at the state level by the Washington
State Department of Ecology (Ecology).
Ecology reviews projects for compliance with state water quality standards and makes permitting and
mitigation decisions based on the nature and extent of impacts, as well as the type and quality of wetlands or
streams being affected. Activities that use, divert, obstruct, or change the flow of a Water of the State,
including some wetlands, typically require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) permit. WDFW is
responsible for implementing HPA’s under the State Hydraulic Code.
A detailed description of methods used to identify, map, classify, and rate existing wetlands and streams is
provided in the Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report (Parametrix 2015b), which is included herein by
reference. Detailed information on wetlands and streams, including data sheets, rating forms, and site
photographs, is provided in the discipline report (Parametrix 2015b). Pertinent regulatory information on
other resources in the project area is summarized in the following sections.
2.3.2 Wildlife Habitat Areas
As stated in ACC 16.10.080 (E), wildlife habitat areas are classified as critical, secondary, or tertiary as
described below:
1. ‘Critical habitat’ are those habitat areas which meet any of the following criteria:
a. The documented presence of species or habitat listed by federal or state agencies as ‘endangered,’
‘threatened,’ or ‘sensitive’ or
b. The presence of unusual nesting or resting sites such as heron rookeries
c. Category I wetlands, as defined in these regulations or
d. Class I streams, as defined in these regulations.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 2-3
2. ‘Secondary habitat’ is habitat which is valuable to fish and wildlife and supports a wide variety of
species due to its undisturbed nature, a diversity of plant species and structure, presence of water, or
the area’s size, location, or seasonal importance.
3. ‘Tertiary habitat’ is habitat which is not classified as critical or secondary. It is habitat which, while
supporting some wildlife and performing other valuable functions, does not currently possess
essential characteristics necessary to support diverse wildlife communities. Tertiary habitat also
includes habitat which has been created purposefully by human actions to serve other or multiple
purposes, such as open space areas, landscape amenities, and detention facilities.
2.3.3 Groundwater Protection Areas
According to ACC 16.10.010, groundwater protection areas are designated by the City as land areas that
provide a source of potential drinking water; contribute to the stream discharge and flow; recharge aquifers,
springs, and wells; and are susceptible to contamination through pollutant infiltration. As stated in ACC
16.10.080, the entire city land area is divided into four groundwater protection zones. The different zones are
delineated based on the amount of time it would take for contamination to reach the water supply through
groundwater flow. Zone 1 is delineated as the land area overlying the 1-year time-of-travel to wells or springs
owned by the City; Zone 2 represents land in the central part of Auburn where the principal aquifer lies and
soils are highly permeable; Zone 3 is the land area that represents between a 1-year and 10-year time-of-travel
to wells or springs owned by the City; and Zone 4 is the land area that would take greater than a 10-year
time-of-travel to wells or springs owned by the City.
2.3.4 Geologic Hazard Areas
According to ACC 16.10.010, geologic hazard areas are land areas with geologic, hydrologic, and topographic
conditions that make them susceptible to varying degrees of risk from landslides, erosion, and seismic or
volcanic activity. Geologic hazards are regulated to avoid and minimize potential impacts on life and property.
To do so, the City regulates and/or limits land uses, where applicable, and conducts analyses to ensure sound
engineering and construction practices are addressing the geologic hazards.
As stated in ACC 16.10.080 (G), geologic hazards are classified as follows:
1. Critical Erosion Hazard Areas. Critical erosion hazard areas are lands or areas underlain by soils
identified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service (SCS), now known as the
Natural Resource Conservation Service, as having “severe” or “very severe” erosion hazards. This
includes the following group of soils when they occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater: Alderwood
Kitsap (AkF), Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (AgD), Kitsap silt loam (KpD), Everett (EvD), and
Indianola (InD).
2. Landslide Hazard Areas. Landslide hazard areas are classified as Class I, Class II, Class III, or Class IV
as follows:
a Class I/Low Hazard. Areas with slopes of 15 percent or less.
b. Class II/Moderate Hazard. Areas with slopes of between 15 percent and 40 percent and that are
underlain by soils that consist largely of sand, gravel, or glacial till.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
2-4 SEPTEMBER 2015
c. Class III/High Hazard. Areas with slopes between 15 percent and 40 percent that are underlain
by soils consisting largely of silt and clay.
d. Class IV/Very High Hazard. Areas with slopes steeper than 15 percent with mappable zones of
emergent water (e.g., springs or ground water seepage), areas of known (mappable) landslide
deposits regardless of slope, and all areas with slopes 40 percent or greater.
3. Seismic Hazard Areas. Seismic hazard areas are lands that, due to a combination of soil and ground
water conditions, are subject to severe risk of ground shaking, subsidence, or liquefaction of soils
during earthquakes. These areas are typically underlain by soft or loose saturated soils (such as
alluvium), have a shallow ground water table and are typically located on the floor of river valleys.
2.3.5 Flood Hazard Areas
Flood hazard areas are identified based on ACC 16.10.010, which refers to the requirements of ACC 15.68
for the identification, assessment, alteration, and mitigation of flood hazard areas. ACC 15.68 applies to
regulatory floodplain within the jurisdiction of the city, that includes the special flood hazard area and all
protected areas within the city of Auburn. The special flood hazard area is defined as the land subject to
inundation by the base flood (also known as the 100-year flood) identified by FEMA. Protected areas include
lands that lie within the boundaries of the floodway, the riparian habitat zone, and the channel migration
area. In riverine areas, where a floodway has not been designated by ACC 15.68, the protected area is
comprised of those lands that lie within the boundaries of the riparian habitat zone, the channel migration
area, and the special flood hazard area.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 3-1
3 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Wetlands
A detailed description of existing wetlands in the project area, including sample plot data, wetland rating
forms, wetland function assessments forms, site photographs, and other supplementary information are
provided in the Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report (Parametrix 2015b). This discipline report is herein
included in the critical areas report by reference. The existing wetlands are summarized below.
Biologists delineated portions of three Category III wetlands (Wetlands A, B, and C) in the project area.
Wetland A includes the ditches south of S 277th St from G St NE extending eastward to the east boundary of
the Port of Seattle property. Wetland B is located on the north side of S 277th St, and Wetland C is located
on the opposite (south) side of the road, between D Street NE and Auburn Way N. Three other wetlands
were identified off-site on the Robertson Properties Group (RPG) property. Parametrix did not delineate
these wetlands for this project, but relied on information and mapping by others. Off-site Wetland A was
delineated by J.S. Jones in 2014. Off-site Wetland D was verified by the Corps of Engineers in 2010. Off-site
Wetland E was estimated in the field by Parametrix based on wetland field indicators. Tables 3-1 and 3-2
summarize the wetlands identified in the project area. Appendix A, Figure 5-1 contains the maps showing the
wetlands identified for this project.
Table 3-1. Summary of Wetlands in the Project Area
Wetland
Area
(sf/ac)
City of
Auburn
Categorya
Minimum
Buffer Widthb
(ft)
Ecology
Ratingc
USFWS
Classificationd
HGM
Classification
A 7,219 / ~0.17 III 25 III PEM Depressional
B ~2 III 25 III PEM Depressional
C 4,343 / 0.10 III 25 III PEM Riverine/
Depressional
a ACC 16.10.070.C
b ACC 16.10.090.E.1
c Hruby (2004)
d Cowardin et al. (1979). PEM = palustrine emergent; sf = square feet; ac = acre; ft = feet; HGM = hydrogeomorphic
Table 3-2. Summary of Wetland Functions in the Project Areaa
Wetland
Flood Flow
Alteration
Sediment
Removal
Nutrient
and
Toxicant
Removal
Erosion
Control and
Shoreline
Stabilization
Production
of Organic
Matter and
its Export
General
Habitat
Suitability
Habitat for
Aquatic
Invertebrates
A High Moderate Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate
B Low Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Low Low
C Low Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Low Low
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
3-2 SEPTEMBER 2015
Table 3-2. Summary of Wetland Functions for Wetlands in the Project Areaa (continued)
Wetland
Habitat for
Amphibians
Habitat for
Wetland-
Associated
Mammals
Habitat for
Wetland-
Associated
Birds
General
Fish
Habitat
Native
Plant
Richness
Education
or
Scientific
Value
Uniqueness
and
Heritage
A Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Low NA NA
B Low NA NA Low NA NA NA
C Low NA NA Low NA NA NA
a. Functions assessed using Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) method (Null et al. 2000); see Parametrix 2015b for indicator
characteristics present in each wetland.
Streams
A detailed description of existing streams in the project area is provided in the Wetlands and Streams
Discipline Report (Parametrix 2015b). This discipline report is herein included in the critical areas report by
reference. A summary of the existing streams is included below.
One stream (Stream 1) was mapped within the project area. Stream 1 is confined to the bottom of a ditch
along the south side of S 277th St, just north of the area that was historically a drive-in movie theater. The
defined channel occurs in two sections separated by a culvert under a driveway. These two segments of the
ditch were classified as stream instead of wetland because they lack native hydric soils. Stream 1 is
approximately 900 linear feet long and 2 to 5 feet wide, with a total surface area of approximately 4,604
square feet. Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) is the predominant cover type in these two segments of
the ditch. Drift lines and trash were readily observed, indicating the high water mark.
The ditches in the project area have not been mapped as streams (fish-bearing or otherwise) by WDFW
(2014) or DNR (2014) based on their source information. However, this mapping is not always accurate or
up to date, therefore, it is possible that fish could occur in these unmapped waterbodies. In fact, three dead
juvenile coho salmon were observed near the eastern end of the ditch on the south side of S 277th Street
during a site visit in October 2013. Dead adult coho salmon were observed at the same location in November
2013 (Jeff Jones, pers. comm. 2015). It is not clear how those fish got to that location, which is at least 3,800
feet upstream of any streams in which fish are known or expected to occur (WDFW 2014, 2015), nor is it
known whether the fish were alive when they arrived at the location where they were observed.
Because there are indications that fish have been present in the ditch, it is classified as a Class II stream per
ACC 16.10.080 (D). This ditch is not expected to provide spawning or rearing habitat for fish, and the
quality of foraging or refuge habitat, if either is present, is poor. The location of the ditches and adjoining
areas within the maintained right-of-way of S 277th St impedes the functioning riparian habitat. The primary
function of Stream 1 is stormwater conveyance. Appendix A contains the maps showing Stream 1.
All of the ditches in the project area have culverts that allow upstream and/or downstream fish passage, to
varying degrees, when water is present in the ditches. Access between the project and high-quality fish habitat
in the Green River is impeded by the presence of a flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek, approximately
3,100 feet downstream and located north of S 277th St. The flood gate prevents upstream and/or
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 3-3
downstream fish passage during various flow levels; therefore, habitat access in the project area is considered
to not be functioning properly, based on the presence of physical barriers.
Wildlife Habitat
3.3.1 Critical Habitat
Although no critical habitat has been documented in the project area, field observation, research on the
WDFW PHS website, and review of existing literature indicate the potential for critical habitat to exist
meeting the definition of ACC 16.10.080 (C)(1).
3.3.1.1 Absence of Unusual or Resting Sites
During site investigations in the fall of 2013, trumpeter swans (Cygnus buccinator) were observed foraging in
fields to the northwest of the project area. WDFW classifies the priority areas for trumpeter swans as regular
concentrations of these species, which means areas that are commonly or traditionally used by a group of
animals on a seasonal or year-round basis (WDFW 2008). WDFW mapped waterfowl concentrations in the
field north of the project area (WDFW 2015). No swans or other regular concentrations of other species were
observed within the project area.
3.3.1.2 Absence of Species or Habitat Listed by Federal or State Agencies as Endangered,
Threatened, or Sensitive
The three species under the Endangered Species Act that occur in the vicinity of the project area include
Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha), which is part of the Puget Sound Evolutionarily Significant Unit, steelhead
trout (O. mykiss), which is part of the Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment, and bull trout (Salvelinus
confluentus). Although none of these species has been documented at the project site, all three are known to
use habitats in the Green River, which receives stormwater runoff from the project area (Parametrix 2015a).
Access to streams in the project area by listed species is severely restricted most of the year by the flood gate as
noted in section 3.2 above. Project area stream and ditches have low quality habitat not preferred by listed
species. Therefore it is highly unlikely that Chinook salmon, steelhead trout, or bull trout would use the
ditches and roadside Stream 1 in the project area. Additional information is presented in the biological
assessment for the project (Parametrix 2015a).
3.3.2 Tertiary Habitat
Wildlife species typically present in the project area are adapted to a wide variety of conditions. Characteristic
species include European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris), American crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos), dark-eyed
juncos (Junco hymalis), spotted towhees (Pipilo maculatus), house finches (Carpodacus mexicanus), house
sparrows (Passer domesticus), black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus), Virginia opossums (Didelphis
virginiana), raccoons (Procyon lotor), deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), and Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus).
The wetlands and stream, as described in Sections 3.1 and 3.2, although limited in supporting diverse wildlife
communities, do provide other functions. Biologists assessed Wetland A, which is located in a ditch system, as
providing a high level of flood flow alteration and a moderate level of general habitat suitability. Wetlands B
and C rated low for general habitat suitability and low to moderate for other functions (see Table 3-2).
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
3-4 SEPTEMBER 2015
The channel and banks of the ditches in the project area are dominated by low-growing non-native species
such as reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus). Riparian habitat along the ditches is
degraded in most locations, consisting of narrow vegetated strips dominated by grasses, forbs, and a few
woody plants. The location of the ditches and adjoining areas within the maintained right-of-way of S 277th
St limits the potential for developing functioning riparian habitat.
A 10-foot-wide strip of ornamental trees (Arborvitae sp.) has been planted along the fence south of the south-
side ditch where it runs alongside the former drive-in movie theater. These trees are approximately 15 feet tall
and provide some shade to the ditch. Farther east, several large native and non-native trees (primarily red
alder [Alnus rubra] and black cottonwood [Populus trichocarpa), along with some native shrubs, such as
snowberry (Symphoricarpos) and salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), are present along the south bank of the ditch
on the parcel immediately east of the drive-in movie theater. The over story vegetation in that area provides
shade during spring and summer (when the trees have leaves), as well as the potential for contributing woody
debris. Downstream of the project site, the ditch is an open drainage channel that drains adjacent farmlands.
There is limited in-stream habitat or vegetated cover to provide thermal protection. Sections 3.1 and 3.2
above describe the wetland and stream habitats within the project area.
Groundwater Protection Areas
The City of Auburn’s Geographic Information Services (GIS) division mapping shows the entire alignment in
a Zone 4 groundwater protection zone (Appendix A) (City of Auburn 2010). Zone 4 is a land area within the
city limits that is not designated as the more protective water resource protection Zones 1, 2, or 3 because the
time-of-travel for contamination to the area is 10 years.
Geologic Hazard Areas
The City’s GIS division mapping does not show the project alignment within a geologic hazard area.
However, King County has mapped the following areas as a seismic hazard: north of S 277th Street, S 277th
Street (and associated right-of-way), and the land area east of Auburn Way N (see Appendix A).
The Geotechnical Engineering Report (AMEC 2015) for the project evaluated geologic conditions and found
that the alluvial soils below the groundwater table have a high potential for liquefaction. It was determined
that the alluvial soft silts and loose sands are expected to liquefy during a design earthquake (per American
Society for Testing and Materials [ASTM] standard D-1883). The liquefaction analysis estimated that 12
inches of settlement could occur during the design earthquake (AMEC 2015).
Flood Hazard Areas
FEMA has identified the currently Effective Flood Insurance Rate Map (authorized by law to be used in
making determinations under the National Flood Insurance Program) for the project area to be that dated
May 16, 1995. This map shows a base flood elevation for the Green River in the project vicinity as 45.0 feet
NGVD29, which converts to 48.53 feet NAVD88. Also, as cited in ACC 15.68, FEMA has designated the
Flood Insurance Study for King County, Washington and Incorporated Areas, dated April 19, 2005, to be
Effective for the project area (FEMA 2015).
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 3-5
The Green River floodplain originates from the Green River at a location to the north of the project site and
flows south and over land and to S 277th St where it’s conveyed through the S 277th St road prism by six
culverts, which range in diameter from 12 inches to 48 inches, and also includes two 3-foot by 6-foot
concrete box culverts. On the south side of S 277th St, the Green River floodplain is hydraulically connected
to a Port of Seattle wetland mitigation site (POS Site) by overland inundation that connects to a large north-
south constructed flood conveyance channel. The POS Site contains approximately 21 acre-feet of available
floodplain storage to compensate for the Port of Seattle project fill within the adjacent floodplain (Port of
Seattle 2012; ACC 18.08). Please see Appendix A, Project Floodplain Map, depicting regulated existing
conditions, impacts, and proposed conveyance and compensatory storage.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 4-1
4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Wetlands
Impacts on wetlands in the project area are described fully in the Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
(Parametrix 2015b). A summary of the wetland impacts is included below. Table 4-1 summarizes the wetland
buffer impacts and Figure 5-1, Appendix A, shows these impact areas.
Construction of this project would affect approximately 7,219 square feet of Wetland A and 4,343 square feet
of Wetland C, totaling 11,562 square feet or 0.27 acre of on-site wetlands. This represents 100% of each of
these two wetlands. These wetland impacts would result from the wetlands, or ditches, being filled to widen
S 277th St and to construct the proposed trail along the south side of the roadway. Functions associated with
Wetlands A and C would be removed from this portion of the project area. Mitigation for these impacts is
presented in a following section. There would be no permanent wetland impacts on Wetland B, because it is
on the north side of S 277th St outside of the main road construction that would occur south of the existing
roadway. Additional turn lanes would be added on the north side of the intersection with Auburn Way N but
would not affect the wetlands. A portion of an off-site wetland (Off-Site Wetland E) also would be impacted
by the project. It is estimated that 1,543 square feet (0.04 acre or less than 10 percent) of this wetland would
be filled for the road prism. This impact would have a minor effect on habitat and water quality functions of
Off-Site Wetland E. Thus, wetland impacts as a result of this project would total 13,105 square feet
(0.31 acre).
Functioning buffers are extremely limited in the project area. Roadside gravel shoulders or the gravel parking
lots of the movie theater make up the majority of the areas adjacent to project wetlands. Thus, no permanent
impacts to project area buffers would occur. However, approximately 7,000 square feet of Off-Site Wetland
A and D buffers would be temporarily impacted by the stream mitigation and riparian corridor. These buffer
are composed of shrubs and young black cottonwood trees.
Table 4-1. Wetland, Stream, and Buffer Impacts
Wetland
USFWS
Classification
City of Auburn
Rating a
Wetland/Stream Buffer
Perm. Impacts
(sf/ac)
Temp. Impacts
(sf/ac)
Perm. Impacts
(sf/ac)
Temp. Impacts
(sf/ac)
A PEM III 7,219/0.17 0/0.00 0/0 250/<0.01
B PEM III 0/0.00 0/0.00 0/0.00 0/0.00
C PEM III 4,343/ 0.10 0/0.00 0/0.00 0/0.00
On-Site Wetlands
Subtotal
11,562/0.27 0/0.00 0/0.00 250/<0.01
Off-Site Wetland E PEM III/IV 1,543/0.04 0/0.00 0/0.00 0/0.00
Off-Site Wetland A PFO\PEM II 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,500/0.00
Off-Site Wetland D PFO\PEM III 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,250/0.00
Off-Site Wetlands -
Total
1,543/0.04 0/0.00 0/0.00 0/0.00
Wetland Impacts -
Total
13,105/0.31 0/0.00 0/0.00 7,000/<0.16
Streams II 900 lf (4,604 0 0 0
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
4-2 SEPTEMBER 2015
Table 4-1. Wetland, Stream, and Buffer Impacts
Wetland
USFWS
Classification
City of Auburn
Rating a
Wetland/Stream Buffer
Perm. Impacts
(sf/ac)
Temp. Impacts
(sf/ac)
Perm. Impacts
(sf/ac)
Temp. Impacts
(sf/ac)
(U.S. Waters) sf/0.11)
U.S. Waters Total 17,709/0.41 0/0.00 0/0.00 7,000/<0.16
a Wetland rating according to ACC 16.10.070 (C)
sf = square feet; ac = acre; lf = linear feet; Perm. = Permanent, Temp. = Temporary
Streams
Impacts on streams in the project area are described fully in the Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report
(Parametrix 2015b). A summary of the stream impacts is included below.
Widening of S 277th St would fill the entire Stream 1 reach, which is approximately 900 linear feet (see
Figure 5-1).. Stream 1 is confined on the north by the road prism and on the south by the gravel
embankment in the parking areas of the abandoned drive-in movie theatre. These areas are not functioning
buffers. Therefore, no permanent impacts to stream buffers would occur from these road improvements.
Table 4-1 summarizes the stream impacts and Appendix A shows these impact areas.
Wildlife Habitat
Field observation of wildlife habitat, including research on the WDFW PHS website and review of existing
literature, indicate there is potential for critical habitat as defined in ACC 16.10.080 (C); however, no critical
habitat has been documented.
Because of the degraded condition of the wetlands and stream in the project area, no secondary wildlife
habitat occurs in the project corridor, but tertiary habitat is affirmatively present. Tertiary impacts include
impacts on wetlands and the stream as described in Sections 4.1 and 4.2.
Groundwater Protection Areas
ACC 16.10.110 (E) establishes the City standards for protecting the quality of groundwater where
development occurs in groundwater protection areas. In accordance with ACC 16.120 (E), development in
Zone 4 areas would require the implementation of best management practices (BMPs) to ensure water
resource protection. This project would apply BMPs to reduce the risk of delivering contaminants into the
City’s groundwater supply through the preparation of a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures
(SPCC) plan prior to beginning construction. The SPCC plan will identify the appropriate spill containment
materials, which will be available at the project site at all times during construction. In addition, at the
conclusion of construction all new pollution-generating impervious surfaces would receive enhanced
treatment in which stormwater and wetland flows would be controlled and treated via a detention pond.
Geologic Hazard Areas
ACC 16.10.110 (D) establishes standards for new developments in geologic hazard areas and the project will
comply with these standards. Fill areas will be preloaded to minimize the risk of post-construction settlement
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 4-3
in the soft soils of the project area in accordance with recommendations in the Geotechnical Engineering
Report (AMEC 2015). This will entail placing fill in the ditches along the south side of S 277th St and letting
it remain in place for approximately 6 months before final grading and paving (AMEC 2015). Temporary
extensions will be installed on existing culverts to ensure proper flood conveyance and flood control while the
preloading fill is in place. When preloading is complete, traffic will be confined to the north side of the road
to allow culvert installation and road construction on the south side. Then traffic will be diverted to the south
side of the road to allow culvert installation and road construction on the north side.
Filling (preloading) of the ditches along the south side of S 277th St will be conducted in compliance with
conditions specified in the HPA issued by WDFW for this project. These conditions may include conducting
ground-disturbing activities below the ordinary high water mark in the dry and limiting such work to the fish
window established for the project.
Flood Hazard Areas
ACC 15.68 regulates impacts on the base flood elevation, hydraulic connectivity of the floodplain, and use of
compensatory storage for fill within the floodplain in addition to regulating potential effects on fish species.
The volume of fill material placed in the floodplain during construction and project operation is expected to
be offset by the compensatory storage available at the adjacent POS Site.
Hydraulic connectivity of the floodplain through the S 277th St road prism would be maintained during
construction by temporarily extending the following existing culverts until the permanent extension of the 48-
inch culvert and construction of the new fish passage culvert are complete and open to provide full flood flow
capacity under the roadway.
48-Inch culvert at D Street NE
Twin flood flow box culverts east of G Street NE
18-Inch culvert east of the twin box culverts.
During project operation, hydraulic connectivity of the floodplain through the S 277th St road prism would
be maintained by extending an existing 48-inch culvert and installing the new fish passage culvert. Also,
construction and operation of the project would not interrupt current overland inundation patterns within
the existing floodplain boundary south of S 277th St that allow flood waters to reach the flood conveyance
channel connected to the POS Site. Appendix A includes a Floodplain map showing the location of the
proposed compensatory storage area (POS Site) and locations of the proposed extended culvert and fish
passage culvert.
Completion of this project could result in indirect impacts in flood hazard areas by facilitating
implementation of the proposed Auburn Gateway project, which would place fill within the floodplain. If
adjacent development would fill portions of the floodplain that currently connect to the POS Site flood
conveyance channel, the flood channel would need to be extended from its current alignment westward to the
proposed fish passage and flood conveyance culvert under S 277th St to prevent cutting off available flood
storage.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 5-1
5 MITIGATION PLAN FOR WETLAND AND AQUATIC
RESOURCES
The mitigation plan for wetland and aquatic resources is described in this section. Mitigation measures for
wildlife habitats, groundwater protection areas, geologic hazards, and flood hazards are described in the
following Section 6. A detailed planting plan will be submitted under separate cover as a supplement for the
critical areas review.
The S 277th St corridor improvements would mitigate impacts on wetlands and aquatic resources by
complying with the mitigation sequencing requirements established by NEPA, the Clean Water Act, and the
City’s wetland protection programs (ACC 16.10). According to NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations
[CFR] 1508.20), the definition of mitigation is as follows:
a.) Avoiding the impact all together by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.
b.) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.
c.) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment.
d.) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the
life of the action.
e.) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.
Avoidance and Minimization Measures
Consistent with the above sequencing requirements, a high priority was placed on designing the project to
include measures and features that avoid and minimize adverse impacts on wetlands and their buffers. The
wetlands in the project area have been avoided to the greatest extent feasible while still achieving the project’s
purpose and need. The City would apply the following strategies to minimize wetland, stream, and buffer
impacts during the design, permitting, and construction phases:
Road widening would occur only to the south rather than widening in both directions to reduce
overall impacts on wetlands and streams.
Near wetlands and streams, earthwork would be done as much as possible in the dry season to reduce
the potential for sediment runoff.
BMPs to control erosion would be implemented to reduce direct and indirect impacts on aquatic
resources during construction.
All construction activities would comply with water quality standards set forth in the 1998 Water
Quality Implementing Agreement between WSDOT and Ecology, as well as compliance with the
State of Washington Surface Water Quality Standards (WAC 173-201A).
An SPCC plan would be prepared before construction begins. The SPCC plan would identify the
appropriate spill containment materials, which would be available during construction at the project
site at all times.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
5-2 SEPTEMBER 2015
Restoration of Temporary Impacts
Natural areas that are temporarily affected would be restored to pre-construction conditions and re-planted or
seeded with native species. This restoration would support a level of function that is the same, or greater, than
under existing conditions.
Compensatory Mitigation
5.3.1 Summary
Compensatory mitigation for impacts on critical areas, as defined in ACC 16.10, is limited to mitigation for
wetland and stream impacts. The mitigation strategy in this section describes conceptual compensatory
mitigation for unavoidable impacts on wetlands and streams.
The conceptual mitigation strategy for this project addresses the mitigation requirements set forth in
Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources, Final Rule (33 CFR Parts 325 and 332, April 10,
2008), hereafter referred to as the Final Rule on Compensatory Mitigation. This final rule was developed by
the Corps and the EPA and consolidates existing regulations and guidance to establish equivalent standards
for all types of mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section 404 regulatory program (Corps and EPA 2008).
All adverse impacts due to the project are not avoidable; therefore, compensatory mitigation is proposed.
In addition, City mitigation requirements are outlined in ACC 16.10.10. The proposed mitigation addresses
these requirements as well as those of WDFW. The wetland mitigation plan employs advanced mitigation by
using wetlands previously constructed in the mid-1990s. The stream mitigation plan described below includes
the typical elements, such as mitigation goals, objectives, performance standards, monitoring, and site
protection measures. A stream mitigation plan is presented in Appendix C. The 90% design mitigation plan
set will be submitted under separate cover.
5.3.1.1 Wetlands Mitigation
The S 277th St corridor improvements would impact 0.31 acre of existing low quality wetlands; mitigation is
needed to compensate for these impacts. Parametrix reviewed past project documents of the 272nd/277th
North Corridor Project previously constructed by the City of Kent to assess if potential mitigation areas
remain for use by the City for its proposed S 277th St road improvements.
Two wetland mitigation approaches have been identified from the 272nd/277nd North Corridor Project for
use by the City of Auburn in the current proposed S 277th Corridor Project. More detailed discussion of
these two wetland mitigation sources is provided in a Parametrix memorandum (Memorandum from Jeff Meyer
to Chuck Scott. Mitigation Credits Available for the South 277th Street Corridor Improvements Project), dated
April 11, 2014. A summary of this document is presented in Appendix B. These two wetland mitigation
approaches are summarized below.
1. Over-Constructed Mitigation: The City of Kent previously constructed mitigation for its
272nd/277th North Corridor Project based on the regulatory definition of wetlands in 1994. In
1999, the definition of wetlands changed, resulting in Kent constructing an excess of approximately
0.5 acre of mitigation. Subsequent additional impacts reduced the amount of available mitigation
over time. The balance of the over-constructed mitigation as of 2003 was 0.26 acre. The City of
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 5-3
Auburn proposes to use this excess mitigation as advanced mitigation at a 1:1 ratio, if the regulatory
agencies confirm that this mitigation is available for Auburn’s usage. Kent has issued a letter that it is
acceptable for Auburn to use this mitigation for its project (see Kent 2003 in Appendix B).
2. Reduced Impacts: Kent conducted mitigation for impacts on wetlands along the south side of S
277th St, but because Kent did not widen the south side of the roadway as originally designed,
permitted impacts on wetlands were not fully used. By Parametrix’s calculations, 0.35 acre of impacts
along the south side were mitigated for, but were not filled. The City of Auburn proposes to use this
excess mitigation if it is deemed sufficient and available to Auburn’s project. The City of Kent has
issued a letter that it is acceptable for Auburn to use these credits for its project (Kent 2003 in
Appendix B).
In total, 0.61 acre of mitigation credits is potentially available to Auburn’s project (0.26 acre of over-
constructed mitigation and 0.35 acre of reduced impacts). Kent’s mitigation site has been established for over
a decade, and Kent has granted permission for Auburn to use these mitigation credits. Auburn proposes to use
the previously constructed mitigation in advance of current project impacts, at a 1:1 mitigation ratio for its
project. Thus, previously constructed mitigation should be sufficient to cover the project’s anticipated
wetland impacts.
This approach for wetland mitigation will be submitted to the Corps of Engineers for verification and
issuance of a Corps 404 permit. No constructed wetland mitigation is proposed for this project. Therefore,
the following sections pertain to only stream mitigation.
5.3.1.2 Stream Mitigation
The impacted reaches of Stream 1 comprise 900 linear feet of roadside ditches. They currently convey
untreated stormwater to other downstream ditches that eventually drain to Auburn Creek and the Green
River. The existing stream channel habitat and functions are very low. Fish stranding has occurred just
downstream of the project area stream reaches.
Mitigation Requirements
In accordance with ACC 16.10.110, the project would be required to replace any impacted stream with one
that is functionally equivalent to or greater than the altered stream in terms of hydrological, biological,
physical, and chemical functions. Similarly, the Final Rule on Compensatory Mitigation requires that impacts
on streams be mitigated at a minimum of 1:1 replacement of linear feet and/or function of impacted stream.
The proposed mitigation for stream impacts addresses federal, WDFW, and City of Auburn mitigation
requirements.
On-Site and In-Kind Mitigation
For the S 277th St corridor improvements, on-site mitigation refers to mitigation design options located on
properties immediately adjacent to the project site and available to the project. According to the mitigation
requirements, the on-site mitigation design would include constructing at least 900 linear feet of a Class 2
stream at a 1:1 mitigation ratio. The fish-habitable stream channel would have a minimum 48.75-foot buffer
on the east side of the channel (a 35 percent reduction from a standard 75-foot buffer), a minimum 25-foot
buffer all sides of the channel, and meander through a total 105-foot-wide fish and wildlife habitat corridor. A
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
5-4 SEPTEMBER 2015
conceptual stream mitigation plan is presented in Appendix C. A detailed mitigation plan will be presented
under a separate cover.
Accessibility to fish would be substantially increased from existing conditions by removing partial physical
barriers. An partially blocked 18 inch culvert would be replaced by one fish-passable culvert that would be
constructed beneath S 277th St. This culvert is necessary to connect the new stream channel south of S 277th
St to the stream/wetland channel north of S 277th St. The culvert was sized using the stream simulation
design method from the WDFW Water Crossing Design Guidelines (Barnard 2013).
The proposed mitigation stream would originate from the southerly discharge point of a stormwater
treatment facility south of S 277th St. The stormwater facilities would capture road runoff and an off-site
drainage basin at least as large as existing conditions. A series of conveyance ditches would capture off-site
runoff from properties south of S. 277th and direct the flow to a side channel feeding the proposed steam
mitigation channel. Road runoff would be collected and pass through the stormwater wetland and detention
pond prior to discharging to the proposed stream mitigation channel.
The peak flow rates would be controlled according to the size and frequency of storms to match the
hydrological patterns assuming original forested conditions. The “stacking of storms” is expected to increase
the duration of flow, but the flow velocity cannot be increased because the area is nearly flat. The channel
grade would be approximately 0.2 percent. The proposed flow conditions would result in an intermittent
stream that would flow annually for short periods. However, water quality would be improved from existing
conditions because the stormwater discharge would meet the criteria in the WSDOT Stormwater Manual.
The channel bottom would be approximately 2 feet wide, and the width at the ordinary high water mark
would be approximately 5 feet. The stream channel would be a minimum of 900 linear feet long, comprising
4,600 square feet, and would have meanders approximately every 100 feet. Spawning gravels would be placed
selectively for the rare individual adult fish that may make it this far upstream. Large woody debris would be
placed along the banks and at the channel edge. The total riparian buffer corridor would be 105 feet wide and
include 3:1 to 4:1 slopes from the stream channel (see the conceptual stream mitigation plan in Appendix C).
The entire buffer would be planted with native trees and shrubs, and the mitigation stream and riparian zone
would have equal or greater functions for the aquatic environment than those impacted. Table 5-1 indicates
the quantitative impacts on the aquatic environment and proposed mitigation.
Detained and treated flow from the stormwater pond will sustain the stream hydrology during the rainy
periods. Stream channel and stormwater pond design is presented in the civil design plans.
Mitigation Plan Buffer Adequacy
The City proposes reduced buffers for this project because of the limited and constrained nature of land
available for a mitigation stream and stream buffer in the vicinity of the project. The proposed buffers would
be a reduction of 35 percent reduction of the standard 75-foot-wide buffer, to an average 48.75 feet on either
side of the approximately 5-foot ordinary high water width of the stream channel. These stream buffer
reductions are in accordance with ACC 19.10.090.E.2.e. The mitigation stream and its buffer will constitute
a new and enhanced 105-foot-wide riparian corridor that connects to Auburn Creek and to the Green River.
The stream channel will meander within the 105-foot-wide corridor, but a minimum 25-foot-wide vegetated
buffer will be maintained in all locations. A formal Critical Areas Ordinance variance will be required for
locations where the vegetated buffer is less than 48.75 feet, but not less than 25 feet. The buffer area will be
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 5-5
expanded in other portions of the corridor as makeup areas to gain approval of a Critical Areas Ordinance
variance to allow for the 25-foot buffer reduction.
In addition, Off-Site Wetland D occurs in the stream mitigation riparian corridor. The standard buffer for
this Category III wetland is 50 feet. The City proposes a buffer reduction of 35 percent from 50 feet to 32.5
feet for this project in accordance with ACC 16.10.090.E.1.b. Moreover, the ordinary high water of the
stream channel will be outside of this reduced buffer.
Off-Site Wetland A occurs west and adjacent to the stream mitigation riparian corridor. The standard buffer
for this Category III wetland is 50 feet. The City proposes a buffer reduction of 35 percent from 50 feet to
32.5 feet for this project in accordance with ACC 16.10.090.E.1.b. Moreover, the ordinary high water of the
stream channel will be outside of this reduced buffer.
In accordance with AMC 16.10.090.E.2.e., the stream mitigation buffer will not have any adverse impacts to
the stream. The new 105-foot-wide buffer compares to a few feet of vegetated buffer along the current
roadside stream reaches that will be impacted. The entire mitigation corridor, including buffers, will be
preserved in a conservation easement.
Stream channel and buffer enhancement measures are included in the mitigation plan to improve fish and
wildlife habitat. These measure would include:
The new buffer will be planted with a variety of native trees and shrubs.
Large black cottonwoods and conifers will be retained in the buffer to the extent practicable.
Downed logs will be placed in the buffer for added wildlife habitat.
Large woody debris will be added to the stream channel in selected locations to increase fish habitat.
Spawning gravels will be placed in the stream for the benefit of any adult fish using the stream.
In addition, the stream will be hydrologically supported by treated stormwater, substantially
improved from current conditions.
The existing 18 inch culvert under South 277th Street is a partial fish barrier and will be removed.
A new fish passable box culvert will be constructed to convey the new stream under South 277th and
into the ditches north of the road. These ditches connect to Auburn Creek and to the Green River.
In summary, the new stream channel and its vegetated buffer will be a substantial improvement to aquatic
and wildlife habitat functions and values compared to existing conditions.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
5-6 SEPTEMBER 2015
Table 5-1. Aquatic Resource Impacts and Mitigation Summary
Impacts Mitigation
Impact
(lf)
Area
Impact
(sf)
Area
Impact
(ac)
Linear
Feet
Square
Feet Acres
Wetlands
Wetland A NA 7,219 0.17 NA 0.17
Wetland C NA 4,343 0.10 NA 0.10
Off-Site Wetlands 1,543 0.04 NA 0.04
Wetlands Sub-Total 13,105 0.31 NA 13,105 0.31
Streams
Stream 1 900 4,604 0.10 900 4,600 0.10
Total 900 17,709 0.41 900 16,700 0.35
5.3.2 Stream Mitigation Goals and Objectives
5.3.2.1 Long-Term Goals
The long-term goals for the site is to: 1) establish an intermittent stream channel; and 2) establish a vegetated
riparian buffer corridor. These goals will be achieved by constructing at least 900 linear feet of intermittent
flowing stream channel, and planting woody species to form an upland buffer with native species that provide
protection to the stream from adjacent land uses. It is not realistic to expect that all the ecological functions
will accrue within 5 years; however, the site should be providing important habitat functions in approximately
5 years. If monitoring reveals that the site is being successfully established within the five-year monitoring
period, the plant communities would likely continue to thrive and develop into complex ecosystems.
5.3.2.2 Performance Standards
The overall goal of this mitigation plan is to construct 900 linear feet of functioning stream and to create a
total of 2.8 acres of upland riparian stream corridor. The mitigation stream and associated buffer areas are
intended to provide a variety of ecological functions, including potential fish and aquatic habitat and wildlife
habitat support for passerine birds, small mammals, and amphibians.
To achieve these intended ecosystem functions, the mitigation plan is designed to meet specific objectives. To
ensure that these objectives are achieved, a series of performance (success) standards must be met within the
monitoring period. These objectives and performance standards are described below.
Mitigation Objectives
Objective 1: Construct 900 linear feet of stream channel
Performance Standards:
Year 0 (As-Built Conditions)
Excavate and grade 900 linear feet of stream channel.
Install habitat features consisting of at least 50 pieces of wood.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 5-7
Year 1, 3, 5
Channel features are substantially intact from as-built conditions. Erosion and scour are minimal,
gravel substrate is in place.
Objective 2: Plant upland stream buffer to provide diverse riparian vegetation community
Performance Standards:
Year 0 (As-Built Conditions)
Plant buffer with a diversity of native trees and shrubs, minimum 9 species.
Total riparian buffer corridor would be 105 feet wide and include 3:1 to 4:1 slopes from the stream
channel for a total of 2.8 acres
Year 1
Achieve 100 percent survival of planted woody species at the end of the plant establishment period
for Year 1. If all dead woody species plantings are replaced, the Year 1 success standard will be met.
The replanting may not be completed and documented until after the Year 1 monitoring report is
submitted.
Removal of temporary erosion and sedimentation features
Year 2
Achieve at least 30 percent cover of native woody species planted in upland buffer areas.
Year 3
Achieve at least 50 percent cover of native woody species planted in upland buffer areas.
Year 5
Achieve at least 70 percent cover of native woody species in the planted upland buffer areas.
Critical area fences and signage are intact.
5.3.3 Construction Plan
5.3.3.1 Proposed Schedule
The mitigation plan is assumed to be constructed in one phase. Site preparation activities will begin in the
summer following permit issuance. Planting will occur during the fall or winter of the same year.
5.3.3.2 Pre-Construction Meeting
Prior to any site work, a pre-construction meeting will be held with the general contractors, landscape
contractors, and biologists to explain the mitigation goals and overall design, review the construction plan set,
determine lines of communications, and review all environmental permit conditions.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
5-8 SEPTEMBER 2015
5.3.3.3 Stream Hydrology
Water for the stream will be conveyed by ditch from adjacent undeveloped areas and piped from the proposed
roadway stormwater detention facility. Details of the detention facility, discharge pipe, and outlet will be
provided in the civil plans.
5.3.3.4 Earthwork
Earthwork for the mitigation area includes excavation for the stream channel and grading for the buffer.
Details of this earthwork will be included in the grading plans.
5.3.3.5 Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control
Standard sedimentation fences will be placed along the edges of mitigation construction areas to prevent soil
erosion and sedimentation of adjacent wetland and buffer areas. High visibility construction fencing will be
placed at the edge of work areas to ensure that activities do not extend beyond the approved work area. A
clear access work area will be established in the field by the contractor prior to beginning any earthwork.
5.3.3.6 Habitat Features
Habitat features, including downed wood, will be placed in the buffer. Some existing trees will be girdled to
form standing snags for nesting habitat. Large woody debris will be installed in selected locations along the
stream channel. Gravel substrate will be place in the bottom of the stream channel.
5.3.3.7 Weed Control
Prior to installing new plant material, noxious weeds will be removed from the wetland and its buffer. The
existing site has a variety of weed species that could spread and limit the success of the mitigation plan.
Reed canarygrass occurs in primarily on the south side of the mitigation site. It will be removed on the subject
property prior to construction. Control strategies will include applications of herbicide before construction
begins. Heavy mulch has been shown to suppress reed canarygrass re-sprouting (Antieau 1998; WSDOT
2008); this measure is therefore proposed in certain areas as shown on the plans. In planting areas, reed
canarygrass will be controlled using a combination of mowing and applications of approved herbicide. In
general, the following sequence of control treatments will reduce reed canarygrass cover and vigor sufficiently
to enhance woody plant establishment:
Stake planting areas.
Mow or ‘weed eat’ the designated planting areas.
Allow re-sprouting of reed canarygrass to approximately 1 foot.
Spray with approved herbicide.
Plant no sooner than 30 days after herbicide application.
This sequence can be modified to best meet site conditions at the time of construction. Details of the weed
control plans will be included in the plan set.
In the upland buffer, blackberry (Rubus spp.), English ivy (Hedera helix), and Scot’s broom (Cytisus scoparius)
are prevalent. These species, as well as other noxious weeds on the King County, Washington, list of noxious
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 5-9
weeds, will be controlled using herbicide applications or hand removal measures. In buffer planting areas
these species will be completely removed prior to planting.
5.3.3.8 Planting Plan
Following site preparation activities, the mitigation area will be planted with native woody vegetation as
shown in the plan set. Pacific willow (Salix lucida), red-osier dogwood (Cornus alba), and Sitka willow (Salix
sitchensis) will be planted along the stream edges. The upland buffer areas will be planted to provide diversity
and structure in the buffer. Tree species will include Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), bigleaf maple (Acer
macrophyllum), western redcedar (Thuja plicata), and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). These trees will
be field located and planted in the designated buffer planting areas. Table 5-2 provides the planting list.
Detailed plant sizes and spacing are shown on the mitigation plan set.
Table 5-2. Planting List
Common Name Scientific Name Indicator Status
Stream Edge and Buffer Mitigation
Red-osier dogwood Cornus alba FACW
Sitka willow Salix sitchensis FACW
Pacific willow Salix lucida FACW
Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU
Western redcedar Thuja plicata FAC
Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU
Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU
Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC
Indian plum Oemleria cerasiformis FACU
Saskatoon serviceberry Amelanchier alnifolia FACU
Baldhip rose Rosa gymnocarpa FACU
Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU
Oceanspray Holodiscus discolor FACU
Beaked hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU
5.3.3.9 Signage and Fencing
Permanent signs will be posted to identify the boundary of buffer to wetlands and stream as sensitive areas.
This will include buffers to wetlands that are not of the project area but are immediately adjacent – see the
previous reference to Off-Site Wetlands A and D identified off-site on the Robertson Properties Group
(RPG) property but were not delineated for this project. Permanent fences will be constructed in areas shown
on the final mitigation plan.
5.3.3.10 Irrigation
Irrigation for newly planted vegetation will be provided via a temporary irrigation system for a minimum of
the first year including the growing season.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
5-10 SEPTEMBER 2015
5.3.4 Construction Observation
A wetland biologist or landscape architect will review the site periodically during mitigation implementation.
The purpose of construction observation is to provide assistance to the contractor and client for the
interpretation and proper implementation of the plan. The responsibilities of the biologist or architect may
include, but are not limited to, providing explanations of unique construction planting techniques; reviewing
construction materials and nursery stock; reviewing plant locations; and assessing temporary erosion and
sediment control measures. Depth of excavation areas and slope profiles will be verified by civil engineer
and/or surveyor. The wetland biologist or landscape architect will also attend the pre- and post-construction
meetings.
Monitoring Plan
The mitigation site will be monitored for a minimum of 5 years. Monitoring reports will be submitted for
review on the following schedule:
Thirty days after completing construction of the mitigation project (submittal of as-built report).
End of the first growing season after construction.
December 1 of the calendar year annually for Years 2, 3, 4, and 5.
Successful mitigation will be measured by attainment of the performance standards described above.
Quantitative monitoring will occur in Years 1, 2, 3, and 5. Qualitative monitoring will occur in all years.
Permanent photopoints will be established and monitored for entire monitoring period. Specific monitoring
will include, but not be limited to, a discussion of wildlife usage of the site, vegetation establishment, stream
flow, weed populations, and site disturbances.
Total percent areal vegetative cover and survival by species will be measured using the line intercept method.
The percent cover of woody plant species will be totaled to estimate the total percent woody cover. The
percent cover of non-native plant species will also be estimated. Total percent survival of woody species will
be estimated in representative sampling plots.
Stream hydrology will be monitored by a continuous data logger in place for at least the first 3 years. The data
logger will be downloaded monthly from October to March to establish a stream hydroperiod.
Contingency Plan
It is anticipated that the mitigation goal will be achieved with the construction and installation of the design
as shown on the plan set. However, contingency actions may be needed to correct unforeseen problems.
Possible contingency measures are described below.
5.5.1 Hydrology
Failure to establish suitable hydrological conditions in the stream channel could be rectified by implementing
one or more of the following potential contingency actions:
Determine the cause of inadequate hydrology.
Adjust source outlet operations to modify, if possible.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 5-11
5.5.2 Vegetation
Failure to meet the proposed vegetation performance standards could result in some or all of the following
contingency actions:
Planting additional vegetation—Additional vegetation planting may be needed to meet cover or plant
survival standards. Plant species will be evaluated in relation to site conditions to determine if plant
substitutions are necessary.
Weed control—Control of competitive weed species, particularly reed canarygrass, may be required if
weed cover is limiting attainment of plant survival or cover standards. Methods of weed control could
include hand or mechanical weeding, herbicide application, or mulching.
Herbivore control—If vegetation cover or survival standards are not met because of animal browse,
then the responsible wildlife will be identified and appropriate damage control methods employed.
Possible control methods include fencing, using repellents, trapping, and constructing temporary
barriers.
Irrigation—Plantings in the buffers may require supplemental irrigation beyond the Year 1 plant
warranty period, especially in summer. Irrigation could occur from the nearby property owned by the
City or by using water trucks on established access routes.
Maintenance and Adaptive Management
Oversight following construction of the wetland mitigation site will be required to ensure the long-term
success of the project. The goal of the proposed mitigation is to create a functional, self-sustaining system that
requires little or no long-term maintenance. Mitigation sites are dynamic systems that can evolve rapidly as
site conditions change. Projects that require modification to soils, plant communities, topography, and/or
hydrology do not always respond as predicted; therefore, the principles of adaptive management will be used
to guide post-construction wetland management activities.
Adaptive management is driven by the monitoring objectives that describe the desired condition of a site. If
the monitoring objectives are not met, adaptive management activities would be planned to achieve the
desired condition. Management activities may include implementation of contingency actions described
above, or other activities as appropriate.
During the monitoring period, regularly scheduled maintenance activities such as removing noxious weeds,
repairing vandalism, and collecting trash will occur on a semi-annual basis for the first 3 years. Depending
upon the success of the plant establishment, maintenance activities may be needed annually in Years 4 and 5.
Access to the site for maintenance activities shall occur from City property or right-of-way, or be obtained by
the City from adjacent property owners as a formalized easement for the duration of the monitoring and
maintenance period.
Performance Security
This mitigation project will be sponsored and permitted by the City of Auburn. The City will implement a
suitable mechanism to ensure that the project is implemented successfully and monitored for a minimum of
5 years, or until the project mitigation is deemed a success by achieving its performance standards.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
5-12 SEPTEMBER 2015
Site Protection / Long-term Preservation
The City will protect the mitigation area through a conservation easement that permits maintenance and
monitoring of the mitigation area. This mechanism shall be submitted to the City and may be submitted to
the Corps after permit issuance, if required. In addition, permanent fencing and signs indicating that the area
is a natural or sensitive area to be protected from disturbance will be posted along the boundaries of each
mitigation area.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 6-1
6 MITIGATION FOR WILDLIFE HABITATS, GROUNDWATER
PROTECTION AREAS, GEOLOGIC HAZARDS, AND
FLOOD HAZARDS
This mitigation section describes the avoidance and minimization of impacts on wildlife habitats,
groundwater protection areas, geologic hazards, and flood hazards. No compensatory mitigation for these
critical areas is proposed or warranted.
Wildlife Habitats
Although no mitigation is required specifically for wildlife habitat impacts for the S 277th St corridor
improvements, wildlife habitat quality in the project area will be substantially increased. On-site stream
mitigation and buffers will include establishment of a 2.49 acres of riparian corridor including the new stream
channel. This area constitutes a diverse contiguous block of wildlife habitat that will be protected through a
long-term conservation easement.
In addition, the project will install a new fish-passable culvert that will replace the existing 18-inch concrete
culvert and the two 3-foot by 6-foot concrete box culverts near the eastern end of the project. The new culvert
will meet the requirements of the Stream Simulation Design Option specified in WDFW’s water crossing
design guidelines (Barnard et al. 2013). The culvert will be a three-sided pre-cast concrete box culvert, 140
feet long by 12 feet wide and 4 feet high. Installation of the new culvert will ensure that any fish that venture
into the roadside ditches in the project area will have unimpeded access to 1,000 linear feet of newly
constructed stream habitat south of S 277th St. The existing 18-inch culvert will be plugged with concrete or
controlled density fill and left in place. The twin box culverts will be removed when the new fish-passable
culvert is installed.
The 48-inch culvert near the western end (near D Street) will be retained after construction. Fish habitat
upstream of the culvert is very limited. The new conveyance ditch south of S 277th Street is open only to the
Chevron station on Auburn Way N (Figure 5-1, Sheet 2 of 7). Any fish that gain access to Auburn Creek and
then venture into the ditch system north of S 277th St will have access to the new stream channel via the new
fish-passable culvert. Overall, the ability of fish to gain access to the project area will be improved because the
large box culvert will remove a partial physical fish barrier. However, the flood gate at the mouth of Auburn
Creek will continue to limit the ability of fish to enter Auburn Creek, and access from Auburn Creek to the
roadside ditches in the project area will continue to be limited by irregular flows in the creek and the ditches.
Groundwater Protection Areas
As described in Section 4.4, the project would apply BMPs to reduce the risk of delivering contaminants into
the City’s groundwater supply as indicated in the SPCC plan prior to the beginning of construction. No
additional mitigation is required for impacts in the groundwater protection areas.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
6-2 SEPTEMBER 2015
Geologic Hazards
As described in Section 4.5, the project will apply the standards defined in ACC 16.10.110 (D), thereby
minimizing the risk of post-construction settlement in the soft soils. No additional mitigation is required for
geologic hazard impacts.
Flood Hazards
The project would avoid floodplain impacts through culvert design and use of available compensatory storage
volume at the POS Site. Therefore, no additional mitigation for direct impacts is required. Also, a floodplain
permit will be secured.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
SEPTEMBER 2015 7-1
7 REFERENCES
AMEC. 2015. Draft Geotechnical Engineering Report. S 277th Street Corridor and Non-motorized Trail
Improvements, AMEC Environment and Infrastructure, Inc., Auburn, Washington.
Antieau, Clayton J. 1998. Biology and Management of Reed Canarygrass, and Implications for Ecological
Restoration. Washington State Department of Transportation, Seattle, Washington. Available at:
www.ser.org/sernw/pdf/RCG_BIO_MGT.pdf.
Barnard, R. J., J. Johnson, P. Brooks, K. M. Bates, B. Heiner, J. P. Klavas, D.C. Ponder, P.D. Smith, and P.
D. Powers (2013), Water Crossings Design Guidelines, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Olympia, Washington.City of Auburn. 2010. City of Auburn stream determination letter. July 15, 2010.
Auburn, Washington.
Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) and EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2008.
Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources; Final Rule (33 CFR Parts 325 and 332, April
10, 2008).
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater
habitats of the United States. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
DNR (Washington Department of Natural Resources). 2013. Natural Heritage Program GIS Layer. Available
at http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/gis/wnhpgis.html.
DNR (Washington Department of Natural Resources). 2014. Forest Practices water typing. Available at:
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/businesspermits/topics/forestpracticesapplications/pages/fp_watertyping.aspx.
ESA 2011. Environmental Impact Statement Addendum for the NE Auburn/ Robertson Properties Special
Area Plan. November 2, 2011.
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2015. Flood Map Service Center. Accessed on April 30,
2015, at https://msc.fema.gov/portal/advanceSearch. Washington State, King County, City of Auburn –
Effective Products. April 2015.
Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington - Revised. Washington
State Department of Ecology, Publication No. 04-06-025.
Kent. 2003. Letter from City of Kent Public Works to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding
mitigation credits, January 23, 2003.
King County. 2015. King County IMAP, online interactive mapper. Available at:
http://www.kingcounty.gov/operations/GIS/Maps/iMAP.aspx.
Null, W.S., G. Skinner, and W. Leonard. 2000. Wetland functions characterization tool for linear projects.
Washington State Department of Transportation Environmental Affairs Office. Olympia, Washington.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Critical Areas Study
7-2 SEPTEMBER 2015
Parametrix. 2014. Memorandum from Jeff Meyer to Chuck Scott. Mitigation Credits Available for the South
277th Street Corridor Improvements Project. Bellevue, Washington. April 11, 2014.
Parametrix. 2015a. Draft Biological Assessment, South 277th Street Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized
Trail Improvements. Seattle, Washington. March 2015.
Parametrix. 2015b. Wetlands and Streams Discipline Report, South 277th Street Corridor Capacity and
Non-Motorized Trail Improvements. Seattle, Washington. May 2015.
Parametrix. 2015c. Floodplain Discipline Report, South 277th Street Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized
Trail Improvements. Seattle, Washington.
Port of Seattle. 2012. Interlocal Agreement between City of Auburn and Port of Seattle–Amendment 1.
Resolution No. 3664. July 2012.
USDA, NRCS (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2013. Web soil
survey online interactive mapper. Available at:
<http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx>. Accessed December 2013.
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2013. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), Online interactive
mapper. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/.
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2008. Priority Habitats and Species List,
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. August 2008.
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2014. SalmonScape fish database and mapping
application. Available at: https://fortress.wa.gov/dfw/salmonscape/. Accessed January 16, 2014.
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2015. PHS on the Web: An interactive map of
WDFW priority habitats and species information for project review. Available at:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/. Accessed February 2, 2015.
Williams, W.R., R.M. Laramie, and J.J. Ames. 1975. A catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon
Utilization, Volume 1, Puget Sound Region. Washington Department of Fisheries, Olympia,
Washington.
WSDOT (Washington State Department of Transportation). 2008. Reed Canarygrass Guidance. March 17,
2008.
APPENDIX A
Wetland and Stream Impacts Maps
Groundwater Protection Zone Map
Seismic Hazard Map
Project Floodplain Map
1 2 3
4
5 6
7
DATE: March 27, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1 COVER
0
SCALE IN FEET
500
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Cover Sheet
Figure 5-1
A
u
b
u
r
n
W
a
y
N
C
e
n
t
r
a
l
A
v
e
S
S 277th St
D
S
t
N
E
8
6
t
h
A
v
e
S
I
S
t
N
E
L
S
t
N
E
A
u
b
u
r
n
W
a
y
N
C
e
n
t
r
a
l
A
v
e
S
S 277th St
RPG
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
2
o
f
7
DATE: March 30, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 1 of 7
Figure 5-1
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
Wetland C
(0.10 acre)
(Impact=4,343 sf/0.10 ac)
Wetland B
(0.13 acre on-site)
(No Impact)
WB-SP1
WB-SP2
Off-Site Wetland E
(Impact=1,543 sf/0.035 ac)
New Conveyance Ditch
S 277th St
D
S
t
N
E
8
6
t
h
A
v
e
S
RPG
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
3
o
f
7
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
1
o
f
7
DATE: March 27, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 2 of 7
Figure 5-1
Wetland C
(cont.)
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
WC-SP1
WC-SP2
New Conveyance Ditch
Extension of
48" Culvert
S 277th St
RPG
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
4
o
f
7
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
2
o
f
7
DATE: March 30, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 3 of 7
Figure 5-1
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
Stream 1
(900 lf)
(Impact=900 lf/4,604 sf/0.11 ac)
New Conveyance Ditch
S 277th St
G
S
t
N
E
RPG
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
5
o
f
7
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
3
o
f
7
DATE: March 27, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 4 of 7
Figure 5-1
Stream 1
(cont.)Wetland A
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
S 277th St
PORT OF SEATTLE
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
6
o
f
7
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
4
o
f
7
DATE: March 30, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 5 of 7
Figure 5-1
Wetland A (cont.)
(0.17 acre)
(Impact=7,219 sf/0.17 ac)
Ditch Continues South
Port of Seattle Flood
Control Channel
(Existing)
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
WA-SP1
Flood Conveyance
Ditch (New)
WA-SP2
S 277th St
L
S
t
N
E
Ma
t
c
h
l
i
n
e
S
e
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
5
o
f
7
DATE: March 27, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 5-1
0
SCALE IN FEET
80
Wetland and Streams and Project Impacts
Sheet 6 of 7
Figure 5-1
Wetland A (cont.)
Stream Impact
Wetland Impact
LEGEND
DATE: March 30, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 7 OF 70SCALE IN FEET 60'
S
2
7
7
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
St
o
r
m
W
a
t
e
r
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
o
n
R
P
G
S
i
t
e
Sh
e
e
t
7
o
f
7
Fi
g
u
r
e
5
-
1
ST
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
DE
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
P
O
N
D
ST
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
WE
T
L
A
N
D
EXISTING WETLAND BUFFERPER JEFF JONES(50' REDUCED BY 35%)Limits of FutureStream Impacts
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
RE
C
O
R
D
E
D
CO
N
S
E
R
V
A
T
I
O
N
EA
S
M
E
N
T
PRIOR W
E
T
L
A
N
D
DELINE
A
T
I
O
N
AC
C
E
S
S
R
O
A
D
15
'
M
I
N
W
I
D
T
H
AR
E
A
4
STEIN PARCEL
G
S
T
R
E
E
T
30'G STREET ROWREVISED WETLAND DELINEATIONBY JEFF JONES
7:
1
M
A
X
FI
S
H
-
P
A
S
S
A
B
L
E
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
(R
E
P
L
A
C
E
S
T
W
O
E
X
.
FL
O
O
D
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
S
)
RE
V
E
R
S
E
D
I
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
OF
G
S
T
.
D
I
T
C
H
S 277TH ST
FL
O
W
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
ST
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
TE
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
DI
T
C
H
WE
T
L
A
N
D
A
(c
o
n
t
.
)
RP
G
OFF-SITEWETLAND A
OF
F
-
S
I
T
E
WE
T
L
A
N
D
D
AUBURNGOLFCOURSE
WASHINGTONNATIONALGOLFCOURSE
OLSONFARMPARK
SUMNERMEADOWSGOLFLINKS
AUBURNGAMEFARM
AUBURNENVIRONMENTALPARK
AUBURNNARROWSNATURALAREA
MOUNTAINVIEWCEMETERY
BRANNANPARK
SUNSETPARK
GAMEFARMWILDERNESSPARK
GSAPARK
LEAHILLPARK
ROEGNERPARK
HATCHERYPARK
NEELYBRIDGEPARK
NORTHGREENRIVERPARK
ISAACEVANSPARK
FENSTERPROPERTY
MILLPONDPARK
CEDARLANESPARK
LESGOVECOMMUNITYCAMPUS
AUBURNDALEPARK
FULMERPARK
ROTARYPARK
VETERANSMEMORIALPARK
TAPPSISLANDGOLFCOURSE
CAMERONPARK
DORTHYBOTHELLPARK
LAKELANDHILLSPARK
SHAUGHNESSYPARK
RIVERPOINTPARK
JORNADAPARK
DYKSTRAPARK
GAINESPARK
SCOOTIEBROWNPARK
TERMINALPARK
LEAHILLTENNISCOURTS
BICENTENNIALPARK
PIONEERCEMETERY
BALLARDPARK
STREETMALL
CITYHALLPARK
INDIANTOMPARK
CENTENNIALVIEWPOINTPARK
FORESTVILLATOTLOT
SLAUGHTERMEMORIALPARK
WELL5
WELL4
WELL1
WELL7
WELL6 WELL2
WELL5C
WELL5A
WELL3BWELL3A
WELL5B
WESTHILLSPRING
COALCREEKSPRING
AUBURNHIGHSCHOOL
CASCADEMIDDLESCHOOL
WESTAUBURNHIGHSCHOOL
MOUNTBAKERMIDDLESCHOOL
LEAHILLELEMENTARYSCHOOL
GREENRIVERCOMMUNITYCOLLEGE
AUBURNMOUNTAINVIEWHIGHSCHOOL
LAKELANDHILLSELEMENTARYSCHOOL
BOWMANLAKE
GENEVALAKE
WHITELAKE
BINGAMANPOND
LAKETAPPS
A
S
T
S
E
C
S
T
S
W
B
S
T
N
W
I
S
T
N
E
AU
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
S
M
S
T
S
E
AU
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
N
51
S
T
A
V
E
S
12
4
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
R
S
T
S
E
WE
S
T
V
A
L
L
E
Y
H
W
Y
N
13
2
N
D
A
V
E
S
E
S 277TH ST
C
S
T
N
W
W MAIN ST E MAIN ST
29TH ST SE
11
2
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
41ST ST SE
SE 312TH ST
K
E
R
S
EY WAY SE
8TH ST N E
37TH ST NW
ORAVETZ RD SE
M
S
T
N
E
L
A
K
E
L
A
N
D
H
I
L
L
S
W
A
Y
S
E
D
S
T
N
W
4TH ST SE
15TH ST NW
A
S
T
N
E
LA
K
E
T
A
P
P
S
P
K
W
Y
S
E
WEST VALLEY HWY S
LEA H I L L R D S E
EM
E
R
A
L
D
D
O
W
N
S
D
R
N
W
37TH ST NE
S 316TH ST
321ST ST S
D
S
T
N
E
P
E
A
S
L
E
Y
C
A
N
Y
O
N R
D S
EAST VALLEY
HWY S
E
H
A
R
V
E
Y
R
D
N
E
RIVER W ALK D R SE
15TH ST NE
15TH ST SW
BOUNDARY BLVD SW
A
S
T
N
W
AU
B
U
R
N
A
V
E
N
E
T
E
RRACE DR NW
ELLINGSON RD SW
SE 281ST ST
SUMN ER-TAPPS HW
Y
E
O ST SW
AUBURN-BLACK DIAMOND RD SE
SE 304TH ST
17TH ST SE
10TH ST NE
3RD ST NW
132 N D W AY SE
14TH ST NW
CROSS S
T
S
E
3R D S T S W
9TH ST N
E
16TH ST NW
IND
U
S
T
R
Y
D
R
S
W
SE 320TH ST
L
A
K
E
L
A
N
D
H
I
L
L
S
W
A
Y
S
E
12
4
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
R
S
T
S
E
PEASLE Y C A NYON RD S
2ND ST E
STUCK RIVER DR SE
SE 304TH ST
C
S
T
N
E
53RD ST SE
M
S
T
N
W
56
T
H
A
V
E
S
SE 320TH ST
M
S
T
N
E
SE 288TH ST
37TH ST SE
4
6
T
H
P
L
S
SE 284TH ST
22ND ST NE
17TH ST SE
S 296TH ST
25TH ST SE
PER
I
M
E
T
E
R
R
D
S
W
R
S
T
N
E
55
T
H
A
V
E
S
ACADEMY DR SE
D
S
T
S
E
11
0
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
10
4
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
I
S
T
N
W
11
6
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
51
S
T
A
V
E
S
M
S
T
S
E
55TH ST SE
11
8
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
SE 299TH ST
GREEN RIVER RD SE
E
V
E
R
G
R
E
E
N
W
A
Y
S
E
N
S
T
N
E
W
S
T
N
W
E
S
T
N
E
O S
T
N
E
69TH ST S
E
S 287TH ST
SCENIC DR S
E
H
S
T
N
W
44TH ST NW
62ND ST SE
6TH ST SE
14TH ST NE
A
S
T
N
E
SE 316TH ST
CL
A
Y
S
T
N
W
S 300 T H P L
11
2
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
4TH ST NE
WE
S
T
B
L
V
D
(
B
O
E
I
N
G
)
K
S
T
S
E
14
4
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
4TH ST SW
I
S
T
S
E
7TH ST SE
D
S
T
N
E
S 331ST ST
BR
I
D
G
E
T
A
V
E
S
E
L
S
T
S
E
DO
G
W
O
O
D
S
T
S
E
8TH ST SE
S 288TH ST
PI
K
E
S
T
N
E
FR
O
N
T
A
G
E
R
D
F
S
T
S
E
T
S
T
S
E
JOHN REDDINGTON RD NE
H
S
T
S
E
G
S
T
S
E
14
0
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
B
S
T
S
E
FO
S
T
E
R
A
V
E
S
E
52
N
D
A
V
E
S
1
0
5T
H
P
L
S
E
32ND ST NE
E
S
T
S
E
SE 310TH ST
EA
S
T
B
L
V
D
(
B
O
E
I
N
G
)
47TH ST SE
RIV ER DR SE
S 305TH ST
U
S
T
N
W
57TH PL S
67TH ST SE
E MAIN ST
SE 290TH ST
SE 296TH WAY
D
S
T
N
W
QUIN
C
Y
A
V
E
S
E
127TH PL SE
28TH ST NE
13
0
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
85
T
H
A
V
E
S
30TH ST NE
R ST NW
MILL POND DR SE
26TH ST SE
51S T S T N E
R I V E R VIEW DR NE
SE 323RD PL
S 300TH ST
S E 3 1 8 T H WA Y
C ST SE
SE 301ST ST
29TH ST NW
SE 287TH ST
32ND ST SE
36T H ST SE
HO
W
A
R
D
R
D
S
E
10TH ST NE
50TH ST S E
A S T E
21ST ST NE
SE 304TH WAY
31ST ST SE
S 297TH PL
S 318TH ST
SE 298TH PL
3 5 T H W A Y SE
23RD ST SE
24TH ST SE
64TH ST S E
H S
T
N
E
ELIZABETH AVE SE
HIGHLAN D D R S E
22ND ST SE
A
S
T
S
W
PI
K
E
S
T
N
W
G
S
T
N
E
64
T
H
A
V
E
S
FOR E S T R I D G E D R S E
42ND ST NW
S 292ND ST
16TH ST NE
58
T
H
A
V
E
S
SUPE R M A L L D R S W
SE 282ND ST
49TH ST NE
O
S
T
S
E
D
S
T
S
W
SE 295TH ST
111TH PL SE
108TH AVE SE
HI CRES T D R N W
1
0
2
N
D
A
V
E
S
E
8TH ST NE
SE 32
6
T
H
P
L
20TH ST SE
V
S
T
S
E
5 9 TH S T SE
SUPERMALL WAY SW
SE 286TH ST
F
S
T
S
W
V C
T
S
E
1
0
4
T
H P
L S
E
2 4 T H ST N W
72ND ST SE
12
8
T
H
P
L
S
E
B PL NW
16TH ST SE
6TH ST NW
42ND ST NE
2ND ST SE
SE 312TH
W
A
Y
L
S
T
N
E
PA
C
I
F
I
C
A
V
E
S
SE 285TH ST
9TH ST SE
19TH DR NE
SE 294TH ST
52
N
D
P
L
S
12TH ST SE
GIN
K
G
O
S
T
S
E
SE 307TH PL
28TH ST SE
T
S
T
N
E
15TH ST SE
LAKE TAPPS DR SE
45TH ST N
E
M
O
N
TEVISTA D
R
SE
H
A
Z
E
L
A
V
E
S
E
J
S
T
N
E
26TH ST NE
SE 299TH PL
SE 308TH PL
S U P E R MALL ACR D S W
SE 290TH PL
22ND ST NW
A
S
T
N
W
K
S
T
N
E
S 314TH
S
T
MAPLE DR SE
RA
N
D
A
L
L
A
V
E
S
E
HE
A
T
H
E
R
A
V
E
S
E
U
S
T
S
E
30TH ST NW
N
O
B
L
E
C
T
S
E
S 302ND PL
19TH ST SE
SE 297TH ST
I PL NE
61ST AVE S
WA
R
D
A
V
E
S
E
21ST ST SE
N
AT
H
A
N AVE SE
33RD ST SE
11
4
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
11
7
T
H
P
L
S
E
WE
S
T
E
R
N
A
V
E
N
W
SE 292ND ST
SE 296TH ST
D PL SE
53
R
D
P
L
S
TERRACE VIEW LN SE
1
1
2
T
H
P
L
S
E
5 TH S T N E
12TH ST NE
35TH ST NE
11
0
T
H
P
L
S
E
SE 323RD ST
8TH ST SW
SE 286TH PL
SE 302ND PL
10
5
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
S 296TH P L
40TH ST NE
ORAVETZ PL SE
S E 300TH ST
59
T
H
A
V
E
S
1ST ST NE
KA
T
H
E
R
I
N
E
A
V
E
S
E
13
3
R
D
A
V
E
S
E
JA
S
M
I
N
E
A
V
E
S
E
A L PINE DR SE
63RD PL S
62 N D LOOP S
E
AS
P
E
N
L
N
S
E
3RD ST NE
SE 305TH PL
S 307TH ST
10
7
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
SE 288TH PL
SE 314TH PL
SE 313TH ST
AABY D R N
W
KE
N
N
E
D
Y
A
V
E
S
E
54TH ST SE
SE 302ND ST
14TH ST NW
SE 313TH PL
E
L
A
I
N
E
A
V
E
S
E
49TH ST NW
5
8
T
H
P
L
S
26TH ST NW
SE 30 4 T H P L
S 329TH PL
12
0
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
C P
L
S
E
7TH ST NE
SE 282ND WAY
JA
M
E
S
P
L
S
E
S
S
T
S
E
SE 321ST PL
16
7
T
H
A
V
E
E
S 320TH ST
SE 315TH PL
18
1
S
T
A
V
E
E
106
T
H
P
L
S
E
SE 306TH PL10
0
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
23RD ST NE
27
T
H
P
L
S
E
3RD ST SE
PI
K
E
S
T
S
E
JO
R
D
A
N
A
V
E
S
E
S 294TH ST
37TH ST NW
87
T
H
A
V
E
S
SE 283RD ST
1 7 T H D R S E
M PL N
E
28TH ST SE
5
7
T
H
P
L
S
47TH
S
T
S
E
F S
T
SE
K
S
T
S
E
AC
A
D
E
M
Y
D
R
S
E
SE 295TH ST
5
7
T
H
P
L
S
E
L
I
Z
A
B
E
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
SE 295TH ST
B
S
T
S
E
11
8
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
SE 298TH PL
30TH ST NE
23RD ST SE
6TH ST SE
2 4 T H S T SE
SE 310TH ST
H
O
W
A
R
D
R
D
S
E
E
S
T
S
E
B
S
T
S
E
108TH AVE SE
R
S
T
N
E
10
8
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
28TH ST S
E
28TH ST SE
SE 302ND ST
36TH S
T
S
E
SE 282ND ST
SE 301ST ST
11
6
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
29TH ST NW
4TH ST SW
2ND ST SE
D
S
T
S
E
K
S
T
S
E
MAP ID # : 3335PRINTED ON: 07/27/2009
1 INCH = 3,400 FEETINFORMATION SHOWN IS FOR GENERAL REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY AND DOES NOTNECESSARILY REPRESENT EXACT GEOGRAPHIC OR CARTOGRAPHIC DATA AS MAPPED. THE CITY OF AUBURN MAKES NO WARRANTY AS TO ITS ACCURACY.
MAP 3.5GROUNDWATER PROTECTION ZONES
Spring
Well
Zone 1 (0-1 Year)
Zone 1A (No Valley Aquitard)
Zone 2 (1-10 Year)
Zone 1 (1/2-1 Year Capture)
Zone 2 (No Valley Aquitard)
Zone 3 (1-10 Year Capture)
Zone 4 (10 Year Capture to City Limits)
City Limits
King County
Seismic Hazard Areas
Date: 5/18/2015 King County
±0 0.650.325 Miles
1 in : 3,009 feet
The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and issubject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied,as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intendedfor use as a survey product. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, orconsequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuseof the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except bywritten permission of King County.
LE
G
E
N
D
DATE: May
2
2
,
2
0
1
5
F
I
L
E
:
F
L
O
O
D
P
L
A
I
N
M
A
P
0SCALE IN FEET 800
So
u
t
h
2
7
7
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
F
l
o
o
d
p
l
a
i
n
M
a
p
Co
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
o
r
y
F
l
o
o
d
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
a
t
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
F
l
o
o
d
p
l
a
i
n
F
i
l
l
Wa
t
e
r
B
o
d
y
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
P
i
p
e
s
/
C
u
l
v
e
r
t
Wa
t
e
r
C
o
u
r
s
e
Re
g
u
l
a
t
e
d
1
9
9
5
F
E
M
A
F
l
o
o
d
p
l
a
i
n
Po
r
t
o
f
S
e
a
t
t
l
e
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
S
i
t
e
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
C
u
l
v
e
r
t
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
D
o
u
b
l
e
Bo
x
C
u
l
v
e
r
t
a
n
d
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
Fi
s
h
-
P
a
s
s
a
g
e
C
u
l
v
e
r
t
Au
b
u
r
n
C
r
e
e
k
Ex
t
e
n
d
e
d
4
8
"
Cu
l
v
e
r
t
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
F
l
o
o
d
Co
n
v
e
y
a
n
c
e
Ch
a
n
n
e
l
Ab
a
n
d
o
n
e
d
/
C
a
p
p
e
d
C
u
l
v
e
r
t
APPENDIX B
Parametrix Memorandum
City of Kent Letter
411 108TH AVENUE NE, SUITE 1800
BELLEVUE, WA 98004-5571
T. 425.458.6200 F. 425.458.6363
www.parametrix.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 11, 2014
To: Chuck Schott
From: Jeff Meyer
Subject: Mitigation Credits Available for the South 277th Street Corridor Improvements Project
Project Number: 214-1931-024\04\04012
Project Name: The South 277th Street Corridor Capacity & Non-Motorized Improvements Project
MITIGATION FOR SOUTH 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
The City of Auburn’s S 277th St Corridor Capacity & Non-Motorized Trail Improvement Project (Project) will
impact existing wetlands and streams and mitigation is needed to compensate for these impacts. On behalf of the
City of Auburn (Auburn), Parametrix reviewed past project documents of the original 272nd/277th North
Corridor Project constructed by the City of Kent (Kent) to assess potential mitigation ‘credits’ remaining for use
by Auburn for the current Project.
Two “mitigation pots” of wetland mitigation credits are potentially available from the City of Kent’s original
272nd/277nd North Corridor Project for use by Auburn’s Project. These wetland mitigation pots are discussed
below.
1) Over-Constructed Mitigation: Kent constructed mitigation for its original 272nd/277th North Corridor
project based on the regulatory definition of wetlands in 1994. In 1999, the definition of wetlands
changed resulting in Kent constructing an excess of approximately 0.5 acre of mitigation. The balance of
the over-constructed mitigation as of 2003 was 0.26 acre. Wetland mitigation rules have changed since
2003; therefore, it is not clear if Auburn can utilize this “mitigation pot” for impacts related to Auburn’s
Project. Parametrix would need to confirm with the regulatory agencies that these credits are available to
Auburn’s Project, and that it is acceptable to Kent for Auburn to use these credits for its Project.
2) Reduced Impacts: Kent conducted mitigation for impacts to wetlands along the south side of S 277th St,
but because Kent did not widen the south side of the roadway as originally designed, permitted impacts to
wetlands were not fully used. By Parametrix’s calculations, 0.35 acre of impacts along the south side
were mitigated for, but not implemented. Parametrix would need to confirm with the agencies that these
credits are available to Auburn’s Project, and that it is acceptable to Kent for Auburn to use these credits
for its Project.
In total, 0.61 acre of mitigation credits is potentially available to Auburn’s Project (0.26 acre of Over-Constructed
Mitigation and 0.35 acre of Reduced Impacts). Because the Kent mitigation site is established and performing
well, Auburn’s Project is in a good position to argue a previously established 1:1 mitigation ratio is appropriate
for the Project, in which case existing mitigation credits would be sufficient to cover the Project’s anticipated
wetland impacts.
More detailed discussion of these two mitigation pots is provided in the attached information.
Attachment 1
Supporting Analysis
SUPPORTING ANALYSIS
The South 277th Street Corridor Improvements Project will impact wetlands and streams. Mitigation must be
provided for these impacts. On behalf of the City of Auburn, Parametrix met with Jeff Jones of J.S. Jones
Associates to discuss the history of the adjacent proposed development and the original 272nd/277th North
Corridor Project. Mr. Jones provided many documents and communications between the City of Kent, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps), and J.S. Jones discussing the level of impacts to wetlands and the mitigation work
constructed for these impacts. Parametrix reviewed these documents to assess potential mitigation credits
remaining from the original 272nd\277th North Corridor Project.
Key issues related to wetland mitigation for the South 277th Street Corridor Improvements Project included:
1. Verifying the amount of excess mitigation credits at the City of Kent Mitigation Sites E, F, and FP that
were constructed for the original 272nd/277th North Corridor Project as permitted in 1996
(NWS-94-4-01283).
2. Verifying the amount of fill that was not placed in 277th Street roadside wetlands during the early phase
of construction.
Issue 1
A number of emails, letters, and permit documents were reviewed to trace the history of this issue. The City of
Kent and J.S. Jones and Associates, Inc. have attempted to maintain a running count of impacts and corresponding
compensatory mitigation requirements.
A comprehensive accounting of mitigation credits was tabulated by Jonathan Smith, Corps Regulatory Project
Manager, in a September 18, 2003, email to Jeff Jones (Attachment 2). This calculation indicated that 0.26 acre of
mitigation credits remained in 2003. In 1999 a change in wetland determination regulations reduced the overall
area of jurisdictional wetlands in the project area from the original 1996 permit. The excess credit was therefore a
result of fewer jurisdictional wetlands being impacted by the project, less a couple of unauthorized activities that
were resolved using portions of the unused credit.
A mitigation credit was defined in the original 1994 permit as a blended mitigation credit and did not equate to an
acre of mitigation. Based on the analysis by Parametrix, the blended credit was 1.44, or 1 acre of impact to
wetlands would require 1.44 acres of mitigation at the project mitigation sites. However, in an April 5, 1999,
Memorandum for Record (Attachment 3; included in a June 11, 2003, letter from the Corps to Mr. Granville Horn
of City of Kent Public Works), the Corps stated that “the mitigation ratio for impacts to Wetland G was 1:1.”
Therefore, it may be concluded that the 0.26-acre credit would compensate for 0.26 acre of impacts to Wetland G
at the time of the 2003 Corps letter. No permitted project impacts have since been applied to this mitigation
credit. It is unclear if the Corps would honor the 1:1 mitigation credit ratio in 2014 because new national
mitigation standards became law in 2008.
It is the intent of the applicant to use this 0.26-acre mitigation credit for the South 277th Street Corridor
Improvements Project in 2014.
Issue 2
The 1996 Corps permit was issued for the full-built width of South 277th Street (Attachment 4). However, the
south side of the road improvements was not completed in the initial phases of the project, and wetlands,
principally Wetland G, in these areas were not fully impacted. As noted in a January 23, 2003, letter from Mr.
Horn to the Corps (Attachment 5), compensatory mitigation was constructed for impacts of the entire project, thus
some compensatory mitigation was completed in 2001 for impacts to wetlands that did not occur.
Parametrix conducted a wetland delineation of wetlands and marking of ordinary high water mark (OHWM) in
the right-of-way on the south side of South 277th Street in October and December 2013. Parametrix found that
the area contained wetlands and streams that were not previously filled, totaling 15,294 square feet (0.35 acre).
Although the entire area was classified as wetland in the 1996 permit, the current delineation found only 10,690
square feet of wetlands and 4,604 square feet (900 linear feet) of streams remaining in 2013. The 2014 project
will finish the road widening to at least its 1996 permitted design and will fill the remaining wetlands and streams.
The Wetland E, F, and FP mitigation sites constructed for the original 272nd/277th North Corridor Project have
been in the ground for 12 years; therefore, it is Parametrix’s understanding that they have achieved their
performance standards and are in good condition. However, Parametrix has not identified specific
correspondence confirming acceptance of the mitigation areas.
Parametrix believes that there was 15,294 square feet (0.35 acre) of mitigation constructed in 2001 in advance of
wetland impacts for the currently proposed South 277th Street Corridor Improvements Project. The project
applicant intends on applying this mitigation to the impacts of the current project.
SUMMARY
The analysis of the two issues above suggests that there may be a total of 0.61 acre of advance wetland mitigation
available at the Wetland E, F, and FP mitigation sites constructed for the original 272nd/277th North Corridor
Project that could be applied to the South 277th Street Corridor Improvements Project in 2014. This analysis and
its conclusions must be verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Attachment 2
September 18, 2003 email from Jonathan Smith, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers Regulatory Project Manager, to Jeff
Jones, J.S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
Attachment 3
April 5, 1999 Memorandum for Record (attached to a June 11,
2003 letter from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to Mr.
Granville Horn, City of Kent Public Works)
Attachment 4
Department of the Army Permit 94-4-0128, July 29, 1996.
South 272nd/277th North Corridor project; selected pages.
Attachment 5
January 23, 2003 letter from Mr. Granville Horn, City of Kent
Public Works, to Jonathan Smith, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers
APPENDIX C
Stream Mitigation Plan
DATE: September 25, 2015 FILE: FIGUREC1_MITIGATIONPLAN
0
SCALE IN FEET
100
S 277th Street Corridor
Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan
Figure C-1
Stormwater
Detention Pond
(Flow Control)
Stormwater
Wetland
(Runoff
Treatment)
"Offsite Wetland A"
Buffer Per Jeff Jones
(Proposed 50' Std. Reduced
By 35% to 32.5')
Mitigation Stream
974 LF @ 0.20% Gradient
(OHW = 8' Wide)
Pond Access Road
15' Min Width
AREA 4
(Stormwater
Management)
STEIN PARCEL
30
'
Ex. G Street NE ROW
"Offsite Wetland A"
2015 Delineation By Jeff Jones
(To Be Confirmed
With USACE)
7:1 MAX
New Fish-Passable Culvert
L=120'
(Replaces Two Ex.
Flood Culverts)
EL=44.25
Utilize Ex Roadside Ditch
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
105.0' Min Stream Buffer Corridor
(Proposed Conservation Easement)
25.0' Min
Stream
Buffer (Typ)
Interim Conveyance Ditch
AREA 2
AREA 5
(Stormwater Management)
Existing Channel
(Continues to S 277th St.
Survey Pending)
Proposed Pond
Easement
15' Min Between
Stream Excavation
And Ex. Wetland, Typ.
(Clearance For Construction
And Wetland Hydrology
Protection)
Interim Ditch At Toe Of
Proposed S 277th Street
Road Embankment (Typ)
Approx. Limit of
4:1 Transition Slopes
Port of Seattle Property
"Offsite Wetland D"
Approx. Limits Shown
(To Be Confirmed by
Jeff Jones With USACE)
FUTURE
I STREET NE
48.75' Min
Stream Buffer
(Port of Seattle
Property Side)
Flow Control Structure
25
'
M
i
n
Str
e
a
m
Bu
f
f
e
r
25' Min
Proposed S 277th Street Widening
Stormwater Inlet
Proposed R/W
(1' Min Beyond 2'
Wide Trail Shoulder)
Proposed Slope And
Drainage Easement
Ex. R/W
Ex. Stein Parcel
Access Easements
(To Be Extinguished)
Existing 20' Access Easement
"Offsite Wetland D"
Buffer (Proposed 50'
Std. Reduced
By 35% to 32.5')
Interim Culvert Under
Unimproved G Street
5' Wide O.H.W.
Split Rail Fence (Typ. Along
Conservation Easement Line)
Chain Link Fence
Stream
Buffer
Gate
Existing "Offsite Wetland A" Buffer
(Existing Recorded Conservation
Easement on Area 4)
Portion of Existing Conservation
Easement To Be Vacated
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
South 277th Street Corridor Capacity
and Non-Motorized Trail Improvements
Submitted to
City of Auburn Public Works
25 West Main Street
Auburn, WA 98001
Prepared for
Federal Highway Administration
and
Washington State Department of Transportation
Prepared by
Parametrix, Inc.
719 2nd Avenue, Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98104
August 2015
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
i
Contents
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................1
Background and Consultation History ......................................................................................1
Project Location and Description .............................................................................................1
Construction Activities ...................................................................................................3
Stormwater Management ................................................................................................5
Culverts and Fish Passage ...............................................................................................6
Stream Construction ........................................................................................................7
Construction Staging Areas.............................................................................................8
Mitigation ........................................................................................................................8
Project Sequencing and Timeline....................................................................................8
Impact Avoidance and Minimization Measures .......................................................................9
Project Action Area ................................................................................................................12
Aquatic Considerations .................................................................................................12
Terrestrial Considerations .............................................................................................14
Indirect Effects Considerations .....................................................................................15
Status and Presence of Listed Species and Designated Critical Habitat in the Project
Action Area .............................................................................................................................16
Species and Critical Habitat Lists and Listing Status .............................................................16
Presence of Federally Listed and Proposed Species in the Project Action Area ....................18
Chinook Salmon ............................................................................................................18
Steelhead .......................................................................................................................19
Bull Trout ......................................................................................................................20
Presence of Federally Designated and Proposed Critical Habitat in the Project
Action Area .....................................................................................................................21
Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat ..................................................................................21
Steelhead Critical Habitat .............................................................................................21
Bull Trout Critical Habitat ............................................................................................21
Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................................22
Habitat Conditions for Aquatic Species .................................................................................24
Hydrology .....................................................................................................................24
In-stream Habitat ...........................................................................................................25
Riparian Habitat ............................................................................................................26
Water Quality ................................................................................................................26
Fish Use .........................................................................................................................28
Environmental Baseline Conditions ..............................................................................29
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
ii
Effects of the Action ......................................................................................................................31
Direct Effects ..........................................................................................................................31
Loss of Aquatic Habitat ................................................................................................31
Construction-related Sedimentation, Turbidity, and Pollutants ....................................32
Stormwater ....................................................................................................................33
Riparian and Wetland Impacts ......................................................................................34
Aquatic Connectivity ....................................................................................................35
Indirect Effects ........................................................................................................................36
Effects from Interrelated and Interdependent Actions ............................................................39
Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................40
Chinook Salmon .....................................................................................................................40
Critical Habitat ..............................................................................................................42
Steelhead .................................................................................................................................42
Critical Habitat ..............................................................................................................44
Bull Trout ................................................................................................................................45
Critical Habitat ..............................................................................................................47
Floodplain Analysis .......................................................................................................................48
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment.................................................................................................49
Essential Fish Habitat Background .........................................................................................49
Description of the Proposed Action ........................................................................................50
Potential Adverse Effects of the Proposed Project .................................................................50
Essential Fish Habitat Conservation Measures .......................................................................51
Conclusions.............................................................................................................................51
References ......................................................................................................................................52
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
iii
Tables
Table 1. ESA-Listed Species and Designated Critical Habitat Addressed in this BA ..................16
Table 2. Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline Conditions and Effects of
the Proposed Project on Relevant Indicators in Project Area Waterbodies ..................30
Table 3. Existing and Projected Annual Pollutant Loading Estimates for Areas Where the
S 277th St Project May Influence Development Rates .................................................37
Table 4. Effects Determinations for Species and Designated Critical Habitat ..............................40
Figures
Figure 1. Project Area Vicinity Map................................................................................................2
Figure 2. S 277th St Corridor Project Overview..............................................................................4
Figure 3. Map of Action Area ........................................................................................................13
Appendices
A – Stormwater
B – Official Species Lists
C – Listed Species Life Histories and Critical Habitat PCEs
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
iv
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADT average daily traffic
BA biological assessment
BMP best management practice
City City of Auburn
dBA A-weighted decibels
DPS Distinct Population Segment
Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology
EFH essential fish habitat
ESA Endangered Species Act of 1973
ESU Evolutionarily Significant Unit
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Administration
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FR Federal Register
HPA Hydraulic Project Approval
HUC Hydrologic Unit Code
LOS level of service
Magnuson-Stevens Act Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
PCE primary constituent element
PGIS pollution-generating impervious surface
SPCC Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (plan)
TDA threshold discharge area
TESC Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (plan)
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
WAC Washington Administrative Code
WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
WDNR Washington Department of Natural Resources
WRIA Water Resource Inventory Area
WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 1
Introduction
Background and Consultation History
Parametrix has prepared this biological assessment (BA) on behalf of the City of Auburn (City) for the
proposed S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-motorized Trail Improvements Project in Auburn,
Washington. The results of this assessment will help to facilitate consultation between the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 United
States Code §§ 1531-1544). The federal nexus for this project is federal-aid funding provided by FHWA,
as administered by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Highways and Local
Programs Division. This BA also supports Section 7 compliance for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’
issuance of a Nationwide Permit No. 14 under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act.
ESA Section 7 requires federal agencies to ensure that actions they authorize, fund, or carry out are not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of or result in the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat for those species listed or proposed to be listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA.
This BA evaluates the potential direct and indirect effects of the proposed action on species that are listed,
or proposed to be listed, as endangered or threatened under the ESA, and that are regulated by NMFS or
USFWS. Analyses in this BA also address potential effects on designated or proposed critical habitat for
listed species. Effects on essential fish habitat (EFH), as defined by NMFS (2004), are also examined.
The City of Auburn participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which is a Federal
Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) program that is required to comply with the ESA. The
City has adopted local floodplain regulations (Auburn City Code 15.68) that implement FEMA’s
requirements for NFIP program compliance with the ESA; these requirements apply to development
projects that are proposed in Auburn’s regulatory floodplain. FEMA’s implementation of an ESA
biological opinion issued for the NFIP by NMFS in 2008 requires that projects proposed in the floodplain
must be assessed to determine if they will adversely affect ESA-listed species or their habitat. A BA that
addresses ESA considerations for projects located in the floodplain and that receives concurrence from
NMFS and USFWS can be used in lieu of preparing a separate floodplain habitat impact assessment
document required under the City’s regulations. The City intends to use this BA to document compliance
of the S 277th St project with the terms of the NFIP biological opinion.
This BA addresses direct and indirect project-related impacts on Chinook salmon, steelhead, and bull
trout. Effects analyses address potential effects on individuals, habitat, and the foraging base for each
species. The effects determinations are based on life history analysis, habitat requirements, literature
review, agency consultation, and field reconnaissance studies conducted by biologists. The author of this
BA conducted a site visit in April 2015.
Project Location and Description
The site of the S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-motorized Trail Improvements Project is located
along the northern boundary of Auburn, between State Route 167 and the Green River in King County,
Washington (Figure 1). The eastern terminus is located at the entrance to a residential subdivision at the
intersection of S 277th St and L St NE. The western terminus is located near the intersection of S 277th St
and Auburn Way N.
DATE: March 5, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 1
0
South 277th Street Corridor Capacity
and Non-Motorized Improvements
Project Vicinity Map
Figure 1
Project
Location
Kent
Auburn
Project
Location
Seattle
Tacoma
Kent
Auburn
S 277th St
Au
b
u
r
n
W
a
y
N
E
V
a
l
l
e
y
H
w
y
SCALE IN FEET
10.5
Auburn Creek
Green River
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 3
Most of the project area1 is located in Section 31, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, Willamette
Meridian; the western end of the project area is in Section 36, Township 22 North, Range 4 East. The
approximate latitude/longitude coordinates are 47.3538° N, 122.2210° W.
The project area is in the Lower Green River sub-basin of Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9
(Duwamish-Green Watershed). The project area is in Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC)
number 171100130304, Mill Creek-Green River.
The project consists of intersection improvements and major roadway widening on S 277th St from
Auburn Way N to L St NE (Figure 2). Project components include adding two new eastbound through
lanes, one new westbound through lane, a Class I separated non-motorized trail, street lighting
improvements, storm drainage improvements, streetscape improvements, intelligent transportation system
improvements, intersection capacity and safety improvements, and auxiliary turn lanes. The project also
includes installing a fish-passable culvert under S 277th St and constructing approximately 900 linear feet
of stream for compensatory mitigation.
S 277th St in Auburn is the only remaining two-lane segment on a corridor that connects State Route 99
in the western portion of King County with State Route 18 to the east. On a typical weekday, the S 277th
St corridor carries approximately 24,000 vehicles, including a high percentage of trucks. High traffic
volumes regularly overwhelm the system in this constrained segment of the corridor, causing congestion
and unreliability for all users, resulting in delays and degradation of safety for the transportation network
in the entire region. This project is needed to complete the final unimproved segment on this vital arterial
connection. The goal is to eliminate this bottleneck and improve an essential connection to Puget Sound
urban and industrial centers, thereby improving safety, reducing travel time, expanding reliability, and
improving freight movement across the Green River Valley.
The 2012 City of Auburn Functional Roadway Classifications Map identifies S 277th St in the project
area as a Principal Arterial. Areas south of the road are within the city limits, zoned as Commercial and
Residential; areas north of the road are within unincorporated King County, zoned for agricultural uses.
The existing width of S 277th St is approximately 36 to 59 feet, consisting of two 11-foot travel lanes and
two 4-foot shoulders in most places (Figure 2).
The following subsections provide more detailed information about proposed project activities.
Construction Activities
The existing and proposed layouts of the roadways, ditches, and stormwater treatment facilities in the
project area are depicted in Figure 2.
Project work will include the following activities:
Widening S 277th St by approximately 20 to 50 feet to the south, to provide additional through
lanes along a 3,300-foot segment extending from Auburn Way N to L St NE and to provide turn
lanes at the following intersections:
o 83rd Avenue S—Westbound right-turn pocket (including retaining wall if needed to
minimize impacts to ditches and sensitive areas)
1 Note: In this document, the term “project area” refers to the general geographic setting of the proposed project.
As such, the term conveys a different meaning than “project action area,” which is the area with the potential to be
affected directly or indirectly by the project actions.
LEGEND
Water Body
Water Course
T
O
G
R
E
E
N
R
I
V
E
R
,
V
I
A
A
U
B
U
R
N
C
R
E
E
K
Concrete Culvert
TWIN BOX CULVERTS
New Full Depth Pavement
New Non-Motorized Trail
18" CULVERT
PROPOSED
MITIGATION
STREAM
PORT OF SEATTLE FLOOD
CONTROL CHANNEL
PROPOSED
STORMWATER
DETENTION POND
48" CULVERT
EXISTING WETLAND
PVC Pipe
PROPOSED
CULVERT
PROPOSED STORMWATER
TREATMENT WETLAND
DATE: March 5, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 2
0
SCALE IN FEET
500
South 277th Street Project Overview
Figure 2
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 5
o D St NE—Eastbound right-turn pocket
o I St NE (new intersection)—Left-turn lane from westbound S 277th St and merge lane for
traffic turning left from I St NE onto westbound S 277th St
Widening a small portion along the north side of S 277th St west of Auburn Way N to
accommodate a lane alignment transition between the widened S 277th St at the Auburn Way N
intersection and to match the existing lanes approximately 200 feet west of the intersection, and
widening both sides of East Valley Highway S/83rd Ave S, north of the S 277th St intersection,
to provide a second southbound left-turn lane, including constructing retaining walls on both
sides of East Valley Highway S/83rd Ave S, north of the S 277th St intersection, as needed, to
stay within the existing right-of-way and to minimize impacts to ditches and sensitive areas.
Constructing a stormwater wetland for treatment of runoff on the south side of S 277th St near the
new I St NE intersection
Constructing a detention pond for flow control on the south side of S 277th St near the new
I St NE intersection
Excavating a new conveyance ditch on the south side of S 277th St to convey stormwater to the
treatment facility
Installing a new fish-passable culvert to replace the flood conveyance structures (twin box
culverts) affected by widening S 277th St
Constructing approximately 500 feet of ditch for flood conveyance between the northern terminus
of the Port of Seattle north-south overflow channel and the proposed fish-passable culvert under
S 277th St
Constructing approximately 900 linear feet of stream to replace ditch habitat on the south side of
S 277th St affected by road widening
Extending the existing 48-inch-diameter culvert under S 277th St (approximately 50 feet west of
the existing D St NE intersection) to accommodate widening of S 277th St
Mitigating for the loss of approximately 1/4 acre of wetlands affected by widening along the
south side of S 277th St
Constructing a Class I separated non-motorized trail along the south side of S 277th St between
Auburn Way N and I St NE
Implementing signal improvements and intelligent traffic system features in the project corridor
Road widening, trail construction, and associated mitigation activities will entail approximately
30,000 cubic yards of fill. Machinery and equipment that will be used for project work include
excavators, bulldozers, backhoes, front-end loaders, dump trucks, an asphalt paving machine, graders, and
rollers. Project construction will entail no blasting, pile driving, or other high-intensity noise-generating
activities.
Stormwater Management
One threshold discharge area (TDA) has been delineated within the project area. The total area of the
TDA is 14.2 acres, of which 5.8 acres consists of pollution-generating impervious surface (PGIS).
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
6 AUGUST 2015
Currently, runoff from this TDA is neither treated nor subject to flow control. Stormwater fro m the
project area runs off the roadway into ditches on the north and south sides of S 277th St. Runoff from the
project area is conveyed via a system of ditches and culverts to a ditch alongside 86th Ave S, where it
flows north toward Auburn Creek and the Green River.
The proposed road widening will increase the amount of PGIS in the TDA by approximately 2.7 acres.
The surface of the non-motorized trail will be constructed with pervious materials and will therefore not
change the amount of impervious surface area in the TDA. All new PGIS on the south side of the road
will receive enhanced treatment in a stormwater wetland near (east of) the future I St NE intersection, as
well as flow control treatment in a detention pond (see Figure 2). At this time, the stormwater wetland and
detention pond are proposed to serve only this project. Roadway stormwater conveyance will consist of
an enclosed drainage system consisting of catch basins and stormwater pipe.
The stormwater wetland will comply with the WSDOT 2014 Highway Runoff Manual requirements for
enhanced treatment, as well as the requirements of the 2009 City of Auburn Surface Water Management
Manual. The detention pond will be designed to match discharge durations under post-construction
conditions to those under pre-developed conditions (i.e., native vegetation and soils that existed before the
influence of Euro-American settlement) for storm events ranging from 50 percent of a 2-year event to a
full 50-year event.
The stormwater wetland and detention pond will discharge to a new ditch that conveys the treated water
approximately 200 feet to the upper end of the constructed mitigation stream (see Stream Construction,
below), approximately 900 feet upstream of the culvert under S 277th St. From that point, treated
stormwater will flow through the existing ditch on the north side of S 277th St, joining the 86th Ave S
ditch approximately 3,000 feet upstream of the Green River.
Minimum requirements for water quality treatment and flow control were calculated using the
Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (Ecology 2012), which meets the level of
stormwater management established by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) to
achieve compliance with federal and state water quality regulations. Because this is a linear project, in
which new pavement will be constructed adjacent to existing pavement, treating runoff from new PGIS
separately from existing runoff is not feasible. For this reason, treating equivalent areas was used as the
method of meeting runoff treatment and flow control requirements. The new non-motorized trail will be
designed with pervious pavement and will not drain to stormwater treatment facilities.
Culverts and Fish Passage
A new fish-passable culvert under S 277th St will be installed to replace the existing culverts that will be
affected by roadway widening (see Figure 2). The existing culverts to be replaced are a pair of adjacent
3-foot by 6-foot box culverts and a single 18-inch concrete culvert. The existing culverts have not been
assessed as fish passage barriers by WSDOT or the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
(WDFW) because the ditches along S 277th St are not mapped as potentially fish-bearing streams in
Washington State’s databases. However, based on observations of coho salmon in the ditch south of S
277th St, WDFW has determined that the ditch is considered to contain fish habitat (pers. comm., L.
Fisher, WDFW Regional Habitat Biologist, February 12, 2015). For this reason, a fish-passable culvert
will be needed to ensure connectivity between the project action area and downstream areas with
documented fish use.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 7
The existing twin flood conveyance box culverts are situated approximately 2 feet above the bottom of
the ditch and convey water only during flood events. The 18-inch culvert is at the ditch bottom; under
most circumstances when water is present in the ditches, it can flow through that culvert. Based on its
size, it is likely that the 18-inch culvert presents a velocity barrier during storm events when water
volumes in the ditch are high but water levels are not high enough to reach the flood conveyance culverts.
The new culvert will meet the requirements of the Stream Simulation Design Option specified in
WDFW’s water crossing design guidelines (Barnard et al. 2013). It will be a three-sided pre-cast concrete
box culvert, 140 feet long by 12 feet wide and 4 feet high. Installation of the new culvert will ensure that
any fish that venture into the roadside ditches in the project area will have unimpeded access to 900 linear
feet of newly constructed stream habitat (compensatory mitigation) south of S 277th St.
The existing 18-inch culvert will be plugged with concrete or controlled density fill and left in place. The
twin box culverts will be removed when the new fish-passable culvert is installed.
Stream Construction
Approximately 900 linear feet of the existing ditch along the south side of S 277th St is classified as a
stream under the City’s critical areas regulations (Auburn City Code 16.10.020). According to Auburn
City Code 16.10.110, the project will be required to replace the affected watercourse with one that is
functionally equivalent or superior in terms of hydrological, biological, physical, and chemical functions.
Stream construction is also expected to be required for compliance with both the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers permit and the WDFW Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) for this project. The U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers issued a determination that the watercourses in the project action area have been
classified as streams for permitting purposes (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2010), and WDFW has
determined that the ditch is considered to contain fish habitat, based on more recent observations of fish.
For this project, mitigation for impacts to ditches classified as streams will be implemented on site and
will consist of constructing approximately 900 linear feet of fish-habitable stream channel. Installation of
the fish-passable culvert to connect the new stream channel south of S 277th St to the ditch system north
of S 277th St is also considered part of project mitigation.
The stream will originate in a vegetated area adjacent to a wetland on private land east of the G St NE
right-of-way and will follow a meandering route before flowing into the new fish-passable culvert at
S 277th St (see Figure 2). The hydrological sources for the stream will include surface runoff from
approximately 6.0 acres of the adjacent property, as well as the outlet from the stormwater wetland and
detention pond described above. Flow control will be provided by the stormwater detention pond. The
flow velocity cannot be increased because the area is flat. The channel grade will be 0.2 percent. The
proposed flow conditions will result in an intermittent stream.
The stream channel will be approximately 2 feet wide at its bottom, and the width at the ordinary high
water mark will be approximately 6 feet. Spawning gravels will be placed in the channel and large woody
debris will be placed along the banks and at the channel edge. In accordance with Auburn City Code
requirements, an approximately 105-foot-wide corridor surrounding the new stream channel will be
managed the regulatory stream buffer. A portion of the proposed buffer area is currently forested, with
black cottonwood and red alder the dominant species. The buffer will also be planted with native trees
and shrubs.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
8 AUGUST 2015
Construction Staging Areas
Construction staging areas will be required for the project. Staging areas will be determined by the
construction contractor, pending approval by the City. It is anticipated that the contractor will be able to
locate staging areas within the defined project footprint permitted for the project; a substantial proportion
of the right-of-way will be available, for example, during lane closures. If a location outside the right-of-
way is needed, it is also possible that the City will allow the contractor to use a portion of the previously
developed parcel west of the location of the proposed stormwater wetland through prior application for
and approval of a City-authorized temporary use permit.
Mitigation
Consistent with the mitigation sequencing requirements established by the National Environmental Policy
Act, the Clean Water Act, and local wetland protection programs, a high priority was placed on designing
the project to include measures and features that avoid and minimize adverse effects on floodplains,
streams, wetlands, and their buffers (see Impact Avoidance and Minimization Measures, below).
Compensatory mitigation will be provided for unavoidable impacts. In addition to the stream construction
described above, mitigation will be provided to compensate for project-related loss of wetland functions
and resources and to replace the functions and values of these resources. Mitigation work in compliance
with City requirements will also be designed to comply with the WDFW Hydraulic Project Approval
(HPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit for this project.
The following two wetland mitigation options have been identified for use by this project (Parametrix
2014):
1) Over-Constructed Mitigation: The City of Kent constructed mitigation for its original
272nd/277th North Corridor Project based on the regulatory definition of wetlands in 1994. In
1999, the definition of wetlands changed. As a result, the City of Kent constructed
approximately 0.5 acre of mitigation beyond what was required. The balance of the over-
constructed mitigation as of 2003 was 0.26 acre. The mitigation site is established and
performing well. The City of Auburn proposes to use this excess mitigation as advance
mitigation at a 1:1 ratio, if the regulatory agencies confirm that the mitigation is available to
this project. The City of Kent has issued a letter stating that it is acceptable for the City of
Auburn to use this mitigation for this project.
2) Reduced Impacts: For the original 272nd/277th North Corridor Project, the City of Kent
constructed mitigation for impacts to wetlands along the south side of S 277th St. However, the
City of Kent did not widen the south side of the roadway as originally designed; therefore,
permitted impacts to wetlands were not fully used. It is estimated that 0.35 acre of impacts
along the south side of S 277th St were mitigated for, but not filled. The City of Auburn
proposes to use this excess mitigation if it is deemed is sufficient and available for this project.
The City of Kent has issued a letter stating that it is acceptable for the City of Auburn to use
these credits for this project.
Project Sequencing and Timeline
Construction of the project is anticipated to start in April 2016 and is expected to continue through
August 2017. Construction activities will occur primarily during daylight hours, with an 8- to 10-hour
work day.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 9
Ground-disturbing and noise-generating activities will occur in the following sequence:
Clearing and grubbing
Placement and preloading of fill for road widening
Fish-passable culvert installation, including temporary shifting of traffic to facilitate culvert
construction.
New stream construction
New utilities installation
Completion of pavement widening and curb and gutter installation
To minimize the risk of post-construction settlement in the soft soils of the project area, fill areas will be
preloaded. The preload will entail placing fill in the ditches along the south side of S 277th St and letting
it remain in place for approximately 6 months before final grading and paving. Temporary extensions will
be installed on culverts to ensure proper flood conveyance and flood control while the preloading fill is in
place. A temporary barrier will be installed at the north end of the proposed new fish culvert, to separate
that work area hydraulically from the existing conveyance ditch on the north side of S 277th Street. When
preloading is complete, traffic will be maintained in its current configuration or potentially shifted to the
north side of the road as necessary to allow culvert installation and road construction on the south side.
Once culvert installation and road construction is complete on the south side of the road, traffic will be
shifted to the south side of the road to allow culvert installation and road construction on the north side.
Filling (preloading) of the ditches along the south side of S 277th St will be conducted in compliance with
conditions specified in the HPA issued by WDFW for this project. Ground-disturbing activities below the
ordinary high water mark will be conducted during the fish window established for the project. It is
anticipated that the fish window will be during the summer months, when the affected watercourses are
typically dry. For this reason, it is expected that all work below the ordinary high water mark will be
conducted in the dry.
Culvert installation will require about 2 weeks to complete. Mitigation stream construction and planting
will require about 4 weeks.
Impact Avoidance and Minimization Measures
To avoid and/or minimize potential impacts from construction and operation of the project, conservation
measures will be implemented through applicable best management practices (BMPs) as outlined below.
BMPs for General Impact Avoidance and Minimization
Road widening will be limited to the south side of S 277th St to avoid effects on ditches,
wetlands, and agricultural land on the north side of the road.
All work below the ordinary high water mark of waters of the state will comply with conditions
specified in the HPA issued by WDFW for this project to minimize potential aquatic effects. It is
anticipated that fish window established under the HPA will be during the summer months, when
the affected watercourses are typically dry. For this reason, it is expected that all work below the
ordinary high water mark will be conducted in the dry.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
10 AUGUST 2015
All construction activities will comply with water quality standards set forth in the 1998 Water
Quality Implementing Agreement between Ecology and WSDOT and with the State of
Washington Surface Water Quality Standards (Washington Administrative Code [WAC] 173-
201A).
The Contractor will be required to maintain the flood conveyance capacity of existing flood
culverts during construction, or will be allowed to bypass the culverts under the condition that the
full capacity can be restored in response to a flood watch notification.
All temporarily affected areas will be restored to pre-construction conditions and re-planted or
seeded with native species to support a level of function that is the same as or greater than under
existing conditions. All disturbed riparian vegetation not permanently impacted will be replanted
with appropriate native species. Trees will be planted when consistent with road safety standards.
BMPs to Reduce the Risk of Delivering Sediment to Waterbodies
A Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) plan will be developed and implemented for
all project elements that entail clearing, vegetation removal, grading, ditching, filling,
embankment compaction, or excavation. The BMPs in the plan will be used to control sediments
from all vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities. Examples of applicable BMPs
include silt fences, wattle, compost socks, ditch check dams, seeding and mulching, stabilized
construction entrances, and street cleaning.
The contractor will designate at least one employee as the erosion and spill control lead. This
person will be responsible for the installation and monitoring of erosion control measures and
maintaining spill containment and control equipment. The erosion and spill control lead will also
be responsible for ensuring compliance with all local, state, and federal erosion and sediment
control requirements, including discharge monitoring reporting for Ecology.
Clearing limits will be delineated with orange barrier fencing before clearing activities commence
within a waterbody, wetland, or the buffer.
Erosion control devices will be installed, as needed, to protect surface waters and other critical
areas. Actual locations will be specified in the field based upon site conditions.
Erosion control blankets or an equally effective BMP will be installed on steep slopes that are
susceptible to erosion and where ground-disturbing activities have occurred. This will prevent
erosion and assist with establishment of native vegetation.
Project staging and material storage areas will be located a minimum of 150 feet from surface
waters or in currently developed areas such as parking lots or previously developed sites.
Erodible material that may be temporarily stored for use in project activities will be covered with
plastic or other impervious material during rain events to prevent sediments from being washed
from the storage area to surface waters.
All temporary and permanent erosion and sedimentation control measures will be inspected on a
regular basis, maintained, and repaired to ensure continued performance of their intended
function.
Silt fences will be inspected after each rainfall and at least daily during prolonged rainfall.
Sediment will be removed as it collects behind the silt fences and prior to their final removal.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 11
Temporary storage of excavated materials will not occur within the 100-year floodplain between
October 1 and May 1. Material used within 12 hours of deposition will not be considered
temporary.
Where practicable for soil stability, native vegetation will be planted in areas disturbed by
construction activities.
Exposed soils will be seeded and covered with straw mulch or an equally effective BMP after
construction is complete. Any temporary construction impact areas will be re-vegetated with
native plants following final grading activities.
All exposed soils will be stabilized during the first available period, and no soils shall remain
unstabilized for more than 2 days from October 1 to April 30, and for more than 7 days from
May 1 to September 30.
All silt fencing and staking will be removed upon soil surface stabilization and project
completion.
BMPs to Reduce the Risk of Introducing Pollutants to Waterbodies
The contractor shall prepare a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan prior
to beginning any construction activities. The SPCC plan will identify the appropriate spill
containment materials (which will be available at the project site at all times), as well as
specifying what to do and whom to contact when spills occur.
All equipment to be used for construction activities will be cleaned and inspected prior to arriving
at the project site to ensure no potentially hazardous materials are exposed, no leaks are present,
and the equipment is functioning properly. Should a leak be detected on heavy equipment used
for the project, the equipment will be immediately removed from areas within or immediately
adjacent to the ordinary high water mark of waterbodies.
A concrete truck chute cleanout area or equally effective BMP shall be established to properly
contain wet concrete.
Uncured concrete and/or concrete byproducts will be prevented from coming in contact with
streams or water conveyed directly to streams during construction in accordance with WAC 220-
110-270(3).
No paving, chip sealing, or stripe painting will occur during periods of rainfall or wet weather. If
equipment use within the wetted perimeter of a wetland or other waterbody is permitted, the
following provisions will apply:
o Equipment will be thoroughly cleaned of mud, petroleum products, or other deleterious
material.
o Turning and spinning within the bed of the waterbody will be avoided.
o Waterbody beds will be returned to pre-project condition at project completion, as
appropriate, although some channels will be relocated and overall habitat conditions will
be improved.
o The amount and duration of in-water work with machinery will be limited to the
minimum necessary to complete the work.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
12 AUGUST 2015
o There will be no visible sheen from petroleum products in the receiving water as a result
of project activities.
Excavated material will be removed to a location that will prevent its re-entry into waters of the
state.
As practicable, the contractor will fuel and maintain all equipment more than 200 feet from the
nearest wetland, drainage ditch, or surface waterbody or in currently developed areas such as
parking lots or managed areas. Commercial facilities that provide such services, for example gas
stations, are excluded.
All new PGIS will receive enhanced treatment in a stormwater wetland and flow control
treatment in a detention pond, as described above in the discussion of Stormwater Management.
Project Action Area
The project action area is defined as the area with the potential to be affected directly or indirectly by the
project actions. Project components with the potential to affect the species addressed in this anal ysis
include construction activities (which may contribute to increased turbidity and sedimentation in
waterbodies and elevated noise levels in terrestrial areas), as well as increases in the amount of
impervious surface area (which may affect the quality and quantity of stormwater discharges to
waterbodies). The action area for this project includes aquatic habitats extending from the upstream extent
of the mitigation stream channel, downstream to points 100 feet from the outlets of the culverts that drain
the ditch along the south side of S 277th St, as well as all terrestrial habitats within a 2,600-foot radius of
the project footprint (Figure 3). The following subsections describe the basis for these determinations.
Aquatic Considerations
Construction activities in or adjacent to waterbodies and wetlands, including culvert replacement and
stream construction, have the potential to introduce and transport sediment into the aquatic environment
at and downstream of the immediate construction or work area. The potential for effects related to in-
water construction will be minimized through compliance with the conditions specified in the HPA issued
by WDFW for this project. It is possible, however, that ground-disturbing activities may contribute to
elevated levels of turbidity during rain events.
As established in the Water Quality Implementing Agreement between Ecology and WSDOT, projects
that involve work in or near waters with flows up to 10 cubic feet per second at the time of construction
could result in elevated levels of turbidity that extend no more than 100 feet downstream of project
activities. It is likely that the HPA for this project will restrict construction activities below the ordinary
high water mark of waterbodies in the project action area to the summer months. Summer-season (May
through September) flows in Auburn Creek downstream of the project site are consistently less than
3 cubic feet per second (Kraft et al. 2004). Water volumes and flows in the ditches along S 277th St
upstream of Auburn Creek are lower than those in the creek itself; in fact, those ditches are often dry
during summer. Therefore, the aquatic portion of the project action area is conservatively estimated to
include the ditch along the south side of S 277th St between Auburn Way N and L St NE, segments of
ditches extending 100 feet south from that ditch, and segments of ditches along the north side of S 277th
St, extending 100 feet from the outlets of the culverts that drain the south-side ditch (see Figure 3). The
project action area also includes the full length of the mitigation stream channel.
S 277th St
83
r
d
A
v
e
S
A
u
b
u
r
n
W
a
y
N
D
S
t
N
E
8
6
t
h
A
v
e
S
L
S
t
N
E
LEGEND
G
S
t
N
E
(F
U
T
U
R
E
)
I
S
t
N
E
DATE: March 5, 2015 FILE: PS1931024 FIG 3
0
SCALE IN FEET
500
Project Action Area
Figure 3
Terrestrial Portion
of the Project Action Area
Site of Proposed
Auburn Gateway Development
Aquatic Portion
of the Project Action Area
GR
E
E
N
R
I
V
E
R
G
R
E
E
N
R
I
V
E
R
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
14 AUGUST 2015
As summarized in the discussion of Stormwater Management above, stormwater collected in the project
action area will be treated and discharged into the mitigation stream. The stormwater wetland and detention
pond will discharge to a ditch that conveys the treated water approximately 200 feet to the upper end of the
mitigation stream, approximately 900 feet upstream of the newly constructed fish-passable culvert under
S 277th St. The WSDOT Highway Runoff Dilution and Loading (HI-RUN) model was used to determine
the potential for the proposed roadway changes to affect water quality downstream of the outfall. The end-
of-pipe pollutant loading subroutine indicated the possibility of increased pollutant loading due to the
proposed roadway changes in the project action area, despite the provision of stormwater treatment for all
new PGIS. To assess the extent of potential effects of stormwater discharges on the aquatic environment,
the dilution modeling subroutine analysis was conducted.
The output of the dilution subroutine presents a conservative distance (mixing zone) downstream of the
outfall, where there is a 5 percent chance that pollutant concentrations will exceed thresholds for effects on
fish. The established thresholds are based on potential increases of 2.0 µg/L above background
concentrations of dissolved copper and 5.6 µg/L above background concentrations of dissolved zinc. Based
on the results of the dilution modeling, the mixing zone may extend approximately 22 feet from the outfall
of the treatment facility at the upper end of the constructed mitigation stream. This zone falls well within
the project action area for aquatic effects described above. Detailed modeling results are presented in
Appendix A, Stormwater.
Terrestrial Considerations
Noise from construction defines the in-air portion of the project action area. All project elements occur on
or near S 277th St between Auburn Way South and L St NE. Therefore, traffic noise was considered to be
part of the baseline (ambient) noise level in the project action area. The baseline noise level along S 277th
St was determined by the volume of traffic and speed of traffic. The design document for this project
specifies an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of approximately 24,000 vehicles for S 277th St in the
project area, which equates to approximately 2,000 vehicles per hour (WSDOT 2014). The posted speed
limit in the project area is 40 miles per hour. Based on these numbers, the baseline (ambient) noise level
along S 277th St is 70.4 decibels on the A-weighted scale (dBA) at 50 feet.
Based on the rules of decibel addition, the anticipated combined noise level for construction equipment
operating at the same time is 92 dBA at 50 feet. Surface conditions in the project vicinity are soft (i.e.,
ground cover exists between the noise source and the receptor), meaning construction noise (a point source)
will attenuate at a rate of about 7.5 dBA per doubling of distance. Similarly, the traffic noise levels (a line
source) will attenuate at a rate of about 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. Background noise levels in
suburban and residential areas similar to the project area typically range from 45 to 50 dBA. The threshold
level for detection of construction noise by ESA-listed terrestrial species is approximately 4 dBA above
background levels. Using a conservative estimate of 45 dBA for background noise levels, the detection
level for construction noise is 49 dBA.
Based on these thresholds, project-related construction noise will attenuate to the 49 dBA detection
threshold approximately 2,600 feet from the project footprint. Traffic noise attenuates to that level at
approximately 1,300 feet, meaning construction noise will not be masked by traffic noise before it
attenuates to background levels. The extent of project-related noise is thus calculated as the distance at
which construction noise is expected to be less than or equal to background noise levels. This distance,
calculated as 2,600 feet (approximately 0.5 mile), defines the land-based extent of the project action area.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 15
Indirect Effects Considerations
The project action area for the S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-motorized Trail Improvements
includes the site of the proposed Auburn Gateway, which is a future multi-phase private development on
approximately 60 acres adjoining S 277th St, consisting of up to 1.6 million square feet of office space, up
to 720,000 square feet of commercial retail, and up to 500 multi-family residential units. Specific
construction authorizations have yet to be applied for and approved for the Auburn Gateway. Construction
of the Auburn Gateway, although not wholly contingent on completion of the S 277th St project, will be
facilitated by this project. Analyses in this document, therefore, address potential indirect effects associated
with development of the Auburn Gateway site. The impacts of the Auburn Gateway development were
previously described in an environmental impact statement (City of Auburn 2004). Other nearby properties,
such as those immediately north of S 277th St, are in King County farmland trust and, as such, are not
available for development. The project is not dependent on any land use development or changes in land
use or zoning, and no other land use development projects depend directly on completion of this project.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
16 AUGUST 2015
Status and Presence of Listed Species and Designated
Critical Habitat in the Project Action Area
Species and Critical Habitat Lists and Listing Status
Lists of species that are listed or proposed for listing under the ESA in the project action area were
obtained from the USFWS and NMFS websites on February 2, 2015 (Appendix B). Based on a review of
habitat associations and conditions, as well as known and expected distribution, three ESA-listed or
proposed species have the potential to be affected by project activities and are addressed in this BA.
These are Chinook salmon, steelhead trout, and bull trout (Table 1). Although none of these species has
been documented at the project site, all three are known to use habitats in the Green River, which receives
stormwater runoff from the project action area.
Table 1. ESA-Listed Species and Designated Critical Habitat Addressed in this BA
Species Status Federal Jurisdiction Critical Habitat
Status
Chinook salmon
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
(Puget Sound ESU)
Threatened NMFS Designated; none in
project action area
Steelhead trout
(Oncorhynchus mykiss)
(Puget Sound DPS)
Threatened NMFS Proposed; none in
project action area
Bull trout
(Salvelinus confluentus) Threatened USFWS Designated; none in
project action area
ESU = Evolutionarily Significant Unit
DPS = Distinct Population Segment
The USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation System identified seven ESA-listed wildlife
species as potentially occurring in areas that might be affected by the project (Appendix B). None of these
species is expected to occur in the project action area, however, for the following reasons:
Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis), and gray wolf (Canis
lupus) are identified as potentially occurring in King County. However, the project action area is
in a lowland setting with relatively high levels of human activity and no nearby roadless areas;
therefore, it does not provide suitable habitat for any of these species. No observations of any of
these species have been documented within 5 miles of the project action area (WDFW 2015).
Oregon spotted frogs (Rana pretiosa) occur in Washington at large wetland complexes in
Klickitat, Skamania, Thurston, Skagit, and Whatcom counties. Oregon spotted frogs depend on
relatively large areas with perennial bodies of fresh water and associated wetlands. No such
habitat is present in the project action area. No observations of this species have been documented
within 10 miles of the project action area (WDFW 2015). The nearest location where critical
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 17
habitat has been proposed for the Oregon spotted frog is more than 40 miles from the project
action area (USFWS 2015).
Marbled murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoratus) require old-growth forest for nesting and
marine habitat for foraging. No breeding or foraging habitat is present in the project action area
and no observations have been documented within 5 miles (WDFW 2015). The nearest location
where critical habitat has been designated for the marbled murrelet is more than 25 miles from the
project action area.
Yellow-billed cuckoos (Coccyzus americanus) require large blocks of riparian forest habitat for
breeding and foraging. No such habitat is present in or near the project action area. Currently, the
species no longer breeds in western Canada and the northwestern continental United States
(Washington, Oregon, and Montana) (79 Federal Register [FR] 59992, October 3, 2014). No
observations of this species have been documented within 10 miles of the project action area
(WDFW 2015). No critical habitat for the yellow-billed cuckoo has been proposed in
Washington.
Streaked horned larks (Eremophila alpestris strigata) are known to occur in Washington only in
portions of southern Puget Sound, along the Washington coast, and at lower Columbia River
islands (78 FR 61452, October 3, 2013). Breeding habitat for streaked horned larks in
Washington consists of grasslands and sparsely vegetated areas at airports, sandy islands, and
coastal spits. The subspecies is largely absent from the Puget Trough during the non-breeding
season; individuals observed in this area outside of the breeding season have been seen using
habitats similar to those used for breeding. No such habitat is present in the project action area,
and the action area is not within the known range of the subspecies. The nearest location where
critical habitat has been designated for the streaked horned lark is more than 90 miles from the
project action area.
Based on the above, the proposed project has no potential to affect the seven ESA-listed wildlife species
identified above (Canada lynx, grizzly bears, gray wolves, Oregon spotted frogs, marbled murrelets,
yellow-billed cuckoos, and streaked horned larks). These species will not be addressed further in this
analysis.
Information from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Natural Heritage database
indicates that no threatened or endangered plants are known to occur within 5 miles of the project site
(WDNR 2014b). The only ESA-listed plant with the potential to occur in King County is golden
paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta), which is known from historical observations in the region. Suitable
habitat for golden paintbrush (open grasslands in glacial outwash prairies) is not present at any locations
where project-related actions will occur. For these reasons, the proposed project has no potential to affect
this species.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
18 AUGUST 2015
Presence of Federally Listed and Proposed Species in the Project
Action Area
This subsection provides information about life history stages of each listed or proposed species that may
occur in the project action area. Information about proposed and designated critical habitat is provided in
the next subsection.
Field investigations in the project action area occurred over multiple site visits during November and
December 2013. The author of this BA conducted a site visit in April 2015. Before conducting fieldwork,
biologists reviewed maps and materials on the soils, hydrology, topography, land use, floodplains,
wetlands, streams, and wildlife habitat in the project area.
Chinook Salmon
Chinook salmon in the Puget Sound ESU are listed as threatened under the ESA (63 FR 11482, March 24,
1999). Primary factors contributing to declines in Chinook salmon in the Puget Sound ESU include
habitat blockages, genetic modification of wild fish through interbreeding with hatchery fish,
urbanization, logging, hydropower development, harvests, and flood control and flood effects (NMFS
1998). The overall abundance of Chinook salmon in the Puget Sound ESU has declined substantially,
with both long- and short-term abundance trending predominantly downward.
Chinook salmon in the Green River are a summer/fall-run stock. Adult summer/fall Chinook salmon
migrate upstream in the Green River from late June to mid-November, spawning from September through
mid-November. Most spawning generally takes place in the mainstem Green River from River Mile 23 to
River Mile 61.2 and in the lower 6 miles of Newaukum and Soos creeks (WDFW 2002).
Most Chinook salmon in the Green River exhibit an ocean-type life history, in which juveniles migrate to
estuaries during the first year of life, generally within 3 to 4 months of emergence (Lister and Genoe
1970). Seaward migration of Green River Chinook fry typically begins in January and peaks in early
March, followed by few fish migrating during late March through April, and then fingerlings migrating
from May through July (Ruggerone and Weitkamp 2004). A small proportion of Green River Chinook
salmon are stream-type fish—that is, juveniles overwinter in the watershed before migrating seaward
(Grette and Salo 1986).
WDFW (2014) identifies the Green River north of the project action area as spawning habitat for Chinook
salmon. Auburn Creek is identified as potential habitat that is not used by Chinook salmon due to an
artificial obstruction (WDFW 2014).
Auburn Creek is an approximately 1,600-foot-long tributary to the Green River that is hydrologically
connected to waterbodies in the project action area via approximately 1,500 feet of seasonally flowing
ditches. The flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek severely limits the potential for Chinook salmon to
venture into the roadside ditches in the project action area. Any fish that enter Auburn Creek could,
however, have access to the ditches in the project action area when water is present. The potential for fish
to remain in the project action area for extended periods is diminished by poor habitat conditions. Habitat
in the roadside ditches in the project action area does not provide any features that would support
spawning or rearing by Chinook salmon. Substrates are embedded and dominated by fine materials and
water quality is poor. Low or irregular flows at most times of year and the absence of water during the
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 19
summer months further reduce the potential for Chinook use. Fish habitat conditions in the project action
area are described further in the discussion of Habitat Conditions for Aquatic Species, below.
Although the likelihood is extremely low, it is not absolutely impossible for Chinook salmon to venture
from the Green River into the project action area. Adult or juvenile Chinook salmon could gain access to
the project action area when the Green River is high enough to allow water to enter the flood gate but not
so high as to close it off. Flows sufficient to create these conditions may occur from October through
May. During that period, adults are present in the Green River in October and November, and
outmigrating ocean-type juveniles may be present from January through May. Any stream-type juveniles
that overwinter in the Green River could be present in the river at any time during that period.
Steelhead
The Puget Sound steelhead DPS is listed as a threatened species under the ESA (72 FR 26722, May 11,
2007). The DPS includes all naturally spawned anadromous winter-run and summer-run O. mykiss
(steelhead) populations, in streams within the river basins of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Puget Sound, and
Hood Canal, Washington. The DPS also includes steelhead from artificial propagation programs in the
Green River.
Natural-origin steelhead that spawn in the Green River system are a winter-run (ocean-maturing)
population2. Adults typically enter fresh water and migrate upstream from November through May;
spawning generally occurs from early March through mid-June (WDFW 2002; Puget Sound Steelhead
Technical Recovery Team 2013). Juvenile steelhead tend to reside in fresh water for 2 years or more
before migrating to marine habitats. Juvenile outmigration typically takes place during April and May.
According to WDFW (2014), winter-run steelhead are present in the Green River and in the lower
600 feet of Auburn Creek. The nearest spawning habitat is in the Green River, approximately 1.5 miles
upstream of the confluence of Auburn Creek with the Green River (WDFW 2014).
As mentioned above, the flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek severely limits the potential for
steelhead to venture into the roadside ditches in the project action area. Any fish that enter Auburn Creek
could, however, have access to the ditches in the project action area when water is present. The potential
for fish to remain in the project action area for extended periods is diminished by poor habitat conditions.
Habitat in the roadside ditches in the project action area does not provide any features that would support
spawning or rearing by steelhead. Substrates are embedded and dominated by fine materials and water
quality is poor. Low or irregular flows at most times of the year and the absence of water during the
summer months further reduce the potential for steelhead use; the absence of water during the summer
months eliminates the possibility of the ditches providing rearing habitat for juveniles that do not
outmigrate during their first year. Fish habitat conditions in the project action area are described further in
the discussion of Habitat Conditions for Aquatic Species, below.
Although the likelihood is extremely low, it is not absolutely impossible for steelhead to venture from the
Green River into the project action area. Adult or juvenile winter-run steelhead could gain access to the
project action area when the Green River is high enough to allow water to enter the flood gate but not so
high as to close it off. Flows sufficient to create these conditions may occur from October through May.
2 A summer-run steelhead population is also present in the Green River. That population originated from the
Skamania Hatchery in the Columbia River Basin and is not included in the ESA-listed Puget Sound DPS.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
20 AUGUST 2015
During that period, adults are present in the Green River from November through May, and juveniles may
be present at any time.
Bull Trout
Bull trout is listed as a threatened species (64 FR 58910, November 1, 1999). Historically, bull trout were
present in the White River (Mongillo 1993), which was once connected to the Green/Duwamish river
system but has since been diverted to the Puyallup River. Today, the lower Green River, Duwamish
River, and adjacent nearshore habitats appear to be used only by foraging anadromous bull trout that
originate in other river systems. Recent telemetry work by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers indicates
that migratory bull trout from Puget Sound watersheds can make extensive and complex annual
migrations between freshwater spawning and rearing habitats, and between marine and freshwater
habitats outside of their natal basins (Goetz et al. 2004).
The Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Plan did not identify the Green/Duwamish river system as a bull trout
core area—that is, the system is not considered to be a biologically functioning unit for bull trout because
it lacks the necessary combination of core habitat (i.e., habitat with all necessary components for
spawning, rearing, foraging, migrating, and overwintering) and a core population (Shared Strategy for
Puget Sound 2007). However, the lower Green River, including the reaches immediately downstream of
the project action area, supports foraging, migration, and overwintering habitat for subadult and adult bull
trout (USFWS 2010; WDFW 2014). Anadromous bull trout migrate from the marine environment into
freshwater habitats in the fall or early winter. Overwintering subadults and adults remain in freshwater
habitats until late winter and spring (Goetz et al. 2004; USFWS 2010). According to WDFW (2014), bull
trout are not expected to be present in Auburn Creek.
The flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek severely limits the potential for bull trout to venture into the
roadside ditches in the project action area. Any fish that enter Auburn Creek could, however, have access
to the ditches in the project action area when water is present. The potential for fish to remain in the
project action area for extended periods is diminished by poor habitat conditions. Bull trout reproduce
only in clean, cold, relatively pristine streams. None of the ditches in the project action area provide that
type of habitat. Substrates are embedded and dominated by fine materials and water quality is poor. Low
or irregular flows at most times of the year and the absence of water during the summer months further
reduce the potential for bull trout use. Fish habitat conditions in the project action area are described
further in the discussion of Habitat Conditions for Aquatic Species, below.
Based on the absence of documented sightings and the lack of suitable habitat, bull trout are not known or
expected to use Auburn Creek or any of the ditches within or adjacent to the project action area. It is not
absolutely impossible for fish to venture from the Green River into the project action area, however.
Adult or subadult bull trout could gain access to the project action area when the Green River is high
enough to allow water to enter the flood gate but not so high as to close it off. Flows sufficient to create
these conditions may occur from October through May. Adult or subadult bull trout may be present in the
Green River throughout that period.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 21
Presence of Federally Designated and Proposed Critical Habitat in
the Project Action Area
No designated or proposed critical habitat for any ESA-listed species is present in the project action area.
For this reason, this BA does not include any analyses of primary constituent elements (PCEs) of critical
habitat for Chinook salmon, steelhead, or bull trout. Additional information about the extent of proposed
and designated critical habitat near the project action area is provided below.
Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat
The final rule designating critical habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon (70 FR 52630, September 2,
2005) included the Green/Duwamish River as critical habitat for Chinook salmon. The Green River is not
within the project action area and neither Auburn Creek nor any of the watercourses in the project action
area was included in the designation.
Steelhead Critical Habitat
Critical habitat for Puget Sound steelhead was proposed for designation in 2013 (78 FR 2726, January 14,
2013). The proposed rule included the Lower Green River Watershed (HUC 1711001303). The Green
River is not within the project action area, however, and neither Auburn Creek nor any of the
watercourses in the project action area was included in the proposed designation.
Bull Trout Critical Habitat
Critical habitat was designated for Coastal Puget Sound bull trout in 2005 and then re-designated in 2010
(75 FR 63898, October 18, 2010). The portion of the Green River into which Auburn Creek empties is
mapped as critical habitat for bull trout. The Green River is not within the project action area, however,
and neither Auburn Creek nor any of the watercourses in the project action area was included in the
designation.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
22 AUGUST 2015
Environmental Setting
The project area lies in the broad, flat historical floodplain of the Green River. Surrounding lands are a
mix of tilled and fallow farm fields, housing developments, a large constructed wetland mitigation site,
and several former drive-in movie theater lots (see Figure 2). A convenience store/gas station is present at
the western end of the project action area.
The project area is quite flat, sloping very gently downward from the east and the west. Also, the river
valley in that area slopes gently from the south to the north. Elevations in the project area range from
approximately 40 to 46 feet above sea level in the ditch bottom to approximately 50 to 51 feet along
S 277th St.
In general, soils in the project area are fine-grained valley floor alluvial soils of the Green River
floodplain, which are seasonally saturated during the winter months (Northwest Hydraulic Consultants
2004). Mapped soils in the study area include Woodinville silt loam and Oridia silt loam; the western end
of the study area is mapped as Briscot silt loam (NRCS 2013). The Woodinville series consists of deep,
poorly drained soils formed in recent alluvium on flood plains and low terraces. Both the Oridia series
and Briscot series consist of very deep, poorly drained soils formed in recent alluvium on floodplains.
Vegetation within the project area consists of both wetland and upland species. Wetland-associated
vegetation includes reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), broad-leaf cattail (Typha latifolia) Sitka
willow (Salix sitchensis), and water parsley (Oenanthe sarmentosa). Upland plant communities within the
project area consist primarily of upland forest and herbaceous vegetation. Vegetation includes red alder
(Alnus rubra), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), reed canarygrass, Himalayan blackberry (Rubus
armeniacus), black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), western swordfern (Polystichum munitum),
ornamental maple (Acer sp.), common velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), English plantain (Plantago
lanceolata), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), and mowed grasses and forbs.
Wildlife species typically present in the project area are adapted to a wide variety of conditions.
Characteristic species include European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris), American crows (Corvus
brachyrhynchos), dark-eyed juncos (Junco hymalis), spotted towhees (Pipilo maculatus), house finches
(Carpodacus mexicanus), house sparrows (Passer domesticus), black-capped chickadees (Poecile
atricapillus), Virginia opossums (Didelphis virginiana), raccoons (Procyon lotor), deer mice
(Peromyscus maniculatus), and Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus).
Land use in the vicinity of the project area has undergone substantial change since the mid-20th century.
The Lower Green River valley was predominantly agricultural until the 1980s, when industrial and
commercial uses (e.g., manufacturing, warehousing, office parks, retail) and higher-density residential
areas became established around Kent and Auburn and along State Route 167. Currently, most of the
valley floor within the cities of Kent, Auburn, and Algona is zoned for high-intensity land uses. The area
south of S 277th St lies within the city limits of Auburn and is zoned for heavy commercial, light
industrial, and residential (20 dwelling units per acre) uses. A portion of that area falls within the
Northeast Auburn special area; allowable future development in that area include multifamily residences,
retail uses, and office uses. The area north of S 277th St is within unincorporated King County and is
zoned for agricultural use. King County has acquired the development rights on that property through the
Farmland Preservation Program.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 23
The project area is located within WRIA 9, the Green-Duwamish River basin. The Green River is north
and east of the project site. Runoff from the project area generally flows northward, ultimately draining
via Auburn Creek to the Green River.
Historically, fish habitat within the Green River basin is presumed to have been excellent for anadromous
salmon and trout, resident trout, and other coldwater native species (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1996).
Over 30 species of fish historically or currently inhabit the Green River, including up to 9 anadromous
salmonid species. Currently, Chinook, coho, chum, pink, and sockeye salmon, steelhead, and coastal
cutthroat trout may be found at various times of the year in portions of the Green River. Native char (bull
trout and/or Dolly Varden) have been occasionally observed entering the lowest reaches of the
Green-Duwamish River. Native resident salmonids include rainbow and cutthroat trout and mountain
whitefish. Other native fish species are also present, including lamprey, minnows, sculpins, and suckers
(Tacoma Public Utilities 2001).
Howard A. Hanson Dam, near River Mile 64, is an impassable barrier to fish migration and prevents
natural production of salmonids in over 100 miles of stream habitat in the upper Green River watershed.
This dam lacks fish passage facilities. The upper basin is managed for timber production. Most of the area
that is accessible to salmon (i.e., the lower portion of the basin) is highly modified by urban, commercial,
industrial, and agricultural uses. Ninety-eight percent of the historical estuary has been lost to
development. Riprap and other structures line the intertidal and marine shorelines, along with levees and
revetments in the middle and lower river. Agriculture and urban development have degraded the
hydrology, water quality, floodplain, channel diversity, and riparian areas of most lowland streams in
WRIA 9. Water temperatures in the Green River have exceeded lethal levels for salmonids (Coffin et al.
2011) largely due to inadequate shade. Today, 97 percent of the Green-Duwamish River estuary has been
filled, 70 percent of the area of the former Green-Duwamish River watershed has been diverted out of the
drainage basin, and about 90 percent of the once-extensive floodplain of the Green-Duwamish River is no
longer inundated on a regular basis (Fuerstenberg et al. 1999).
Based on data from WDFW (2014, 2015), the following salmonids are known or expected to be present in
the Green River near the confluence of Auburn Creek:
Chinook salmon—fall run (spawning)
Steelhead—summer run (rearing) and winter run (occurrence and migration)
Bull trout (presence)
Coho salmon (rearing)
Chum salmon—fall run (occurrence and migration)
Sockeye salmon (occurrence and migration)
Pink salmon (occurrence and migration)
Coastal cutthroat trout (occurrence and migration)
The following subsections provide detailed information about Auburn Creek and the project action area
waterbodies that are tributary to that stream.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
24 AUGUST 2015
Habitat Conditions for Aquatic Species
The only waterbodies in the aquatic portion of the project action area are the ditches that run along the
north and south sides of S 277th St, along with some segments of ditches that extend southward from the
south-side ditch and northward from the north-side ditch. The ditches collect water from S 277th St and
surrounding areas and drain to the Green River via a series of ditches and waterways, including Auburn
Creek (WRIA ID #09-0056, WDFW LLID #1222259 473617; see Figure 1). The roadside ditches along
S 277th St have been maintained for decades and provide minimal habitat functions for fish. Habitat
conditions in the ditches that extend southward are also degraded. Habitat conditions of the ditches that
extend northward are degraded by agricultural activities.
One segment of the ditch along the south side of S 277th St has been classified as a stream for the
purposes of permitting with the City, WDFW, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This segment
extends between D St NE and G St NE, along the northern edge of the former drive-in movie theater. The
defined channel, which occurs in two sections separated by a culvert under a driveway, is approximately
900 linear feet long and 2 to 5 feet wide, with a total surface area of approximately 4,600 square feet. This
ditch segment was classified as a stream instead of a wetland because it lacks native hydric soils. Reed
canarygrass is the predominant cover type in the channel. Drift lines and trash were apparent during site
visits and were used to identify the ordinary high water mark.
The segments of the south-side ditch west of D St NE and east of G St NE have been classified as
wetlands in accordance with the criteria established by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Environmental
Laboratory 1987; Parametrix 2015a). In terms of their potential to provide habitat for ESA-listed fish
species, the segments classified as wetlands do not differ from the segments classified as stream. The
discussions below, therefore, describe the condition of fish habitat in the full length of the ditch along the
south side of S 277th St, regardless of regulatory classification.
Hydrology
The roadside ditches originate near the eastern end of the project action area and border S 277th St
through most of the project action area. Flow direction is generally from east to west and from south to
north, although flows can reverse during rain events due to the flat terrain in the project action area and
partial culvert blockages near 86th Ave S. After crossing under S 277th St, water from the project action
area flows through farmlands in ditches along 86th Ave S for approximately 1,500 feet before joining
Auburn Creek, which flows approximately 1,600 feet before emptying into the Green River at
approximately River Mile 25.4.
Flows in the ditches in the project action area are flashy and seasonal. During the summer months water is
present only during rain events. At other times of the year, some standing water remains in the ditches
between rain events, although the ditches can dry out entirely after about a week.
Under most conditions, connectivity between project area waterbodies and the Green River is limited.
Auburn Creek discharges to the Green River through a 48-foot-long, 66-inch-diameter concrete culvert
fitted with a flood gate (Northwest Hydraulic Consultants 2004). The flood gate is a top-hinged cast iron
structure 5 to 6 feet in diameter. Under most flow conditions, the culvert is perched several feet above the
surface of the Green River, preventing fish from entering Auburn Creek. When flows on the Green River
exceed about 3,000 cubic feet per second, water from the Green River starts to impose backwater effects
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 25
on Auburn Creek (Northwest Hydraulic Consultants 2004). At even higher flows, hydraulic pressure
closes the flood gate and prevents fish from passing into or out of Auburn Creek. Fish are thus able to
enter Auburn Creek when flows in the Green River are greater than 3,000 cubic feet per second, but not
during substantially higher flows.
Several structures provide varying degrees of hydrologic connectivity between the ditches on the north
and south sides of S 277th St. The largest constant connection is a 75-foot-long, 48-inch-diameter
concrete culvert near 86th Ave S in the western portion of the project action area. Under most conditions,
the primary north-south connection in the eastern portion of the project action area is a 90-foot-long, 18-
inch-diameter concrete culvert approximately 800 feet west of L St NE. Two adjacent 3-foot by 6-foot
box culverts near the location of the 18-inch culvert allow drainage during periods of high flows; these
flood conveyance culverts are approximately 2 feet above the ditch bottom and therefore do not convey
water under most conditions. Additional flood conveyance is provided by several 12-inch PVC pipes that
are located 3 to 4 feet above the ditch bottom at various locations along the length of the ditch.
Ditch along the
south side of
S 277th St, looking
east from the
western end of
project action
area; 12-inch PVC
pipe visible at left.
Photo taken in
December 2012,
following
approximately
0.5 inch of rainfall
in the preceding
72 hours and
0.8 inch of rainfall
in the preceding
week.
In-stream Habitat
Substrates in the ditches in the project action area generally consist of silt, sand, and highly embedded
small gravel, with vegetation growing in much of the channel. Vegetation in the ditches is dominated by
reed canarygrass, with Himalayan blackberry, Sitka willow, and water parsley also present. The gradient
of the ditches is nearly flat, sloping gradually from west to east through most of the project action area.
During rain events the flow of water can reverse because of the generally flat terrain, partial culvert
blockages, and a small outlet culvert. Water flow is intermittent, even during the winter months. When
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
26 AUGUST 2015
water is present, it is usually shallow (less than 6 inches deep) and slow moving. No pools or riffles were
observed during site investigations.
Ditch along the
south side of
S 277th St, looking
east along the
border of the
former drive-in
theater. Photo
taken in January
2014, following
approximately
0.8 inch of rainfall
in the preceding
72 hours and
2.2 inches of
rainfall in the
preceding week.
Riparian Habitat
The channel and banks of the ditches in the project action area are dominated by low-growing non-native
species such as reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry. Riparian habitat along the ditches is
degraded in most locations, consisting of narrow vegetated strips dominated by grasses and forbs and a
few woody plants. The location of the ditches and adjoining areas within the maintained right-of-way of
S 277th St limits the potential for development of functioning riparian habitat.
A 10-foot-wide strip of ornamental trees (Arborvitae sp.) has been planted along the fence line south of
the south-side ditch where it runs alongside the former drive-in movie theater. These trees are
approximately 15 feet tall and provide some shade to the ditch. Farther east, several large native and non-
native trees (primarily alder and cottonwood), along with some native shrubs, such as snowberry and
salmonberry, are present along the south bank of the ditch on the parcel immediately east of the drive-in
movie theater. The overstory vegetation in that area provides shade during spring and summer (when the
trees have leaves), as well as the potential for contributing woody debris. Downstream of the project site,
the ditch is an open drainage channel that drains adjacent farmlands. There is limited in-stream habitat or
vegetated cover to provide thermal protection.
Water Quality
No waterbodies within the aquatic portion of the project action area are on the 303(d) list of impaired
waters (Ecology 2014). The closest waterbody on the list is the Green River, which is listed for exceeding
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 27
dissolved oxygen and temperature criteria (Ecology 2014). A total maximum daily load for temperature
for the Green River was approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in August 2011. That
document specifies that the 7-day average of daily maximum temperatures in that reach of the Green
River must not exceed 13°C between September 15 and July 1 (Coffin et al. 2011).
No water quality data are available for the ditches in the project action area nor for Auburn Creek, which
is immediately downstream of the action area. The quality of water in the ditches in the project action
area is generally poor, with high levels of turbidity, trash, and pollutants from the neighboring roadway.
Water in the ditch
along the south
side of S 277th St,
January 2014.
Additional insight into water quality in waterbodies in and near the project action area may be gained by
reviewing data from a nearby system, Mill Creek. Such an approach was used for a hydrodynamic and
water quality model developed for the Green River (Kraft et al. 2004). For that model, water quality and
flow parameters were estimated for several tributaries to the Green River, including Auburn Creek.
Because no water quality sampling data were available from Auburn Creek, the developers of the model
used data from Mill Creek because that was the nearest tributary for which data were available (Kraft et
al. 2004). Notably, the hydrologic input to Mill Creek is not as strongly influenced by input from roadside
and farmland ditches as that of Auburn Creek, suggesting that water quality in Auburn Creek may be
more degraded than that in Mill Creek. Although Auburn Creek is not within the aquatic portion of the
project action area, it does receive water directly from the ditches that drain the project action ar ea. Thus,
water quality conditions in Auburn Creek likely reflect conditions in the project action area.
Mill Creek is on Ecology’s 2012 303(d) list for violation of standards for temperature, dissolved oxygen,
fecal coliform bacteria, and copper (King County 2014a). Water quality conditions in Mill Creek were
historically characterized as poor due to high temperatures, low dissolved oxygen concentrations, high
nutrient concentrations, and high fecal coliform bacteria counts. However, a recent trend analysis showed
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
28 AUGUST 2015
some improvements in water quality during 1979 through 2004 (King County 2014a). Levels of turbidity,
total suspended solids, ortho-phosphorus, total phosphorus, ammonia, nitrate-nitrogen, and fecal coliform
bacteria all decreased during that 25-year period and concentrations of dissolved oxygen increased (King
County 2014a). In its most recent (2008) water quality report for Mill Creek, King County assigned the
stream a water quality index score of 49, indicating a moderate level of concern for water quality (King
County 2014b). In general, scores between 40 and 80 indicate a moderate level of concern and scores
below 40 indicate a high level of concern. Criteria with scores indicating relatively high levels concern
included dissolved oxygen and total phosphorus.
Based on amount of runoff entering the ditches and the lack of shading within and upgradient of the
project action area, it is likely that water temperatures, nutrient levels, and contaminant levels in project
action area waterbodies are substantially higher than in Mill Creek.
Fish Use
Data from WDFW (2014, 2015) indicate that coho salmon and cutthroat trout have been documented in
Auburn Creek throughout its mapped length (i.e., up to a point approximately 1,500 feet downstream
from the project action area), and winter steelhead have been documented in the lowest 600 feet of
Auburn Creek. Fall Chinook salmon are listed as potentially present in Auburn Creek, but excluded by
the presence of an artificial barrier (WDFW 2014). None of these species is expected to use Auburn
Creek for spawning or rearing (WDFW 2014). It is not known whether these fish usage data are based on
information collected before or after the installation of the flood gate on Auburn Creek in the 1990s.
WDFW (2014, 2015) and WDNR (2014a) do not provide any information about fish presence in the
ditches in the project action area because those waterbodies are not mapped as potentially fish-bearing
streams in the state’s databases.
As noted in the discussion under Hydrology above, fish are able to enter Auburn Creek during episodes of
high flows, but not during low flows or extreme high flows. WDFW (2014) has not identified any natural
or manmade fish passage barriers between Auburn Creek and the ditches in the project action area. It is
likely that no formal fish passage assessments have been conducted in this area because the ditches are
not mapped as potentially fish-bearing streams in the state’s databases. It is also worth noting that the
flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek is not included in WDFW’s Fish Passage Barrier and Diversion
Screening database, suggesting that Auburn Creek has not been inventoried since the flood gate was
installed.
Although the ditches in the project action area have not been mapped as streams (fish-bearing or
otherwise) by WDFW (2014) or WDNR (2014a), it is nevertheless possible for fish to venture into these
waterbodies. In November 2013, several adult coho salmon were observed near the eastern end of the
ditch on the south side of S 277th St, approximately 3,800 feet upstream of any streams in which fish are
known or expected to occur (WDFW 2014, 2015). Three dead juvenile were also observed at the same
location on a different occasion, although it is not clear how those fish got there or whether they were
alive when they arrived at that location. Based on these observations, the WDFW regional habitat
biologist has determined that the 4ditch is considered to contain fish habitat (pers. comm., L. Fisher,
WDFW, February 12, 2015).
The flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek severely limits the potential for fish to gain access to the
roadside ditches in the project action area. The potential for fish to remain in the project action area for
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 29
extended periods is diminished by poor habitat conditions. Habitat in the roadside ditches in the project
action area (including a silty and embedded streambed) is unlikely to support spawning or rearing. Low or
irregular flows at most times of the year and the absence of water during the summer months further
reduce the potential for fish use, and there are no pools to provide refuge habitat. In addition, the quality
of water in the ditch is generally poor, with high levels of turbidity, trash, and pollutants from the
neighboring roadway. Lastly, the potential for development of fish habitat is limited by periodic ditch
maintenance work conducted by the City. For these reasons, this ditch is not expected to provide
spawning, rearing, foraging, or refuge habitat for fish. Based on the lack of suitable habitat, the presence
of any ESA-listed fish species in the project action area would be limited to very short periods, if at all.
Environmental Baseline Conditions
Table 2 provides an overview of environmental baseline conditions in the project action area, based on
the USFWS and NMFS Matrices of Pathways and Indicators. Following the table is a brief discussion of
physical barriers, which is the only indicator that will be substantially modified (restored) as a result of
the project. Descriptions of baseline conditions for water quality, habitat elements, channel conditions,
hydrology, and riparian habitat are provided above.
All of the ditches in the project action area have culverts that allow upstream and/or downstream fish
passage, to varying degrees, when water is present in the ditches. Access between the project action area
and high-quality fish habitat in the Green River is impeded by the presence of a flood gate at the mouth of
Auburn Creek, approximately 3,100 feet downstream of S 277th St. The flood gate prevents upstream
and/or downstream fish passage at a range of flows; therefore, habitat access in the project action area is
considered to be not properly functioning, based on the presence of physical barriers.
As described in the discussion under Culverts and Fish Passage, above, the project includes the
installation of a new fish-passable culvert under S 277th St. This project will thus restore physical barrier
conditions within the project action area, although overall fish access to the action area will not be
improved. The flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek will continue to limit the potential for fish to gain
access to Auburn Creek, and access from Auburn Creek to the roadside ditches in the action area will
continue to be limited by irregular flows in the creek and the ditches. This project will not affect fish
passage conditions in any other watercourses in the project action area. See the discussion of direct effects
related to Aquatic Connectivity, below, for further details.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
30 AUGUST 2015
Table 2. Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline Conditions and Effects of the
Proposed Project on Relevant Indicators in Project Area Waterbodies
Pathways
Indicators Environmental Baseline Effects of Proposed Project
Water Quality
Temperature AR/FAR Maintain
Sediment/Turbidity AR/FAR Maintain
Chemical Contamination/Nutrients NPF/FUR Maintain
Habitat Access
Physical Barriers NPF/FUR Restore
Habitat Elements
Substrate/Substrate Embeddedness NPF/FUR Maintain
Large Woody Debris NPF/FUR Maintain
Pool Frequency and Quality NPF/FUR Maintain
Large Pools1 FUR Maintain
Off-Channel Habitat NPF/FUR Maintain
Refugia NPF/FUR Maintain
Channel Conditions and Dynamics
(Wetted1) Width/Depth Ratio AR/FAR Maintain
Streambank Condition AR/FAR Maintain
Floodplain Connectivity AR/FAR Maintain
Flow/Hydrology
Change in Peak/Base Flows AR/FAR Maintain
Increase in Drainage Network AR/FAR Maintain
Watershed Conditions
Road Density and Location NPF/FUR Maintain
Disturbance History (Regime1) NPF/FUR Maintain
Riparian Reserves/Conservation Areas NPF/FUR Restore
AR = At Risk
FAR = Functioning at Risk
NPF = Not Properly Functioning
FUR = Functioning at Unacceptable Risk
1 Language specific to bull trout
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 31
Effects of the Action
The following subsections describe potential direct and indirect effects on ESA-listed species and critical
habitat. Effects of interrelated and interdependent activities are also addressed. Direct effects include all
immediate impacts from project-related actions (e.g., construction-related impacts such as noise
disturbance or loss of habitat); disturbances directly related to project elements that occur very close to
the time of the action itself (e.g., sedimentation); and impacts stemming from actions or activities that are
interrelated or interdependent to the proposed action. Indirect effects include effects that are reasonably
certain to occur as a result of the proposed action, but later in time (generally after the construction
period). Indirect impacts may result from the operation of the project or future activities related to the
project (e.g., future impacts from trail use, induced land use change or growth, and increased traffic).
Direct Effects
Potential direct effects of this project include the following:
Loss of approximately 900 linear feet of existing roadside ditch that is considered by WDFW to
contain fish habitat and that has been classified as a stream by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Construction of 900 linear feet of fish-habitable stream channel south of S 277th St, as mitigation
Loss of approximately 11,500 square feet of existing ditch wetlands that may be accessible to fish
Temporary increases in erosion and sedimentation from disturbed soil areas
Elevated risk of contaminant spills during construction
Increased input of contaminants from PGIS (diminished by treatment of stormwater runoff),
according to the HI-RUN model
Modifications to peak and base flows due to changes in impervious surface area (minimized by
routing stormwater runoff to a detention pond)
Impacts to wetlands, wetland buffers, and riparian areas
Improved connectivity between the new stream channel south of S 277th St and watercourses
north of S 277th St
The following subsections describe these potential effects in greater detail.
Loss of Aquatic Habitat
Roadway widening will fill the existing ditch along the south side of S 277th St, reducing the amount of
aquatic habitat in the project action area. The ditch is hydrologically connected to Auburn Creek.
Although the perched culvert and flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek likely present at least a partial
barrier to fish passage, Auburn Creek is mapped by WDFW and WDNR as a fish-bearing stream, and
coho salmon have been observed in the project action area. It is thus possible that ESA-listed fish could
venture into the existing ditch under existing conditions; habitat in the ditch will be eliminated by road
widening.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
32 AUGUST 2015
The existing ditch along the south side of S 277th St is unlikely to provide spawning, rearing, foraging, or
refuge habitat for fish. Substrates are embedded and dominated by fine materials. Low or irregular flows
at most times of the year and the absence of water during the summer months further reduce the potential
for fish use, and there are no pools to provide refuge habitat. In addition, the quality of water in the ditch
is generally poor, with high levels of turbidity, trash, and pollutants from the neighboring roadway.
Lastly, the potential for development of fish habitat is limited by periodic ditch maintenance work
conducted by the City.
As discussed under Project Location and Description, above, the project will involve the construction of
approximately 900 linear feet of fish-habitable mitigation stream channel with a riparian buffer that
includes existing and newly planted native trees and shrubs, as well as the installation of a fish-passable
culvert beneath S 277th St. The culvert will connect the new stream channel south of S 277th St to
existing ditches north of S 277th St, which drain to Auburn Creek. Fish habitat in the mitigation stream
will be superior to the lost habitat in the existing south-side ditch for the following reasons:
Large woody debris, which is absent from the existing ditch, will be placed in the mitigation
stream.
Runoff from S 277th St will not flow directly into the new stream channel but will instead first
pass through the stormwater wetland and detention pond, resulting in improved water quality and
flow conditions compared to the existing ditch.
The mitigation stream will include meanders.
The property on which the mitigation stream is located will not be subject to regular disturbance
by road maintenance activities, allowing the development of streambank vegetation and riparian
habitat dominated by native shrubs and trees.
The mitigation stream will be connected to downstream watercourses by a fish-passable culvert
under S 277th St.
Construction-related Sedimentation, Turbidity, and Pollutants
Based on the potential for fish presence as described above, construction activities do not have the
potential to affect water quality in any streams where ESA-listed fish have been documented. The area
potentially affected by sedimentation, turbidity, or pollutant delivery from project construction does not
extend into Auburn Creek or any other streams that have been mapped as fish-bearing. No barriers have
been identified between Auburn Creek and the ditches in the action area, however. Therefore, it not
absolutely impossible that ESA-listed fish could venture into the project action area. Based on the lack of
suitable spawning, rearing, or refuge habitat, the presence of any ESA-listed fish species in the project
action area would be limited to short periods.
Project activities in or adjacent to waterbodies, including culvert replacement and stream construction,
have the potential to introduce sediment into these aquatic resources. As noted in the definition of the
project action area, above, construction-related sedimentation and turbidity could extend downstream to
points 100 feet from the outlets of the culverts that drain the existing ditch along the south side of S 277th
St. Any fish present in those areas would be exposed to an elevated risk of adverse effects, such as gill
abrasion, interference with vision, and decreased availability of food sources. However, BMPs will be
implemented during project construction to reduce the potential for the introduction of sediment into
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 33
waterbodies (including wetlands) in the project action area. BMPs for this project are identified under
Impact Avoidance and Minimization Measures, above.
Specifically, potential effects will be substantially minimized or eliminated because work below the
ordinary high water mark will be conducted in compliance with the conditions specified in the HPA
issued by WDFW for this project. Adherence to HPA conditions aimed at protecting fish and fish habitat
is expected to reduce the potential for construction-related adverse effects to negligible levels. It is
anticipated that this potential will be eliminated entirely because the HPA will likely restrict ground-
disturbing work below the ordinary high water mark to the summer months, when the ditches are
typically dry and water levels in the Green River are too low to allow fish to gain access to Auburn Creek
and from there to the project action area.
The effectiveness of these measures will be enhanced by implementing BMPs that reduce the risk of
sediment delivery (e.g., silt fences, erosion control devices). Although ESA-listed fish species could
occasionally occur in waterbodies within or downstream of the project action area, the timing of
construction activities and the implementation of BMPs are expected to eliminate the potential for any
adverse effects of construction-related sedimentation or turbidity on these species.
Project activities in or adjacent to waterbodies also have the potential to introduce pollutants through
spills of fuel, hydraulic fluid, or other substances. As discussed above, work below the ordinary high
water mark will be conducted in compliance with the conditions specified in the HPA issued by WDFW
for this project. In addition, all work will be conducted in compliance with the SPCC plan for the project
and BMPs will be implemented to prevent construction-related pollutants from entering streams. Based
on these factors, the potential for construction activities to introduce pollutants into waters that support
ESA-listed fish is extremely low.
Stormwater
Increases in the amount of impervious surface (including PGIS) in the project action area can increase
stormwater runoff rates, volumes, and pollutant loads. These, in turn, can lead to higher peak flows and
degraded water quality in fish-bearing streams. The proposed road widening will increase the amount of
impervious surface in the TDA by 2.7 acres.
All new PGIS will receive enhanced water quality treatment in a stormwater wetland. Treated stormwater
will be discharged to the newly constructed mitigation stream at a location more than 900 feet upstream
of the new culvert under S 277th St. At this time, the stormwater wetland and stream are proposed to
serve only this project. From the new culvert, treated stormwater will flow through the ditch on the north
side of S 277th St, joining the 86th Ave S ditch approximately 1,500 feet upstream of any known fish-
bearing waters (see discussions above of the potential for fish presence in the project action area,
however). Numerous ditch lines intersect with this conveyance system. During a storm event, water
conveyed from the project site will undergo substantial mixing with water in these other ditches.
The quality of stormwater runoff entering waterbodies in the project action area will be largely unchanged
following project construction. Currently, stormwater runoff in the project action area is neither detained
nor treated. The WSDOT HI-RUN model was used to assess the potential for project-related changes in
PGIS to affect water quality in waterbodies where ESA-listed fish may be present. Modeling results
suggest the possibility that pollutant loadings in receiving waters may be greater than under existing
conditions. However, the dilution modeling indicates that any exceedance of sublethal thresholds for
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
34 AUGUST 2015
dissolved copper and dissolved zinc will be diluted to levels below the sublethal thresholds within several
feet of the proposed outfalls (see the description of the project action area for distances established from
the proposed outfalls). The dilution zones for both dissolved copper and dissolved zinc will be about the
same as under existing conditions (see Appendix A, Stormwater).
Notably, completion of the S 277th St project will also reduce the volume of traffic traveling on untreated
PGIS. Under current conditions, runoff from both the eastbound and westbound traffic lanes through the
project action area does not receive water quality treatment. Upon project completion, only runoff from
the westbound traffic lanes will remain untreated. Assuming the volumes of westbound and eastbound
traffic through the project action area are roughly equal, this means the volume of traffic traveling on
untreated PGIS will be reduced by approximately one-half. This reduction, which is not taken into
account by the HI-RUN model, is expected to reduce the potential for increased pollutant loading in
receiving waters.
To minimize the potential impacts of increased impervious surface, a stormwater detention pond will be
constructed as part of the project. The pond will be designed so that discharge durations under post-
construction conditions match those under pre-developed conditions (i.e., native vegetation and soils that
existed before the influence of Euro-American settlement) for storm events ranging from 50 percent of a
2-year event to a full 50-year event.
Based on the implementation of these BMPs, peak flows are not expected to increase in any of the
waterbodies in the project action area as a result of the project. It is possible that peak flows within and
immediately downstream of the action area will decrease following the completion of project
construction. Currently, surface water runoff in the project action area is not detained before it is
discharged to receiving waterbodies. The proposed stormwater detention pond and stormwater wetland
will attenuate storm flows, resulting in decreased peak flows compared to current conditions.
Riparian and Wetland Impacts
Widening S 277th St and constructing the new non-motorized trail will result in the permanent loss of
approximately 1 acre of vegetated area along the existing roadside ditches. Affected vegetation consists
primarily of grasses and shrubs in the road right-of-way. A portion of the affected area is a 10-foot-wide
strip of ornamental trees (Arborvitae) along the fence line south of the south-side ditch where it runs
alongside the former drive-in movie theater. In addition, several large native and non-native trees and
shrubs will be removed from the south bank of the existing ditch on the parcel immediately east of the
drive-in movie theater property.
Impacts to riparian habitat adjacent to the ditches in the project action area are not expected to cause
substantial adverse effects on fish habitat quality for several reasons. First, most of the area subject to
disturbance from construction activities is currently in a degraded condition and dominated by invasive
species that do not provide essential riparian functions. In addition, riparian habitat in the project action
area does not serve as a source of large woody debris for fish-bearing streams downstream. This is
because debris in the existing ditch on the south side of S 277th St is typically removed during ditch
maintenance activities or is too large to pass through the culverts that connect to the ditch system on the
north side of S 277th St. Lastly, the potential riparian function of the affected area will rendered moot by
the filling of the adjacent ditch. In other words, vegetation disturbance along the south side of S 277th St
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 35
will not affect riparian habitat function because the potentially affected watercourse will no longer exist at
that location.
The area that will become the riparian zone of the newly constructed mitigation stream currently includes
native trees and shrubs, some of which will be retained during stream construction. Additional native
trees and shrubs will be planted in that buffer, which will be approximately 105 feet wide. The new
riparian buffer will moderate water temperatures, stabilize stream banks and provide organic material
input and large woody debris for the mitigation stream. In addition, the area will not be subject to regular
disturbance by road maintenance activities, allowing the long-term development of streambank vegetation
and riparian habitat dominated by native shrubs and trees. The riparian buffer on the mitigation stream
will thus be substantially wider and less disturbed than the existing buffer along the ditches in the project
action area. As such, the riparian buffer on the mitigation stream will likely contribute to improved
riparian functions and stream habitat conditions compared to current conditions. All areas temporarily
affected by clearing for construction will be revegetated with native plants after the completion of final
grading activities.
Widening of S 277th St and construction of the proposed trail will affect approximately 11,500 square
feet of existing ditches that have been classified as wetlands (Parametrix 2015a). Portions of the
associated wetland buffers will also be affected. These buffers are generally low-functioning and are
composed primarily of blackberry, grasses, and forbs. Very limited temporary impacts to these wetlands
and their buffers are anticipated. As described under Project Location and Description, above, mitigation
for wetland impacts will likely be accomplished through advance wetland mitigation construction from
the City of Kent’s original 272nd/277nd North Corridor Project. Use of the already established mitigation
site will increase the likelihood of mitigation success with minimal additional ground-disturbing activity,
and will have the added advantage of having functioning mitigation in place before the impacts occur.
The proposed location of the mitigation stream includes some areas within the City-regulated buffer of a
wetland on private land east of the G St NE right-of-way (see Figure 2). Ground-disturbing activities for
stream construction have the potential to affect that buffer. However, stream construction will be
conducted in compliance with the critical areas provisions of the Auburn City Code and, as such, will not
result in any net loss of wetland function and value. Notably, the mitigation stream was purposely located
downstream of the existing wetlands to avoid the potential for intercepting water sources to the existing
wetlands. In addition, the alignment of the proposed stream was designed to keep all excavation for
stream construction at least 15 feet (and in most cases, substantially more) away from the edge of the
existing wetland.
Aquatic Connectivity
Under existing conditions, fish may gain access to the ditch system on the south side of S 277th St (when
water is present) via two culverts: a 48-inch-diameter concrete culvert in the western portion of the
project action area and an 18-inch concrete culvert in the eastern portion. Under high flow conditions,
several flood conveyance culverts may also provide connectivity between the north and south sides of
S 277th St.
After project construction is complete, the primary hydrologic connection between the north and south
sides of S 277th St will be the new fish-passable culvert that will replace the existing 18-inch concrete
culvert and the twin box flood conveyance culverts near the eastern end of the project action area. The
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
36 AUGUST 2015
ditch that drains through the 48-inch culvert near the western end will be replaced with a smaller ditch,
but it will to continue flow through the 48-inch culvert and be accessible to fish. Additional potential fish
habitat south of S 277th St will be available in the new stream channel constructed as mitigation for the
loss of the existing ditch habitat. Any fish that gain access to Auburn Creek and then venture into the
ditch system north of S 277th St will have access to the new stream channel via the new fish-passable
culvert.
Based on the replacement of existing culverts with a new culvert specifically designed to accommodate
fish passage, this project is expected to improve access to potential fish habitat (i.e., the new stream
channel) in the project action area. Although the accessibility of newly created habitat within the project
action area will be improved, the overall ability of fish to gain access to the project action area will not
change. That is, the perched culvert and flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek will continue to limit
the ability of fish to enter Auburn Creek, and access from Auburn Creek to the roadside ditches in the
project action area will continue to be limited by irregular flows in the creek and the ditches.
Indirect Effects
Indirect effects of a transportation project can include changes in land use induced by the proposed action,
provided such changes are reasonably certain to result from the proposed action. Completion of this
project will facilitate the implementation of the proposed Auburn Gateway, a multi-phase private
development on approximately 60 acres adjoining S 277th St to the south. Notably, the potential impacts
of the Auburn Gateway development proposal have already been analyzed and disclosed in an
environmental impact statement. The potential water quality impacts associated with stormwater runoff
from the Auburn Gateway are being evaluated here to comply with ESA Section 7 analysis requirements.
As required by the April 14, 2011 memorandum of agreement, as agreed to by WSDOT, FHWA, NMFS,
and USFWS, the Indirect Effects Stormwater Runoff Analytical Method was used to assess development-
related indirect effects that can be directly associated with this project. This approach provides a coarse-
scale analysis of potential changes in stormwater pollutant loads from anticipated changes in land use. It
is a simple “wash-off” model that relies upon estimated unit-area annual pollutant loads
(pounds/acre/year) for individual land cover types to estimate annual pollutant yields (pounds/year) under
existing conditions and for projected conditions following completion of the project (Hererra 2011).
The analysis was limited to the portion of the project action area where the rate of development is
expected to be influenced by the proposed Auburn Gateway. The proposed Auburn Gateway project site
was divided into four land types. The estimated annual loads of total suspended solids, copper, and zinc
were calculated based on estimates of the annual runoff of these pollutants from each acre of each land
type (Table 3).
Broadly, the analysis indicates that loadings of total suspended solids, copper, and zinc in the project
action area are likely to increase upon completion of the Auburn Gateway. See the discussion of
Stormwater, under Direct Effects, for more information about the overall effects of sediments, metals, and
other stormwater constituents on fish. Although changes in loading may contribute to sublethal effects on
listed aquatic species via ingestion or food chain interactions, it may be difficult to link these changes to
adverse effects to listed aquatic species (Hererra 2011). Thus, while the results of this analysis suggest the
possibility of a degradation of baseline water quality conditions in the project action area, these results do
not describe potential direct effects on fish.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 37
It must also be understood that these values represent a gross estimate of potential changes under a worst-
case scenario. The pollutant loading rates for developed areas are based on the assumption that BMPs will
not be installed and that new PGIS will not receive appropriate water quality treatment. The Auburn City
Code requires the implementation of such measures for development projects such as the proposed
Auburn Gateway. The analysis also assumes that all developed portions of the Auburn Gateway project
area will generate pollutant loadings at the rates predicted for high-density development, whereas some
portions of the project area are likely to be maintained in a relatively undeveloped status. Neither of these
assumptions is accurate; therefore, the actual magnitude of increases in pollutant loading will most likely
be much lower than what is suggested by the values in Table 3.
Table 3. Existing and Projected Annual Pollutant Loading Estimates for Areas Where the
S 277th St Project May Influence Development Rates
Land Cover Type1 Area
(acres)
Total Suspended
Solids (pounds/year)
Total Copper
(pounds/year)
Total Zinc
(pounds/year)
Existing Conditions
Forest 11.4 476 0.1 0.3
Agricultural 15.2 646 0.3 0.6
Low-/Medium-density Development 45.2 1,972 0.5 1.6
High-density Development 8.3 660 0.2 1.4
Existing Total 80.1 3,753 1.1 3.9
Projected Conditions
Forest 11.4 476 0.1 0.3
Agricultural 0.0 0 0.0 0.0
Low-/Medium-density Development 4.0 174 0.0 0.1
High-density Development 64.7 5,134 1.6 11.1
Projected Total 80.1 5,784 1.7 11.5
Estimated Change in Pollutant Loading + 2,031 + 0.6 + 7.6
1 These are generalized land use types that were used in the development of the indirect effects stormwater runoff analytical
method; the land cover type names are not intended to describe the current or projected conditions of the analysis area. For
example, areas classified as “Forest” for this analysis include not only areas with tree cover but also wetlands and other ar eas
that are likely to generate relatively low pollutant loadings, compared to over land cover types.
No other anticipated development projects are contingent or dependent on the S 277th St Corridor
Capacity and Non-Motorized Trail Improvements Project. Other nearby properties, such as those
immediately north of S 277th St, are in King County farmland preservation program and are therefore not
available for development. The remainder of this subsection provides additional information about the
potential for indirect effects resulting from possible future development projects.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
38 AUGUST 2015
The improvements proposed as part of this project are identified in the City of Auburn’s Comprehensive
Transportation Plan. According to that document, the current level of service (LOS) for eastbound traffic
on S 277th St in the project area is LOS E, indicating significant delays and average travel speeds that are
less than 33 percent of the free-flow speed. The current westbound traffic is rated LOS B, indicating
reasonably unimpeded operations. The eastbound traffic through the project area, following completion of
the improvements proposed as part of this project, is expected to be LOS D (bordering on the range in
which small increases in flow may cause substantial increase in delay), indicating a partial improvement
over current conditions.
Roadway widening is expected to result in an improvement in eastbound traffic levels through the project
area. Projects that improve traffic levels have the potential to facilitate planned development or
redevelopment. This project is not expected to result in any indirect effects related to future development
(other than the Auburn Gateway) for the following reasons:
No building moratoria are in place that are contingent on the proposed road improvements.
No land use changes are tied by permit condition to the proposed project.
Except for the Auburn Gateway, no other actions or land use changes have been identified that
would be caused by or result from the project and that are reasonably certain to occur.
No current development plans include scenarios for the planning area where land use differs
based on “build” versus “no-build” outcomes related to the proposed project. If the City does not
complete this project, the developer of the Auburn Gateway site would have to do so as part of a
concurrency requirement.
Except for the Auburn Gateway, no other land use changes are likely to occur at a different rate
as a result of this project.
In addition, any future development projects in the project action area and surrounding areas will be
subject to independent environmental review and permitting by various local, state, and federal agencies,
further limiting the potential for adverse effects on ESA-listed species. New developments in adjoining
areas will be subject to review under local critical areas ordinances. This will trigger the implementation
of mitigation measures and practices aimed at avoiding or minimizing the potential for adverse effects on
wetlands, aquatic species and habitat, and other natural resources such as fish and wildlife habitat
conservation areas. In addition, the City of Auburn’s Comprehensive Plan includes several commitments
to the maintenance and enhancement of surface water, groundwater, and shoreline resources, including
the following:
The City will regulate any new stormwater discharges to creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and
other waterbodies with the goal of no degradation of the water quality or habitat of the receiving
waters, and, where feasible, seek opportunities to enhance the water quality and habitat of
receiving waters (Policy EN-4).
The City’s design standards shall ensure that the post-development peak stormwater runoff rates
do not exceed the pre-development rates (Policy EN-10).
The City shall require the use of BMPs to enhance and protect water quality as dictated by the
City’s Design and Construction Standards and Ecology’s Stormwater Management Manual for
Western Washington. In all new development, approved water quality treatment measures that are
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 39
applicable and represent the best available science or technology shall be required prior to
discharging stormwater into the City’s storm drainage system or into environmentally sensitive
areas (e.g., wetlands, rivers, and groundwater) (Policy EN-14).
Compliance with these requirements will ensure that any future development projects in the project action
area—whether facilitated by completion of this project or not—will be unlikely to result in adverse
impacts on water quality in the Green River or other waterbodies that support ESA-listed fish. Based on
the above, it is possible but unlikely that completion of this project may contribute to indirect effects
related to increased pollutant loadings in runoff from the proposed Auburn Gateway. The likelihood of
any such effects will be minimized if not entirely avoided through the implementation of BMPs aimed at
ensuring no net loss of ecosystem functions and values, which will be consistent with Auburn City Code
16.10.010.
Effects from Interrelated and Interdependent Actions
An interrelated activity is an action that is part of a larger action and depends on the larger action for its
justification. Interdependent actions are those that have no independent utility apart from the action under
consideration. Activities associated with mitigation for impacts on streams, wetlands, and wetland buffers
can be considered interrelated and interdependent actions for this project. The sites selected for
compensatory mitigation for such impacts are within the project action area, immediately south of the
project construction footprint. The potential effects of stream construction and wetland mitigation site
development are addressed in the discussion of direct effects, above. Based on the findings of that
analysis, interrelated and interdependent actions associated with this project are not expected to have any
effects on ESA-listed species or critical habitat.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
40 AUGUST 2015
Conclusions
Table 4 summarizes the effect determinations for ESA-listed species and designated critical habitat. The
rationales for the recommended effect determination for each species and its designated critical habitat, as
appropriate, are provided after the table.
Table 4. Effects Determinations for Species and Designated Critical Habitat
Species Status Federal
Jurisdiction Effect Determination Critical Habitat Effect
Determination
Chinook salmon
(Puget Sound ESU) Threatened NMFS Not Likely to Adversely
Affect No Effect
Steelhead trout
(Puget Sound DPS) Threatened NMFS Not Likely to Adversely
Affect N/A1
Bull trout Threatened USFWS Not Likely to Adversely
Affect No Effect
1 Critical habitat for Puget Sound steelhead has been proposed but not designated. No proposed steelhead critical habitat occurs in the project
action area; if critical habitat is designated before project completion, the project will have no effect on designated critical habitat for Puget Sound
steelhead.
Chinook Salmon
This project may affect Puget Sound Chinook salmon for the following reasons:
Adult and juvenile Chinook salmon could be present in ditches in the project action area. The
area potentially affected by project construction does not extend into Auburn Creek or any other
streams that have been mapped as fish-bearing. Because no barriers have been identified between
Auburn Creek and the ditches in the project action area, however, it is not impossible that
Chinook salmon could venture into the action area.
Construction activities have the potential to introduce and transport excess sediment and
pollutants into waterbodies in the project action area.
Roadway widening and trail construction will fill ditches along the south side of S 277th St. The
resultant reduction in the amount of aquatic habitat in the project action area will be offset by the
construction of a new stream channel south of S 277th St.
Roadway widening will result in increased PGIS in the project action area, potentially increasing
pollutant loading and affecting peak flows and base flows in downstream waterbodies.
Construction activities will result in impacts to riparian areas, wetlands, and wetland buffers,
potentially affecting habitat conditions in waterbodies where Chinook salmon could be present.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 41
However, this project is not likely to adversely affect Chinook salmon for the following reasons:
Chinook salmon are neither known nor expected to be present in Auburn Creek (the nearest
watercourse to the project action area that has been mapped as potentially fish-bearing).
The ditches in the project action area do not provide spawning habitat for Chinook salmon;
therefore, there is no potential for impacts to spawning adults, eggs, or newly hatched juveniles.
The potential for water and substrates in the ditches in the project action area to provide suitable
rearing, foraging, or refuge habitat for Chinook salmon under current conditions is extremely low,
based on limited access, low water quality, intermittent flows, high levels of fine substrates, and
periodic disturbance due to ditch maintenance work.
Chinook salmon could potentially have access to the project action area only on rare occasions
when the Green River is high enough to allow water to enter the flood gate at the mouth of
Auburn Creek but not so high as to close it off.
The potential for Chinook salmon to remain in the project action area for extended periods is
restricted by poor habitat conditions.
Existing low-quality habitat in roadside ditches will be replaced with a newly constructed
mitigation stream with features designed to enhance fish habitat.
Installation of a fish-passable culvert at the downstream end of the mitigation stream may
encourage any Chinook salmon that venture into the project action area to use higher-quality
habitat in that stream rather than low-quality habitat in roadside ditches.
All work below the ordinary high water mark of the ditches in the project action area will be
conducted in accordance with the HPA issued by WDFW and with the Clean Water Act Section
404 permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Such permits typically include
provisions designed to avoid or minimize the risk of adverse effects on fish during sensitive life
history stages. Provisions will likely include restrictions on construction periods below the
ordinary high water mark and/or other measures to avoid or minimize the potential for
construction activities to deliver sediment or pollutants to streams.
It is expected that the HPA will restrict construction activities below the ordinary high water
mark of waterbodies in the project action area to the summer months, when the ditches are
typically dry and water levels in the Green River are too low to allow fish to gain access to the
project action area. Therefore, any impacts to this species from construction work below the
ordinary high water mark can be discounted.
Appropriate BMPs will be employed during construction to minimize or eliminate the discharge
of excess sediment or pollutants to ditches where water is present. Therefore, the potential for
direct impacts to Chinook salmon from project construction near waterbodies is considered
insignificant and discountable.
Disturbed and exposed ground will be planted and seeded with native vegetation to secure soils
and provide long-term stability.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
42 AUGUST 2015
Stormwater runoff from all new PGIS in the project action area will receive enhanced water
quality treatment in a stormwater wetland, as well as flow control treatment in a detention pond,
minimizing the risk of degradation of water discharged to fish-bearing streams.
The proposed stormwater detention pond and wetland will attenuate storm flows, resulting in
decreased peak flows compared to existing conditions.
Modeling results suggest any exceedance of sublethal thresholds for dissolved copper and
dissolved zinc will be diluted to levels below the sublethal thresholds within several feet of the
proposed outfall.
The potential for exposure of Chinook salmon to elevated levels of pollutants from new PGIS
will be minimal, given the small extent of the area potentially affected by temporary increases in
pollutant concentrations, the low likelihood of Chinook salmon using habitats in the project
action area, and the treatment of runoff from road surfaces. Therefore, any impacts to this species
due to elevated pollutant levels in stormwater runoff can be discounted.
Stream and riparian habitat, as well as wetlands and wetland buffers, will be restored or enhanced
to minimize and compensate for unavoidable impacts and adverse effects on fish.
Based on the low quality of existing riparian habitat and proposed mitigation for riparian habitat
removal, downstream effects on water quality (e.g., water temperature) due to the removal of
shade-producing vegetation along ditches in the project action area will be insignificant.
The project is not expected to result in induced growth that will adversely affect habitat for
Chinook salmon.
Mitigation activities, including stream channel creation, riparian area planting, and the removal of
fish passage barriers, will lead to improvements in fish habitat conditions in the waterbodies in
the project action area.
Critical Habitat
The areas potentially affected by project construction and stormwater discharge do not overlap any areas
of designated critical habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon. The nearest designated critical habitat is in
the Green River, approximately 3,100 feet downstream of the project action area. Therefore, the project
will have no effect on designated critical habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon.
Steelhead
This project may affect Puget Sound steelhead for the following reasons:
Adult and juvenile steelhead could be present in ditches in the project action area. The area
potentially affected by project construction does not extend into Auburn Creek or any other
streams that have been mapped as fish-bearing. Because no barriers have been identified between
Auburn Creek and the ditches in the project action area, however, it is not impossible that
steelhead could venture into the action area.
Construction activities have the potential to introduce and transport excess sediment and
pollutants into waterbodies in the project action area.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 43
Roadway widening and trail construction will fill ditches along the south side of S 277th St. The
resultant reduction in the amount of aquatic habitat in the project action area will be offset by the
construction of a new stream channel south of S 277th St.
Roadway widening will result in increased PGIS in the project action area, potentially increasing
pollutant loading and affecting peak flows and base flows in downstream waterbodies.
Construction activities will result in impacts to riparian areas, wetlands, and wetland buffers,
potentially affecting habitat conditions in waterbodies where steelhead could be present.
However, this project is not likely to adversely affect steelhead for the following reasons:
The ditches in the project action area do not provide spawning habitat for steelhead; therefore,
there is no potential for impacts to spawning adults, eggs, or newly hatched juveniles.
The potential for water and substrates in the ditches in the project action area to provide suitable
rearing, foraging, or refuge habitat for steelhead under current conditions is extremely low, based
on limited access, low water quality, intermittent flows, high levels of fine substrates, and
periodic disturbance due to ditch maintenance work.
Steelhead could potentially have access to the project action area only on rare occasions when the
Green River is high enough to allow water to enter the flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek
but not so high as to close it off.
The potential for steelhead to remain in the project action area for extended periods is restricted
by poor habitat conditions.
Existing low-quality habitat in roadside ditches will be replaced with a newly constructed
mitigation stream with features designed to enhance fish habitat.
Installation of a fish-passable culvert at the downstream end of the mitigation stream may
encourage any steelhead that venture into the project action area to use higher-quality habitat in
that stream rather than low-quality habitat in roadside ditches.
All work below the ordinary high water mark of the ditches in the project action area will be
conducted in accordance with the HPA issued by WDFW and with the Clean Water Act Section
404 permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Such permits typically include
provisions designed to avoid or minimize the risk of adverse effects on fish during sensitive life
history stages. Provisions will likely include restrictions on construction periods below the
ordinary high water mark and/or other measures to avoid or minimize the potential for
construction activities to deliver sediment or pollutants to streams.
It is expected that the HPA will restrict construction activities below the ordinary high water
mark of waterbodies in the project action area to the summer months, when the ditches are
typically dry and water levels in the Green River are too low to allow fish to gain access to the
project action area. Therefore, any impacts to this species from construction work below the
ordinary high water mark can be discounted.
Appropriate BMPs will be employed during construction to minimize or eliminate the discharge
of excess sediment or pollutants to ditches where water is present. Therefore, the potential for
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
44 AUGUST 2015
direct impacts to steelhead from project construction near waterbodies is considered insignificant
and discountable.
Disturbed and exposed ground will be planted and seeded with native vegetation to secure soils
and provide long-term stability.
Stormwater runoff from all new PGIS in the project action area will receive enhanced water
quality treatment in a stormwater wetland, as well as flow control treatment in a detention pond,
minimizing the risk of degradation of water discharged to fish-bearing streams.
The proposed stormwater detention pond and wetland will attenuate storm flows, resulting in
decreased peak flows compared to existing conditions.
Modeling results suggest any exceedance of sublethal thresholds for dissolved copper and
dissolved zinc will be diluted to levels below the sublethal thresholds within several feet of the
proposed outfall.
The potential for exposure of steelhead to elevated levels of pollutants from new PGIS will be
minimal, given the small extent of the area potentially affected by temporary increases in
pollutant concentrations, the low likelihood of steelhead using habitats in the project action area,
and the treatment of runoff from road surfaces. Therefore, any impacts to this species due to
elevated pollutant levels in stormwater runoff are considered discountable.
Stream and riparian habitat, as well as wetlands and wetland buffers, will be restored or enhanced
to minimize and compensate for unavoidable impacts and adverse effects on fish.
Based on the low quality of existing riparian habitat and proposed mitigation for riparian habitat
removal, downstream effects on water quality (e.g., water temperature) due to the removal of
shade-producing vegetation along ditches in the project action area will be insignificant.
The project is not expected to result in induced growth that will adversely affect habitat for
steelhead.
Mitigation activities, including stream channel creation, riparian area planting, and the removal of
fish passage barriers, will lead to improvements in fish habitat conditions in the waterbodies in
the project action area.
Critical Habitat
The areas potentially affected by project construction and stormwater discharge do not overlap any areas
of proposed critical habitat for Puget Sound steelhead. The nearest proposed critical habitat is in the
Green River, approximately 3,100 feet downstream of the project action area. Therefore, this project will
not destroy or adversely modify proposed critical habitat for Puget Sound steelhead. For the same
reason, the project will have no effect on designated critical habitat for Puget Sound steelhead, should
critical habitat be designated before project completion.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 45
Bull Trout
This project may affect bull trout for the following reasons:
Adult and subadult bull trout could be present in ditches in the project action area. The area
potentially affected by project construction does not extend into Auburn Creek or any other
streams that have been mapped as fish-bearing. Because no barriers have been identified between
Auburn Creek and the ditches in the project action area, however, it is not impossible that bull
trout could venture into the action area.
Construction activities have the potential to introduce and transport excess sediment and
pollutants into waterbodies in the project action area.
Roadway widening and trail construction will fill ditches along the south side of S 277th St. The
resultant reduction in the amount of aquatic habitat in the project action area will be offset by the
construction of a new stream channel south of S 277th St.
Roadway widening will result in increased PGIS in the project action area, potentially increasing
pollutant loading and affecting peak flows and base flows in downstream waterbodies.
Construction activities will result in impacts to riparian areas, wetlands, and wetland buffers,
potentially affecting habitat conditions in waterbodies where bull trout could be present.
However, this project is not likely to adversely affect bull trout for the following reasons:
Bull trout are neither known nor expected to be present in Auburn Creek (the nearest watercourse
to the project action area that has been mapped as potentially fish-bearing).
The ditches in the project action area do not provide spawning habitat for bull trout; therefore,
there is no potential for impacts to spawning adults, eggs, or newly hatched juveniles.
The potential for water and substrates in the ditches in the project action area to provide suitable
rearing, foraging, or refuge habitat for bull trout under current conditions is extremely low, based
on limited access, low water quality, intermittent flows, high levels of fine substrates, and
periodic disturbance due to ditch maintenance work.
Bull trout could potentially have access to the project action area only on rare occasions when the
Green River is high enough to allow water to enter the flood gate at the mouth of Auburn Creek
but not so high as to close it off.
The potential for bull trout to remain in the project action area for extended periods is restricted
by poor habitat conditions.
Existing low-quality habitat in roadside ditches will be replaced with a newly constructed
mitigation stream with features designed to enhance fish habitat.
Installation of a fish-passable culvert at the downstream end of the mitigation stream may
encourage any bull trout that venture into the project action area to use higher-quality habitat in
that stream rather than low-quality habitat in roadside ditches.
All work below the ordinary high water mark of the ditches in the project action area will be
conducted in accordance with the HPA issued by WDFW and with the Clean Water Act Section
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
46 AUGUST 2015
404 permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Such permits typically include
provisions designed to avoid or minimize the risk of adverse effects on fish during sensitive life
history stages. Provisions will likely include restrictions on construction periods below the
ordinary high water mark and/or other measures to avoid or minimize the potential for
construction activities to deliver sediment or pollutants to streams.
It is expected that the HPA will restrict construction activities below the ordinary high water
mark of waterbodies in the project action area to the summer months, when the ditches are
typically dry and water levels in the Green River are too low to allow fish to gain access to the
project action area. Therefore, any impacts to this species from construction work below the
ordinary high water mark can be discounted.
Appropriate BMPs will be employed during construction to minimize or eliminate the discharge
of excess sediment or pollutants to ditches where water is present. Therefore, the potential for
direct impacts to bull trout from project construction near waterbodies is considered insignificant
and discountable.
Disturbed and exposed ground will be planted and seeded with native vegetation to secure soils
and provide long-term stability.
Stormwater runoff from all new PGIS in the project action area will receive enhanced water
quality treatment in a stormwater wetland, as well as flow control treatment in a detention pond,
minimizing the risk of degradation of water discharged to fish-bearing streams.
The proposed stormwater detention pond and wetland will attenuate storm flows, resulting in
decreased peak flows compared to existing conditions.
Modeling results suggest any exceedance of sublethal thresholds for dissolved copper and
dissolved zinc will be diluted to levels below the sublethal thresholds within several feet of the
proposed outfall.
The potential for exposure of bull trout to elevated levels of pollutants from new PGIS will be
minimal, given the small extent of the area potentially affected by temporary increases in
pollutant concentrations, the low likelihood of bull trout using habitats in the project action area,
and the treatment of runoff from road surfaces. Therefore, any impacts to this species due to
elevated pollutant levels in stormwater runoff are considered discountable.
Stream and riparian habitat, as well as wetlands and wetland buffers, will be restored or enhanced
to minimize and compensate for unavoidable impacts and adverse effects on fish.
Based on the low quality of existing riparian habitat and proposed mitigation for riparian habitat
removal, downstream effects on water quality (e.g., water temperature) due to the removal of
shade-producing vegetation along ditches in the project action area will be insignificant.
The project is not expected to result in induced growth that will adversely affect habitat for bull
trout.
Mitigation activities, including stream channel creation, riparian area planting, and the removal of
fish passage barriers, will lead to improvements in fish habitat conditions in the waterbodies in
the project action area.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 47
Critical Habitat
The areas potentially affected by project construction and stormwater discharge do not overlap any areas
of designated critical habitat for bull trout. The nearest designated critical habitat is in the Green River,
approximately 3,100 feet downstream of the project action area. Therefore, this project will have no
effect on designated critical habitat for bull trout.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
48 AUGUST 2015
Floodplain Analysis
The project includes development within the riparian buffer zone of a watercourse that has been classified
as a stream and is also located within the 100-year floodplain of the Green River. The City, as the local
jurisdiction with FEMA permitting authority, must therefore demonstrate that the proposed development
will not adversely affect water quality, water quantity, spawning substrate, flood volumes or velocities, or
floodplain refugia for ESA-listed salmonids.
As discussed in the analyses of direct effects, above, the construction of new stormwater management
features is expected to limit the potential for short-term or long-term adverse effects on water quality or
water quantity (i.e., runoff flow rates or runoff volumes). The availability and quality of potential
spawning substrates will be improved through the construction of the mitigation stream. In addition,
potential reductions in the availability of off-channel refuge habitat in project action area ditches will be
offset by mitigation stream construction. Also, access to off-channel habitats in the project action area
will likely be improved with the installation of the new fish-passable culvert.
The project will have no effect on the connection between the Green River and its floodplain north of
S 277th Street, and the proposed placement and sizing of culverts will maintain existing flood conveyance
flows and velocities through the road prism. Therefore, no adverse effects to flood volumes or flood
velocities are anticipated. Also, excess compensatory floodplain storage is currently available at the
adjacent Port of Seattle site, and project fill will be less than the available storage. Therefore, the project
will result in no net loss of floodplain storage capacity. See the Floodplain Conveyance Analysis for this
project (Parametrix 2015b) for more detailed analysis of potential project-related impacts to flood
elevations.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 49
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
Essential Fish Habitat Background
The objective of this assessment is to determine whether the proposed action may adversely affect
essential fish habitat (EFH) that has been designated for federally managed commercially harvestable fish
species in the project action area. This assessment also describes conservation measures proposed to
avoid, minimize, or otherwise offset potential adverse effects to designated EFH resulting from the
proposed action.
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), as
amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267), includes a mandate that NMFS
must identify EFH for federally managed commercially harvestable fish, and federal agencies must
consult with NMFS on all activities, or proposed activities, authorized, funded, or undertaken by the
agency that may adversely affect EFH.
EFH has been defined for the purposes of the Magnuson-Stevens Act as “those waters and substrate
necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity” (NMFS 2004). NMFS has
further added the following interpretations to clarify this definition:
“Waters” include aquatic areas and their associated physical, chemical, and biological properties
that are used by fish, and may include areas historically used by fish where appropriate;
“Substrate” includes sediment, hard bottom, structures underlying the waters, and associated
biological communities;
“Necessary” means the habitat required to support a sustainable fishery and the managed
species’ contribution to a healthy ecosystem; and
“Spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity” covers the full life cycle of a species
(NMFS 2004).
“Adverse effect” means any impact that reduces the quality and/or quantity of EFH; such impacts can
include direct (e.g., contamination or physical disruption), indirect (e.g., loss of prey, reduction in species’
fecundity), site-specific, or habitat-wide impacts, including individual, cumulative, or synergistic
consequences of actions.
The Pacific Fishery Management Council has designated EFH for the Pacific Coast groundfish fishery,
the coastal pelagic species fishery, and the Pacific Coast salmon fishery. The Green River tributaries in
the project action area contain EFH for Pacific salmon. No marine habitats are present in the action area;
therefore, EFH for groundfish and coastal pelagic species is not addressed in this assessment.
The EFH designation for the Pacific salmon fishery includes all streams, lakes, ponds, wetlands, and other
waterbodies currently or historically accessible to salmon in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California,
except above impassable barriers. The Pacific salmon management unit includes Chinook, coho, and pink
salmon. Of these species, only coho salmon have been documented in areas that may be directly or
indirectly affected by the proposed action. Coho and Chinook salmon are known or expected to use
downstream habitats in Auburn Creek outside of the project action area. In addition, all three of these
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
50 AUGUST 2015
species use the Green River farther downstream for adult migration, juvenile out-migration, and rearing
where suitable habitat is present.
Based on the observation of coho salmon in the project action area and the absence of any known full
barriers to fish passage downstream, it is assumed for this analysis that EFH is present in the action area.
The potential for water and substrates in the ditches in the action area to function as EFH is low, however.
At most times, water quality is poor, with high levels of turbidity, trash, and pollutants from the
neighboring roadway. Substrates in the ditches generally consist of silt, sand, and small gravel, with
vegetation growing in much of the channel. Water flow is intermittent, even during the winter months.
Moreover, the potential for development of fish habitat is limited by periodic ditch maintenance work
conducted by the City. For these reasons, this ditch is not expected to provide high-quality spawning,
rearing, foraging, or refuge habitat for fish.
Description of the Proposed Action
The project activities covered by this assessment are associated with intersection improvements and
roadway widening on S 277th St in Auburn. The project will add two new eastbound through lanes, one
new westbound through lane, a non-motorized trail, street lighting improvements, storm drainage
improvements, streetscape improvements, intelligent transportation system improvements, intersection
capacity and safety improvements, and auxiliary turn lanes. The project is described in detail in the
Introduction to this BA, under the heading of Project Description.
Potential Adverse Effects of the Proposed Project
The potential effects of the proposed project on fish habitat are described in detail above, under Effects of
the Action. Following is a brief overview of potential adverse effects identified in that section.
Roadway widening will result in the loss of some roadside ditches that provide little, if any,
function as fish habitat. This lost habitat will be replaced by approximately 900 linear feet of
stream channel that will have a substantially higher potential to support fish, along with an
improved connection to other watercourses in and near the project action area.
Construction activities in or adjacent to waterbodies, including culvert replacement and stream
construction, have the potential to introduce sediment and pollutants into those aquatic resources.
However, BMPs will be implemented during project construction to reduce the potential for
introducing sediment and pollutants into waterbodies (including wetlands) in the action area.
Increases in the amount of impervious surface (including PGIS) in the project action area can
adversely affect habitat quality by increasing stormwater runoff rates, volumes, and pollutant
loads. Construction of a stormwater detention pond under the project is expected to eliminate the
potential for adverse effects on peak flows and base flows. Although all new PGIS will receive
enhanced water quality treatment in a stormwater wetland, modeling results suggest that pollutant
loadings and concentrations could be slightly greater than existing conditions. Dilution modeling
indicates, however, that any exceedance of sublethal thresholds for dissolved zinc and dissolved
copper will be diluted to levels below the sublethal thresholds within several feet of the proposed
outfall.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 51
Impacts to riparian habitat adjacent to waterbodies in the project action area are not expected to
adversely affect fish habitat quality based on 1) the degraded condition of most existing riparian
habitat in the project action area; 2) the low potential for riparian habitat in the project action area
to provide large woody debris for fish-bearing streams downstream; and 3) the creation of higher-
quality riparian habitat along the newly constructed stream channel.
Strict adherence to BMPs will protect known fish-bearing waters downstream of the action area from
water quality effects during project construction. The construction of stormwater detention and treatment
facilities will ensure downstream water quality is not permanently degraded. The project will not result in
alterations in the availability or quality of spawning, migration, or rearing habitat for Chinook, coho, and
pink salmon in the action area. As such, there should be no direct, indirect, or cumulative adverse effects
upon Pacific Coast salmon EFH during project construction or operation. No EFH for groundfish or
coastal pelagic species occurs within or adjacent to the action area. Based on these findings, the project
will not adversely affect EFH.
Essential Fish Habitat Conservation Measures
Conservation measures and BMPs are included for project activities and are described in the Introduction
to this BA, under Impact Avoidance and Minimization Measures. Implementation of those measures will
avoid or minimize potential effects to existing habitat conditions, including EFH, within the project action
area.
Conclusions
In accordance with the EFH requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, it has been determined that this
project will have the following effects on EFH for the guilds identified below:
Pacific Salmon No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect
Chinook Salmon No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect
Coho Salmon No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect
Pink Salmon No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect
Groundfish No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect
Coastal Pelagic Species No Adverse Effect Adverse Effect
The project will have no adverse effects on EFH for groundfish or coastal pelagic species because they
do not occur in the areas directly or indirectly affected by the project.
The project will have no adverse effects on EFH for Pacific salmon (including Chinook, coho, and pink
salmon) because project construction, including implementation of the conservation measures identified
above, is not expected to result in any permanent reduction of quantity or quality of EFH.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
52 AUGUST 2015
References
Barnard, R.J., J. Johnson, P. Brooks, K.M. Bates, B. Heiner, J.P. Klavas, D.C. Ponder, P.D. Smith, and P.
D. Powers. 2013. Water crossings design guidelines. Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. Available at: http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/ahg/culverts.htm.
City of Auburn. 2004. Final environmental impact statement for the Northeast Auburn/Robertson
Properties special area plan. July 30, 2004.
Coffin, C. S. Lee, and C. DeGasperi. 2011. Green River Temperature Total Maximum Daily Load: Water
Quality Improvement Report. Washington State Department of Ecology report number 11-10-
046. 163 pages.
Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology). 2012. Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Washington. Publication Number 12-10-030. August 2012.
Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology). 2014. 2012 Washington State Water Quality
Assessment (305[b] report and 303[d] list). Available at:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/currentassessmt.html. Accessed March 21, 2014.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetland delineation manual. Technical Report Y-
87-1, Environmental Laboratory, Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Fuerstenberg, R., K. Nelson, and R. Blomquist. 1999. Draft ecological conditions and limitations to
salmonid diversity in the Green River, Washington, USA: structure, function, and process in river
ecology. Unpublished report. King County Department of Natural Resources. Seattle,
Washington.
Goetz, F.A., and E. Jeanes. 2004. Bull trout in the nearshore. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle
District. Seattle, Washington.
Grette, G.B., and E.O. Salo. 1986. The status of anadromous fishes of the Green/Duwamish River system.
Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, by Evans-Hamilton, Inc.,
Seattle, Washington.
Hererra. 2011. Indirect effects stormwater runoff analytical method. Memorandum from Julie Hampden
and John Lenth, Herrera Environmental Consultants, to Megan White (WSDOT), John
Grettenberger (USFWS), Michael Grady (NMFS), and Sharon Love (FHWA). April 14, 2011.
King County. 2014a. Stream report for Mill Creek (Station A315). Available at:
http://green.kingcounty.gov/WLR/Waterres/StreamsData/DataDownload.aspx?Locator=A315.
Accessed March 20, 2014.
King County. 2014b. Water quality index report for Mill Creek (Gauge # 41a). Available at:
http://green.kingcounty.gov/WLR/Waterres/StreamsData/DataDownload.aspx?Locator=A315.
Accessed March 20, 2014.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 53
Kraft, T, R.L. Annear, C. Berger, and S.A. Wells. 2004. A hydrodynamic and water quality study of the
Green River, King County, Washington. Report prepared for the King County Department of
Natural Resources and Parks. 182 pages + appendices.
Lister, D.B., and H.S. Genoe. 1970. Stream habitat utilization by cohabiting underyearlings of Chinook
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and coho (O. kisutch) salmon in the Big Qualicum River, British
Columbia. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 27:1215-1224.
Mongillo, P.E. 1993. The distribution and status of bull trout/Dolly Varden in Washington State, June
1992. Washington Department of Wildlife, Fisheries Management Division. Report No. 93–22.
Olympia, Washington.
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1998. Factors contributing to the decline of Chinook salmon:
an addendum to the 1996 west coast steelhead factors for decline report. Protect Resources
Division, Portland, Oregon.
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2004. Preparing essential fish habitat assessments: a guide
for federal action agencies. Available at:
http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/habitat/fish_habitat/efh_consultations_go.html.
Northwest Hydraulic Consultants, Inc. 2004. Hydraulic model report for the Cities of Auburn and Kent in
King County, May 17, 2004. Appendix to the supplemental downstream storm drainage analysis
for River Sand PUD, City of Auburn, Washington. 12 pages.
NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2013. Web soil survey online interactive mapper.
Available at <http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx>. Accessed December
2013.
Parametrix 2014. Memorandum Jeff Meyer to Chuck Scott. Mitigation Credits Available for the South
277th Street Corridor Improvements Project. April 11, 2014.
Parametrix. 2015a. Wetlands and streams discipline report for the S 277th St corridor capacity and non-
motorized improvements project. Prepared for the City of Auburn Public Works Department.
March 2015.
Parametrix. 2015b. Floodplain conveyance analysis. Technical memorandum from Julie Brandt,
Parametrix, to Ryan Vondrak, City of Auburn. April, 2015.
Puget Sound Steelhead Technical Recovery Team. 2013. Identifying historical populations of steelhead
within the Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment. Final Review Draft. 149 pages.
Ruggerone, G.T., and D.E. Weitkamp. 2004. WRIA 9 Chinook salmon research framework: Identifying
key research questions about Chinook salmon life histories and habitat use in the Middle and
Lower Green River, Duwamish Waterway, and marine nearshore areas. Report prepared for the
WRIA 9 Steering Committee.
Shared Strategy for Puget Sound. 2007. Puget Sound salmon recovery plan. Adopted by National Marine
Fisheries Service 19 January 2007. Volume I (plan) and Volume II (local watershed chapters).
Available online at:
http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/protected_species/salmon_steelhead/recovery_planning_and_implemen
tation/puget_sound/puget_sound_chinook_recovery_plan.html Accessed July 2, 2013.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
54 AUGUST 2015
Tacoma Public Utilities. 2001. Tacoma Water habitat conservation plan: Green River water supply
operations and watershed protection. July, 2001. 733 pages.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1996. Howard Hanson Dam Section 1135 fish and wildlife restoration
project final project modification report/environmental assessment. September. Seattle,
Washington.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Letter from Matt Bennett, Corps, to Jeff Jones, J. S. Jones and
Associates, Inc. May 10, 2010.
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2010. Bull trout final critical habitat justification: rationale for
why habitat is essential, and documentation of occupancy. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific
Region, Portland, Oregon. September 2010.
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2015. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service critical habitat mapper.
Available at: http:// http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/. Accessed February 2, 2015.
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2002. Washington State salmon and steelhead
stock inventory (SaSI). WDFW, Olympia, Washington. Available at:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/fisheries/sasi/.
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2015. PHS on the Web: An interactive map of
WDFW priority habitats and species information for project review. Available online at:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/. Accessed February 2, 2015.
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2014. Salmonscape fish database and mapping
application. Available online at: https://fortress.wa.gov/dfw/salmonscape/. Accessed January 16,
2014.
WDNR (Washington Department of Natural Resources). 2014a. Forest Practices Water Typing. Available
at:
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/businesspermits/topics/forestpracticesapplications/pages/fp_watertyping.a
spx
WDNR (Washington Department of Natural Resources). 2014b. List of surveyed land sections in
Washington identified by the Natural Heritage Program as reported to contain Natural Heritage
Features. Data Current as of February 4, 2014. Available online at:
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/ResearchScience/HowTo/ConservationRestoration/Pages/amp_nh_data_i
nstructions.aspx.
WSDOT (Washington State Department of Transportation). 2014. Biological assessment preparation
advanced training manual. Version 04-02-2014. Available online at:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Environment/Biology/BA/BAguidance.htm.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015
Appendix A – Stormwater
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 A-1
The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Highway Runoff Dilution and Loading
(HI-RUN) model was used to determine the potential for the proposed roadway changes to affect water
quality downstream of project area outfalls. The model’s end-of-pipe loading subroutine was run using
dissolved zinc as the parameter of interest to determine whether the proposed S 277th St Corridor
Capacity and Non-Motorized Trail Improvements Project will result in a significant increase in pollutant
loading over baseline conditions.
Based on output of the HI-RUN model, the project could result in increased pollutant loading in the
receiving waters for threshold discharge area (TDA) 1. According to model output, treatment of all new
pollution-generating impervious surface (PGIS) in this TDA is expected to result in a post-project
P(exceed) value greater than 0.45. P(exceed) values greater than 0.50 represent conditions under which
runoff quality is not expected to improve, relative to current conditions (WSDOT 2008). A threshold
value of 0.45 was selected to provide a level of confidence that proposed conditions would not be
degraded when compared to background conditions given the inherent uncertainty and variability in the
data (WSDOT 2008).
The P(exceed) value of 0.606 for TDA 1 indicates the possibility that pollutant loading at the outfall may
increase with the proposed roadway changes in TDA 1, despite the provision of stormwater treatment for
all new PGIS in this TDA. To assess the extent of potential effects of stormwater discharges on the
aquatic environment, the dilution modeling subroutine analysis was conducted for TDA 1. Dilution
modeling results show that concentrations of dissolved copper will be below the biological threshold for
effects on fish (i.e., an increase of 2.0 µg/L over the background concentration of 2.0 µg/L) within 2 feet
of the outfall under both baseline and post-project conditions. Concentrations of dissolved zinc will be
below the biological threshold for effects on fish (i.e., an increase of 5.6 µg/L over the background
concentration of 4.0 µg/L) within 19 feet of the outfall under baseline and within 22 feet under post-
project conditions.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
A-2 AUGUST 2015
HI-RUN End-of-Pipe Loading Subroutine Report
TDA 1 Input Summary
Run Date/Time: 3/5/15 08:50
Baseline Conditions: 5.8 acres
No Treatment: 0% infiltration – 5.8 acres
Proposed Conditions: 8.5 acres
Enhanced Treatment: 0% infiltration – 2.7 acres
No Treatment: 0% infiltration – 5.8 acres
TDA 1 Load Analysis
Dissolved Zinc Load (pounds/year)
Baseline Proposed
Max. 82.5 49
75th Percentile 2.23 2.7
Median 1.16 1.6
25th Percentile 0.606 0.97
Min. 0.023 0.099
P(exceed) 0.606
Highway Runoff Dilution Summary Results – TDA 1
Background Concentrations (mg/L)
Dissolved Copper: 0.002
Dissolved Zinc: 0.004
Baseline Conditions: 5.8 acres
No Treatment: Infiltration 0% – 5.8 acres
Proposed Conditions: 8.5 acres
Enhanced Treatment: Infiltration 0% – 2.7 acres with detention
No Treatment: Infiltration 0% – 5.8 acres
Depth (ft) 0.6
Velocity (fps) 1.11
Width (ft) 3.98
Manning Roughness 0.035
Discharge Distance (ft) 0
Distance Downstream (in feet) to Meet Biological Threshold
Dissolved Copper Baseline 2
Proposed 2
Dissolved Zinc Baseline 19
Proposed 22
Literature Cited
WSDOT (Washington State Department of Transportation). 2008. Highway runoff dilution and loading
model user’s guide: analysis of highway stormwater water quality effects for Endangered Species
Act consultations. Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. Seattle, WA. October 6,
2008.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015
Appendix B – Official Species Lists
Status of ESA Listings & Critical Habitat Designations
for West Coast Salmon & Steelhead
PUGET SOUND DOMAIN
• Puget Sound Chinook (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
• Hood Canal Summer Chum (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
• Ozette Lake Sockeye (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
• Puget Sound Steelhead (T)
[CH under dev.; ANPR 1/10/11]
INTERIOR COLUMBIA DOMAIN
• Snake River Sockeye (E) [FCH 12/28/93]
• Snake River Fall Chinook (T) [FCH 12/28/93]
• Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook (T)
[FCH 12/28/93; 10/25/99]
• Snake River Steelhead (T) [FCH 9/2/05]
• Upper Columbia River Spring Chinook (E) [FCH 9/2/05]
• Upper Columbia River Steelhead (T) [FCH 9/2/05]
• Middle Columbia River Steelhead (T) [FCH 9/2/05]
OREGON COAST DOMAIN
• Oregon Coast Coho (T)
[FCH 2/11/08]
SOUTHERN
OREGON/NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA COAST DOMAIN
• Southern Oregon/Northern
California Coast Coho (T)
[FCH 5/5/99]
CENTRAL VALLEY DOMAIN
• Sacramento River Winter Chinook (E)
[FCH 6/16/93]
• Central Valley Spring Chinook (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
• Central Valley Steelhead (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
NORTH-CENTRAL CALIFORNIA COAST
DOMAIN
• Central California Coast Coho (E)
[FCH 5/5/99]
• California Coastal Chinook (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
• Northern California Steelhead (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
• Central California Coast Steelhead (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
WILLAMETTE/LOWER COLUMBIA
DOMAIN
• Columbia River Chum (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
• Lower Columbia River Coho (T)
[CH Under dev.; ANPR 1/10/11]
• Lower Columbia River Chinook (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
• Lower Columbia River Steelhead (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
• Upper Willamette River Chinook (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
• Upper Willamette River Steelhead (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
SOUTH-CENTRAL/SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
COAST DOMAIN
• South-Central California Coast Steelhead (T)
[FCH 9/2/05]
• Southern California Coast Steelhead (E)
[FCH 9/2/05]
CRITICAL HABITAT RULES CITED
• 6/16/93 (58 FR 33212) Final CHD for Sacramento
River Winter-run Chinook
• 12/28/93 (58 FR 68543) Final CHD for Snake River
Chinook and Sockeye
• 5/5/99 (64 FR 24049) Final CHD for Central CA Coast
and SONCC Coho
• 10/25/99 (64FR57399) Revised CHD for Snake River
Spring/Summer Chinook
• 9/2/05 (70 FR 52630) Final CHD for 12 ESUs of
Salmon and Steelhead
• 2/11/08 (73 FR 7816) Final CHD for Oregon Coast
Coho
• 1/10/11 (76 FR 1392) Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking; CHDs for Lower Columbia Coho and
Puget Sound Steelhead
LEGEND
(E) Endangered
(T) Threatened
(FCH) Final Critical Habitat Designated
Updated 10-31-12
Domain Overlap
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015
Appendix C – Listed Species Life Histories and
Critical Habitat PCEs
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 C-1
Chinook Salmon Pertinent Life History
The Puget Sound Chinook salmon evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) encompasses all runs of Chinook
salmon from the Elwha River in the Strait of Juan de Fuca eastward, including rivers and streams flowing
into Hood Canal, Puget Sound, and the Strait of Georgia in Washington. Of an estimated 31 original
populations, there are 22 extant geographically distinct populations representing the primary historical
spawning areas of Chinook salmon in the ESU (Good et al. 2005). Of the nine extinct populations, eight
were spring Chinook salmon. The extinct spring Chinook salmon populations represented a significant
portion of the historical life history diversity and spatial structure of the ESU. Their loss has increased the
ESU’s risk of extinction.
Long-term trends in abundance and median population growth rates for naturally spawning populations of
Puget Sound Chinook salmon indicate that approximately half of the populations are declining and the
other half are increasing in abundance. Eight of the 22 populations are declining over the short term, and
11 or 12 populations are experiencing long-term declines (Good et al. 2005). Factors contributing to the
downward trends are widespread blockages of streams, degraded freshwater and marine habitat, poor
forest practices in upper river tributaries, and urbanization and agriculture in lower tributaries and main
stem rivers.
Chinook salmon spawning areas are generally characterized by stream gradients of less than 2 percent,
velocities between 1.0 and 3.6 feet per second, depths greater than 0.8 feet, and gravel and cobble
substrates as large as 4 inches. Chinook salmon favor the head of riffles and side channels for their redd
locations (Healey 1991). The eggs are deposited in gravel that has well-oxygenated water percolating
through it (Healey 1991). The eggs overwinter and hatch in the gravel to become juveniles with a yolk sac.
After emerging from the gravel (usually in late winter), juvenile Chinook salmon rear in fresh water for a
period ranging from a few days to 3 years (Wydoski and Whitney 1979; Healey 1991). Outmigration
commonly occurs during the night under the cover of darkness, although some fish may migrate during
the day (Healey 1991). Chinook salmon fry tend to migrate along the banks and avoid the high velocity
water near the center (thalweg) of the channel (Healey 1991).
Most juvenile Chinook salmon in Puget Sound streams migrate to the marine environment during their
first year and are thus known as “ocean-type” fish (Myers et al. 1998). Most ocean-type Chinook begin
moving downstream as fry soon after emergence, whereas others remain upriver to rear in areas closer to
the spawning grounds, migrating as fingerlings (Healey 1991; Seiler et al. 2002; Nelson et al. 2004). Peak
migration of fry typically occurs in early March, followed by few fish migrating during late March
through April, and then fingerlings migrating from May through July. A small proportion of juvenile
Chinook in some systems are “stream-type” individuals, rearing in freshwater for 12 to 18 months before
emigrating. Stream-type Chinook salmon may migrate to the ocean any time of the year, although most
Chinook salmon within a population tend to migrate at similar times and ages (Healey 1991).
Different populations of Puget Sound Chinook salmon have different run timings—i.e., the seasonal
periods during which mature adults return to rivers to spawn. Puget Sound spring-run populations return
to natal rivers from early spring to mid-summer and spawn from late summer to early fall in colder,
higher-elevation areas of watersheds where eggs and fry develop more slowly. Puget Sound fall-run
populations return to natal streams from late summer to fall and spawn until late fall. Spring-run juveniles
tend to reside longer in natal streams before their ocean migration, and to have different ocean migration
patterns than do fall runs. As the term implies, spawn-timing characteristics of summer/fall runs are
intermediate between spring and fall runs.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
C-2 AUGUST 2015
Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat Primary Constituent Elements
NMFS has defined specific primary constituent elements (PCEs) as the known physical and biological
features within occupied areas that are essential to the conservation of the species (70 FR 52630,
September 2, 2005). The specific PCEs for Chinook salmon in freshwater areas are as follows:
1. Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting
spawning, incubation, and larval development.
2. Freshwater rearing sites with water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain
physical habitat conditions, and support juvenile growth and mobility; water quality and forage
supporting juvenile development; and natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging
large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side
channels, and undercut banks.
3. Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction with water quantity and quality conditions and
natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and
boulders, side channels, and undercut banks supporting juvenile and adult mobility and survival.
4. Estuarine areas free of obstruction with water quality, water quantity, and salinity conditions
supporting juvenile and adult physiological transitions between freshwater and saltwater; natural
cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and
boulders, and side channels; and juvenile and adult forage, including aquatic invertebrates and
fishes, supporting growth and maturation.
5. Nearshore marine areas free of obstruction with water quality and quantity conditions and forage,
including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation; and natural cover
such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and
side channels.
6. Offshore marine areas with water quality conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates
and fishes, supporting growth and maturation.
Steelhead Pertinent Life History
Steelhead are the anadromous form of freshwater resident rainbow or redband Oncorhynchus mykiss trout
species. The present distribution of steelhead extends from Asia, to Alaska, and south to the U.S.-Mexico
border (Busby et al. 1996; 67 FR 21586, May 1, 2002). Unlike many salmonid species, the O. mykiss
exhibit extremely complex and plastic (i.e., variable and changeable within generations) life-history
characteristics, such that their offspring can exhibit different life-history forms from the parental
generation. For example, offspring of resident fish may migrate to sea, and offspring of anadromous
steelhead may remain in streams as resident fish (Burgner et al. 1992).
Those that are anadromous can spend up to 7 years in freshwater prior to smoltification (the physiological
and behavioral changes required for the transition to saltwater), and then spend up to 3 years in saltwater
before returning to freshwater to spawn. However, they typically return to their natal stream to spawn as
4- or 5-year-old fish. Unlike Pacific salmon, steelhead trout are iteroparous—that is, capable of spawning
more than once before they die. However, it is rare for steelhead to spawn more than twice before dying,
and those that do are usually females (Busby et al. 1996).
Over their entire range, West Coast steelhead spawning migrations occur throughout the year, with
seasonal peaks of migration activity varying by location. Even in a given river basin there might be more
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 C-3
than one seasonal migration peak, typically referred to as winter, spring, summer, or fall steelhead runs.
Although there are generally four migration seasons, steelhead are typically divided into two basic
reproductive ecotypes (summer and winter), based on the state of sexual maturity at the time they enter
freshwater and the duration of spawning migration (Burgner et al. 1992). The summer, or
stream-maturing, type enters freshwater in a sexually immature condition between May and October, and
matures sexually over the course of several months. In contrast, the winter, or ocean-maturing, type enters
freshwater in a sexually mature condition between November and April, and spawns shortly thereafter. In
basins with both ecotypes, the summer run generally spawns farther upstream than winter-run fish. The
winter run of steelhead is the predominant run in Puget Sound.
Depending on water temperature, fertilized steelhead eggs may incubate in redds for 1.5 to 4 months
before hatching as alevins. Following yolk sac absorption, young juveniles (fry) emerge from the gravel
and begin active feeding. As they grow, steelhead move to deeper parts of the stream, establish territories
and diet changes from microscopic aquatic organisms to larger organisms such as isopods, amphipods,
and aquatic and terrestrial insects, primarily associated with the stream bottom (Wydoski and Whitney
1979). Riparian vegetation and submerged cover (logs, rocks, and aquatic vegetation) are important for
providing cover, food, temperature stability, and protection from predators. As a result, densities of
juvenile steelhead are highest in areas containing in-stream cover (Reiser and Bjornn 1979; Johnson and
Kucera 1985). Juvenile steelhead tend to reside in freshwater for 2 years or more before migrating to
marine habitats. Juvenile outmigration typically takes place during April and May (Busby et al. 1996).
Steelhead Critical Habitat
Critical habitat for Puget Sound steelhead was proposed for designation in 2013 (78 FR 2726, January 14,
2013). As established in that proposal, the specific PCEs for steelhead in freshwater areas are as follows:
1. Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting
spawning, incubation, and larval development.
2. Freshwater rearing sites with water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain
physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; water quality and forage
supporting juvenile development; and natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging
large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side
channels, and undercut banks.
3. Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction with water quantity and quality conditions and
natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and
boulders, side channels, and undercut banks supporting juvenile and adult mobility and survival.
Bull Trout Pertinent Life History
The coterminous United States population of bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) was listed as threatened
in 1999 (64 FR 58910, November 1, 1999). Bull trout occur from the Klamath River Basin of south-
central Oregon and in the Jarbridge River in Nevada, north to various coastal rivers of Washington to the
Puget Sound and east throughout major rivers within the Columbia River Basin to the St. Mary-Belly
River, east of the Continental Divide in northwestern Montana.
Bull trout are believed to be restricted in their spawning distribution by water temperature. Bull trout
spawn in late summer and early fall (Bjornn 1991). Some individuals return to freshwater in late summer
and fall to spawn in upper tributaries and headwater areas. Puget Sound stocks typically initiate spawning
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
C-4 AUGUST 2015
in late October or early November as water temperature falls below 7 to 8ºC. Spawning habitat almost
invariably consists of very clean gravel, often in areas of groundwater upwelling or cold spring inflow
(Goetz 1994). Egg incubation temperatures needed for survival have been shown to range from 2 to 4ºC
(Willamette National Forest 1989). Bull trout eggs require approximately 100 to 145 days to hatch,
followed by an additional 65 to 90 days of yolk sac absorption during alevin incubation. Thus, in-gravel
incubation spans more than 6 months. Hatching occurs in winter or late spring and fry emergence occurs
from early April through May (Rieman and McIntyre 1993).
Generally, for their first 1 to 2 years, bull trout juveniles rear near their natal tributary and exhibit a
preference for cool water temperatures (Bjornn 1991), although they appear less restricted by temperature
than are spawners. Newly emerged bull trout fry are often found in shallow, backwater areas of streams
that contain woody debris. Later, or in other habitats lacking woody debris for refugia, fry are bottom
dwellers, and may occupy interstitial spaces in the streambed (Brown 1992). Because all known spawning
occurs in the upper Skykomish sub-basin, these habitat requirements are not pertinent in the action area.
Resident forms of bull trout spend their entire lives in small streams, while migratory forms live in
tributary streams for several years before migrating to larger rivers (fluvial form) or lakes (adfluvial
form). Migratory individuals typically move downstream in the summer and often congregate in large,
low-velocity pools to feed (Bjornn 1991). Anadromous bull trout usually remain in freshwater 2 or 3
years before migrating to saltwater in spring (Wydoski and Whitney 1979).
Bull trout life histories are plastic, and juveniles may develop a life history strategy that differs from their
parents. The shift between resident and migratory life forms may depend on environmental conditions.
For example, resident forms may increase within a population when survival of migratory forms is low
(Rieman and McIntyre 1993). Char are generally longer-lived than salmon, and bull trout up to 12 years
old have been identified in Washington (Brown 1992). Some individuals are amphidromous; that is, they
return seasonally to freshwater as sub-adults, sometimes for several years, before returning to spawn
(Wilson 1997).
Bull Trout Critical Habitat Primary Constituent Elements
Within the designated critical habitat areas, the PCEs for bull trout are those habitat components that are
essential for the primary biological needs of foraging, reproducing, rearing of young, dispersal, genetic
exchange, or sheltering (75 FR 63898, October 18, 2010). The specific PCEs for bull trout are:
1. Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, and subsurface water connectivity (hyporheic flows) to
contribute to water quality and quantity and provide thermal refugia.
2. Migratory habitats with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between
spawning, rearing, overwintering, and freshwater and marine foraging habitats, including but not
limited to permanent, partial, intermittent, or seasonal barriers.
3. An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic
macroinvertebrates, and forage fish.
4. Complex river, stream, lake, reservoir, and marine shoreline aquatic environments and processes
with features such as large wood, side channels, pools, undercut banks, and substrates to provide
a variety of depths, gradients, velocities, and structure.
5. Water temperatures ranging from 2 to 15°C (36 to 59°F), with adequate thermal refugia available
for temperatures at the upper end of this range. Specific temperatures within this range will vary
depending on bull trout life-history stage and form; geography; elevation; diurnal and seasonal
variation; shade, such as that provided by riparian habitat; and local groundwater influence.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
AUGUST 2015 C-5
6. Substrates of sufficient amount, size, and composition to ensure success of egg and embryo
overwinter survival, fry emergence, and young-of-the-year and juvenile survival. A minimal
amount (e.g., less than 12 percent) of fine substrate less than 0.85 mm (0.03 in.) in diameter and
minimal embeddedness of these fines in larger substrates are characteristic of these conditions.
7. A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows within historic and seasonal
ranges or, if flows are controlled, they minimize departures from a natural hydrograph.
8. Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are not
inhibited.
9. Few or no non-native predatory (e.g., lake trout, walleye, northern pike, and smallmouth bass),
inbreeding (e.g., brook trout), or competitive (e.g., brown trout) species present.
References
Bjornn. T.C. 1991. Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus). Pages 230-235 in J. Stolz and J. Schnell, eds. Trout.
Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
Brown, L.G. 1992. On the zoogeography and life history of Washington’s native char. Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Rept. #94-04, Fish. Mgmt. Div. 41 p.
Burgner, R.L., J.T. Light, L. Margolis, T. Okazaki, A. Tautz, and S. Ito. 1992. Distribution and origins of
steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in offshore waters of the north Pacific Ocean. International
North Pacific Fisheries Commission. Bull. no. 51.
Busby, P.J., T.C. Wainwright, and G.J. Bryant. 1996. Status Review of West Coast Steelhead from
Washington, Oregon and California. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-27. National
Marine Fisheries Service. Seattle, Washington.
Goetz, F.A. 1994. Distribution and ecology of bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) in the Cascade Mountains.
Master’s Thesis. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.
Good, T.P., R.S. Waples, and P. Adams, eds. 2005. Updated status of federally listed ESUs of West Coast
salmon and steelhead. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest
Fisheries Science Center, NOAA Technical Memorandum. NMFS-NWFSC-66, Seattle, WA.
598 pp.
Healey, M.C. 1991. Life history of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Pages 311-393 in C. Groot
and L. Margolis, editors. Pacific salmon life histories. UBC Press, University of British Columbia,
Vancouver, British Columbia.
Johnson, J.H. and P.A. Kucera. 1985. Summer-autumn habitat utilization of subyearling steelhead trout in
tributaries of the Clearwater River, Idaho. Canadian Journal of Zoology 63:2283-2290.
Myers, J.M., R.G. Kope, G.J. Bryant, D. Teel, L.J. Lierheimer, T.C. Mainwright, W.S. Grant, F.K. Waknitz,
K. Neely, S.T. Lindley, and R.S. Waples. 1998. Status review of Chinook salmon from Washington,
Idaho, Oregon, and California. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo.
NMFS-NWFSC-35. 443 pp.
S 277th St Corridor Capacity and Non-Motorized Improvements Biological Assessment
C-6 AUGUST 2015
Nelson, T., G. Ruggerone, H. Kim, R. Schaefer, and M. Boles. 2004. Juvenile Chinook migration, growth
and habitat use in the lower Green River, Duwamish River and Nearshore of Elliott Bay, 2001-2003.
Draft Report. WRIA 9 Juvenile Salmonid Survival Study. King County DNR and NRC. Seattle,
Washington.
Reiser, D.W., and T.C. Bjornn. 1979. 1. Habitat requirements of anadromous salmonids. In: Meehan, W.R.,
Technical Editor. Influence of Forest and Rangeland Management on Anadromous Fish Habitat in
the Western United States and Canada. USDA Forest Service GTR PNW-96. 54 pp.
Rieman, B.E., and J.D. McIntyre. 1993. Demographic and habitat requirements for conservation of bull trout.
General Technical Report. U.S. Forest Service Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah. 38 pp.
Seiler, D., G., Volkhardt, L. Kishimoto, and P. Topping. 2002. 2000 Green River juvenile salmonid
production evaluation. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington.
Willamette National Forest. 1989. Biology of the bull trout Salvelinus confluentus. A literature review.
Willamette National Forest. Eugene, Oregon. (Frequently cited as Goetz, F.A. 1989.)
Wilson, M.F. 1997. Variation in salmonid life histories: patterns and perspectives. U.S. Forest Service,
Pacific Northwest Research Station Research Paper PNW-RP-498, Portland, Oregon.
Wydoski, R.S., and R.R. Whitney. 1979. Inland Fishes of Washington. University of Washington Press,
Seattle, Washington.
2"
SI
D
E
W
A
L
K
2"
4"
2"5"
6"
2"5"6"
SI
D
E
W
A
L
K
2"2"5"6"
2"
4"
2"
4"
2"
4"TR
A
I
L
2"
2"
5"
6"
2"
5"
6"
TR
A
I
L
2"
2"
5"
6"
2"
5"
6"
2"
4"
TR
A
I
L
2"
5"
6"
2"
4"
HM
A
C
L
A
S
S
12"
HM
A
C
L
A
S
S
1
"
CR
U
S
H
E
D
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
B
A
S
E
C
O
U
R
S
E
PO
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
2
4
TY
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
TYPICAL SECTIONSTA 97+48 TO STA 100+34STA 132+09 TO STA 139+57SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
A-
S 277TH STREETTYPICAL SECTIONSTA 100+34 TO STA 102+06SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
B-
S 277TH STREETTYPICAL SECTIONSTA 102+06 TO STA 104+29SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
C-
S 277TH STREET
TY
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
ST
A
1
0
5
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
1
0
+
4
2
ST
A
1
2
6
+
3
3
T
O
I
S
T
A
1
2
7
+
2
1
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
E-
TY
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
ST
A
1
0
4
+
2
9
T
O
S
T
A
1
0
5
+
5
0
ST
A
1
2
4
+
8
8
T
O
S
T
A
1
2
6
+
3
3
ST
A
1
2
7
+
6
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
2
8
+
5
3
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
D-
TY
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
ST
A
1
1
0
+
4
2
T
O
S
T
A
1
2
4
+
4
6
ST
A
1
2
7
+
2
1
T
O
S
T
A
1
2
7
+
4
0
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
F-
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
375
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
ST
A
1
0
2
+
6
8
T
O
S
T
A
1
0
4
+
2
9
TR
A
I
L
2"2"5"
6"
2"5"6"
2"
4"
TR
A
I
L
2"2"5"6"
2"
4"
2"
4"
5"
6"
5"
6"
2"
4"
2"
2"4"5"6"5"6"2"4"2"
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
HM
A
C
L
A
S
S
12"
HM
A
C
L
A
S
S
1
"
CR
U
S
H
E
D
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
B
A
S
E
C
O
U
R
S
E
PO
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
2
4
TY
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
TYPICAL SECTIONSTA 124+54 TO STA 124+88STA 127+40 TO STA 127+60STA 128+53 TO STA 129+43SCALE: NOT TO SCALE S 277TH STREETG-TYPICAL SECTIONSTA 129+43 TO STA 132+09SCALE: NOT TO SCALE S 277TH STREETH-TYPICAL SECTIONSTA 5+34 TO STA 6+50SCALE: NOT TO SCALE AUBURN WAY NORTHI-No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
475
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
TY
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
ST
A
6
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
8
+
4
7
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
AU
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
N
O
R
T
H
J-
ST
A
1
0
0
+
3
3
.
1
7
,
(
4
.
0
'
L
T
)
ST
A
2
+
8
8
.
1
7
(3
3
.
6
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
0
2
+
0
6
.
2
3
,
(
4
4
.
5
'
L
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
0
2
+
0
6
.
2
3
,
(
4
3
.
0
'
L
T
)
ST
A
1
0
1
+
6
2
.
6
7
,
(
4
.
0
'
L
T
)
STA
3
+
8
1
.
9
0
(57.
1
'
L
T
)
ST
A
3
+
5
9
.
0
7
(3
9
.
6
'
L
T
)
ST
A
1
0
0
+
5
7
.
7
3
,
(
5
1
.
8
'
L
T
)
ST
A
1
0
2
+
4
3
.
3
1
,
(
3
4
.
4
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
0
0
+
7
5
.
2
8
,
(
4
.
0
'
L
T
)
ST
A
1
0
0
+
7
9
.
3
0
,
(
4
.
0
'
L
T
)
ST
A
1
0
0
+
8
2
.
4
8
,
(
4
3
.
0
'
L
T
)
ST
A
1
0
0
+
7
8
.
4
7
,
(
4
3
.
0
'
L
T
)
ST
A
2
+
8
7
.
7
0
(
5
7
.
2
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
KING COUNTY
ST
A
1
0
2
+
4
0
.
9
0
,
(9
3
.
3
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
0
2
+
0
1
.
8
0
,
(9
4
.
2
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
0
1
+
8
6
.
1
6
,
(7
1
.
3
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
0
1
+
6
7
.
3
2
,
(6
6
.
0
'
R
T
)
ST
A
R
T
ST
A
1
0
1
+
6
7
.
3
9
,
(4
5
.
5
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
0
2
+
4
5
.
9
2
,
(2
3
.
6
'
R
T
)
E
N
D
ST
A
2
+
8
8
.
0
9
(
4
7
.
6
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
STA 102+65.39, (3.0' LT)STA 104+19.60, (0.8' LT)STA 104+56.76, (11.0' LT)STA 102+72.30, (76.3' RT)STA 102+55.58, (49.2' RT)
ST
A
1
0
6
+
8
8
.
1
7
,
(
8
5
.
8
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
0
7
+
9
2
.
1
7
,
(
9
6
.
0
'
R
T
)
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
AUBU
R
N
W
A
Y
N
83RD A
V
E
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
11
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
SE
E
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
F
O
R
N
E
W
W
O
R
K
AC
C
O
M
M
O
D
A
T
E
D
B
Y
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
.
A
D
J
U
S
T
L
I
M
I
T
S
I
N
F
I
E
L
D
A
S
N
E
C
E
S
S
A
R
Y
OR
A
S
D
I
R
E
C
T
E
D
B
Y
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
SE
E
S
I
G
N
A
L
/
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
S
I
G
N
A
L
L
O
O
P
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
A
N
D
IN
S
T
A
L
L
A
T
I
O
N
.
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
SA
W
C
U
T
A
N
D
R
E
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
S
P
H
A
L
T
.
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
U
R
B
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
AB
A
N
D
O
N
A
N
D
P
L
U
G
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
I
P
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
O
R
M
P
I
P
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
E
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
RE
L
O
C
A
T
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
I
L
B
O
X
,
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
T
O
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
TE
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
A
N
D
P
E
R
M
A
N
E
N
T
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
W
I
T
H
L
O
C
A
L
C
A
R
R
I
E
R
.
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
AD
J
U
S
T
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
RE
M
O
V
E
/
R
E
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
A
R
E
A
L
I
G
H
T
11.2.23
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' HONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
1375
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
SI
T
E
P
R
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
BE
G
I
N
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
T
O
S
T
A
1
0
7
+
5
0
JBJWCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-SP.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
56 4
LE
G
E
N
D
:
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
PL
A
N
I
N
G
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
SA
W
C
U
T
PI
P
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CL
E
A
R
I
N
G
A
N
D
G
R
U
B
B
I
N
G
61
L
F
42
L
F
76
L
F
39
L
F
70
L
F
21
0
L
F
1,
8
7
3
S
F
30
0
S
F
51
3
S
F
89
S
F
415 SF
50
,
7
1
2
S
F
78
SEE SHEET 17 FOR REMOVAL LIMITS
131418
14'
13'
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
1
7
F
O
R
RE
M
O
V
A
L
L
I
M
I
T
S
OF
8
3
R
D
A
V
E
S
ST
A
1
1
0
+
0
1
.
0
2
,
(
1
2
.
5
'
L
T
)
ST
A
1
1
0
+
7
6
.
0
2
,
(
9
.
5
'
L
T
)
STA 109+51.96, (92.7' RT)STA 109+24.17, (97.2' RT)STA 107+92.17, (96.0' RT)
ST
A
1
1
0
+
9
4
.
3
1
,
(
4
1
.
2
'
R
T
)
ST
A
R
T
STA 109+90.28, (7
0
.
7
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
1
0
+
1
1
.
8
3
,
(
6
8
.
5
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
1
0
+
7
6
.
1
0
,
(
7
1
.
6
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
1
0
+
1
0
.
8
7
,
(
8
9
.
5
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
0
9
+
9
0
.
4
7
,
(
8
9
.
3
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
1
6
+
5
0
.
5
3
,
(
9
.
5
'
L
T
)
ST
A
1
1
6
+
0
8
.
6
9
,
(
8
8
.
3
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
1
7
+
1
3
.
5
2
,
(
1
0
1
.
3
'
R
T
)
STA 114+48.06, (11.7' RT)END
ST
A
1
1
4
+
7
2
.
2
9
,
(
3
5
.
2
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
1
4
+
7
9
.
9
4
,
(
8
4
.
3
'
R
T
)
EN
D
S 277TH STS 2
7
7
T
H
S
T
D STREET NE
86TH AVE
S
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' HONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
1475
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
SI
T
E
P
R
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
ST
A
1
0
7
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
1
7
+
5
0
JBJWCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-SP.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
15
L
F
40
L
F
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
SE
E
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
F
O
R
N
E
W
W
O
R
K
AC
C
O
M
M
O
D
A
T
E
D
B
Y
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
.
A
D
J
U
S
T
L
I
M
I
T
S
I
N
F
I
E
L
D
A
S
N
E
C
E
S
S
A
R
Y
OR
A
S
D
I
R
E
C
T
E
D
B
Y
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
SA
W
C
U
T
A
N
D
R
E
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
S
P
H
A
L
T
.
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
U
R
B
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
AB
A
N
D
O
N
A
N
D
P
L
U
G
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
I
P
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
O
R
M
P
I
P
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
E
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
RE
L
O
C
A
T
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
I
L
B
O
X
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
E
N
C
E
A
N
D
G
A
T
E
S
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
G
N
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
R
O
C
K
E
R
Y
W
A
L
L
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
RE
M
O
V
A
L
O
F
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
S
A
N
D
O
B
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
MO
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
H
Y
D
R
A
N
T
1 1.23564
LE
G
E
N
D
:
789
56
L
F
1011
10
L
F
15 13
14'
11'
11'
12'
GATE
GA
T
E
16
12 LF
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
PL
A
N
I
N
G
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
SA
W
C
U
T
PI
P
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CL
E
A
R
I
N
G
A
N
D
G
R
U
B
B
I
N
G
STA 118+43.66, (104.5' RT)STA 119+80.56, (101.0' RT
)PC
STA 118+73.53, (101.7' RT)
ST
A
1
2
6
+
1
5
.
8
1
,
(
1
2
.
5
'
L
T
)
ST
A
1
2
5
+
0
6
.
2
5
,
(
1
2
.
5
'
L
T
)
STA 1
2
5
+
0
6
.
2
5
,
(
9
.
5
'
L
T
)
STA 123+33.11, (10.5' LT)STA 124+29.68, (
9
7
.
8
'
R
T
)
STA 123+83.11, (36.4' LT)STA 123+83.21, (10.2' LT)STA 124+11.11, (36.5' LT)STA 124+11.21, (10.1' LT)
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
I ST
R
E
E
T
N
E
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' HONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
1575
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
SI
T
E
P
R
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
ST
A
1
1
7
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
2
7
+
5
0
JBJWCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-SP.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
38
L
F
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
SE
E
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
F
O
R
N
E
W
W
O
R
K
AC
C
O
M
M
O
D
A
T
E
D
B
Y
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
.
A
D
J
U
S
T
L
I
M
I
T
S
I
N
F
I
E
L
D
A
S
N
E
C
E
S
S
A
R
Y
OR
A
S
D
I
R
E
C
T
E
D
B
Y
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
SA
W
C
U
T
A
N
D
R
E
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
S
P
H
A
L
T
.
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
U
R
B
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
AB
A
N
D
O
N
A
N
D
P
L
U
G
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
I
P
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
O
R
M
P
I
P
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
E
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
RE
L
O
C
A
T
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
I
L
B
O
X
,
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
T
O
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
TE
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
A
N
D
P
E
R
M
A
N
E
N
T
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
W
I
T
H
L
O
C
A
L
C
A
R
R
I
E
R
.
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
E
N
C
E
A
N
D
G
A
T
E
S
TE
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
O
F
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
O
R
M
P
I
P
E
T
O
N
E
W
D
I
T
C
H
LO
C
A
T
I
O
N
.
A
B
A
N
D
O
N
A
N
D
P
L
U
G
P
I
P
E
W
H
E
N
D
I
R
E
C
T
E
D
B
Y
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
1
0
F
O
R
T
E
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
.
RE
M
O
V
A
L
O
F
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
S
A
N
D
O
B
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
11.23564
LE
G
E
N
D
:
78912
7
E
A
5
E
A
5
E
A
3
E
A
4
E
A
2
E
A
4 EA4 EA5 EA4 EA 4 EA3 EA
3
E
A
2
E
A
3
E
A
4
E
A
5
E
A
FOR REMOVAL LIMITS OF THE PONDAND STREAM AREA SEE SHEET 18
FO
R
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
L
I
M
I
T
S
O
F
T
H
E
P
O
N
D
AN
D
S
T
R
E
A
M
A
R
E
A
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
1
8
R
3
2
.
0
'
12'
12'13'
15'
12'
15'
15
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
PL
A
N
I
N
G
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
SA
W
C
U
T
PI
P
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CL
E
A
R
I
N
G
A
N
D
G
R
U
B
B
I
N
G
ST
A
1
3
0
+
1
5
.
8
1
,
(
3
.
5
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
3
2
+
0
9
.
0
1
,
(
3
.
5
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
3
2
+
0
9
.
0
1
,
(
7
0
.
7
'
R
T
)
EN
D
STA 129+28.22, (0.0' LT)STA 129+34.55, (87.8'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
3
0
+
9
6
.
3
9
,
(
7
7
.
1
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
3
1
+
1
6
.
8
4
,
(
4
6
.
8
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
3
2
+
5
7
.
9
1
,
(
7
4
.
7
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
3
2
+
9
4
.
0
4
,
(
3
8
.
7
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
2
+
0
9
.
0
1
,
(
6
3
.
7
'
R
T
)
L STREET NE
17.5
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' HONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
1675
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
SI
T
E
P
R
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
ST
A
1
2
7
+
5
0
T
O
E
N
D
O
F
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
JBJWCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-SP.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
97
L
F
GENERAL
N
O
T
E
S
:
SEE ROADWA
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
F
O
R
N
E
W
W
O
R
K
ACCOMMODA
T
E
D
B
Y
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
.
A
D
J
U
S
T
L
I
M
I
T
S
I
N
F
I
E
L
D
A
S
NECESSARY
O
R
A
S
D
I
R
E
C
T
E
D
B
Y
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
SA
W
C
U
T
A
N
D
R
E
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
S
P
H
A
L
T
.
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
U
R
B
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
AB
A
N
D
O
N
A
N
D
P
L
U
G
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
I
P
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
O
R
M
P
I
P
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
E
E
MO
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
H
Y
D
R
A
N
T
RE
M
O
V
E
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
S
Y
S
T
E
M
1
1.
23564
LE
G
E
N
D
:
35
2
S
F
2 EA2 EA 2 EA5 EA
52
L
F
10
3
L
F
S 27
7
T
H
S
T
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
1617
16'
15'
41'
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
PL
A
N
I
N
G
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
SA
W
C
U
T
PI
P
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CL
E
A
R
I
N
G
A
N
D
G
R
U
B
B
I
N
G
S 277TH ST AUBURN WAY N
83
R
D
A
V
E
S
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' HONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
1775
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
AU
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
N
O
R
T
H
/
8
3
R
D
A
V
E
S
SI
T
E
P
R
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
ST
A
2
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
0
+
5
0
JBJWCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-SP.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
83
R
D
A
V
E
S
1,
7
0
3
S
F
2,
5
3
1
S
F
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
SE
E
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
F
O
R
N
E
W
W
O
R
K
AC
C
O
M
M
O
D
A
T
E
D
B
Y
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
.
A
D
J
U
S
T
L
I
M
I
T
S
I
N
F
I
E
L
D
A
S
N
E
C
E
S
S
A
R
Y
OR
A
S
D
I
R
E
C
T
E
D
B
Y
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
SA
W
C
U
T
A
N
D
R
E
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
S
P
H
A
L
T
.
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
U
R
B
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
O
R
M
P
I
P
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
E
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
G
N
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
RE
M
O
V
E
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
S
Y
S
T
E
M
11.2356
LE
G
E
N
D
:
1013
31 LF
19
7
L
F
11
1
L
F
60
L
F
2,
7
5
3
S
F
2,753
S
F
445 SF 415 SF
17
SEE SHEET 13 FORREMOVAL LIMITSOF S 277TH ST
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
PL
A
N
I
N
G
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
SA
W
C
U
T
PI
P
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CL
E
A
R
I
N
G
A
N
D
G
R
U
B
B
I
N
G
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' HONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
1875
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
SI
T
E
P
R
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
ST
A
1
1
9
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
2
4
+
5
0
JBJWCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-SP.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
SE
E
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
F
O
R
NE
W
W
O
R
K
A
C
C
O
M
M
O
D
A
T
E
D
B
Y
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
.
A
D
J
U
S
T
.
LI
M
I
T
S
I
N
F
I
E
L
D
A
S
N
E
C
E
S
S
A
R
Y
O
R
A
S
D
I
R
E
C
T
E
D
BY
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
SA
W
C
U
T
A
N
D
R
E
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
S
P
H
A
L
T
.
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
U
R
B
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
AB
A
N
D
O
N
A
N
D
P
L
U
G
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
I
P
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
O
R
M
P
I
P
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
E
E
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
RE
L
O
C
A
T
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
I
L
B
O
X
,
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
T
O
CO
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
T
E
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
A
N
D
P
E
R
M
A
N
E
N
T
LO
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
W
I
T
H
L
O
C
A
L
C
A
R
R
I
E
R
.
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
E
N
C
E
A
N
D
G
A
T
E
S
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
G
N
11.23564
LE
G
E
N
D
:
78910
2 EA2 EA 6 EA
5
E
A
6
E
A
5
E
A
8
E
A
5 EA2 EA5 EA
6
E
A
R26
.
7
'
R76.4'
R20.0
'
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
PL
A
N
I
N
G
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
SA
W
C
U
T
PI
P
E
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
CL
E
A
R
I
N
G
A
N
D
G
R
U
B
B
I
N
G
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' HONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
1975
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
T
A
G
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
ESJWCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-CS.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
PI
P
E
D
O
U
T
F
A
L
L
W
I
L
L
B
E
P
O
I
N
T
O
F
M
O
N
I
T
O
R
I
N
G
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
WI
T
H
N
P
D
E
S
P
E
R
M
I
T
A
N
D
W
I
L
L
A
L
S
O
H
A
V
E
S
C
R
E
E
N
T
O
PR
E
V
E
N
T
P
O
T
E
N
T
I
A
L
F
I
S
H
I
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
F
R
O
M
AC
C
E
S
S
I
N
G
T
H
E
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
E
D
I
M
E
N
T
A
T
I
O
N
P
O
N
D
S
AN
D
U
P
S
T
R
E
A
M
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
W
O
R
K
A
R
E
A
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
1.
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
S
E
D
I
M
E
N
T
A
T
I
O
N
P
O
N
D
EX
T
E
N
D
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
T
O
T
O
E
O
F
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
EM
B
A
N
K
M
E
N
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
E
M
B
A
N
K
M
E
N
T
A
N
D
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
D
I
T
C
H
A
T
T
O
E
O
F
S
L
O
P
E
T
O
D
R
A
I
N
SE
D
I
M
E
N
T
A
T
I
O
N
P
O
N
D
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
T
E
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
F
I
S
H
B
A
R
R
I
E
R
T
O
H
Y
D
R
A
U
L
I
C
A
L
L
Y
SE
P
A
R
A
T
E
F
I
S
H
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
W
O
R
K
A
R
E
A
F
R
O
M
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
O
N
N
O
R
T
H
S
I
D
E
O
F
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
0$
,
1
7
$
,
1
)
,
6
+
3
$
6
6
$
*
(
%
(
7
:
(
(
1
(
;
7
(
1
'
(
'
(
;
,
6
7
,
1
*
CU
L
V
E
R
T
T
O
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
T
E
R
C
O
U
R
S
E
F
R
O
M
S
O
U
T
H
ST
A
G
E
1
N
O
T
E
S
(
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
o
f
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
)
12345
MA
I
N
T
A
I
N
S
E
D
I
M
E
N
T
P
O
N
D
,
P
I
P
E
D
O
U
T
F
A
L
L
*
A
N
D
O
T
H
E
R
TE
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
E
R
O
S
I
O
N
A
N
D
S
E
D
I
M
E
N
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
(
T
E
S
C
)
BE
S
T
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
P
R
A
C
T
I
C
E
S
(
B
M
P
S
)
D
U
R
I
N
G
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
T
R
E
A
T
M
E
N
T
A
N
D
D
E
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
P
O
N
D
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
M
I
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
S
T
R
E
A
M
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
F
I
S
H
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
,
R
O
A
D
S
I
D
E
T
R
A
I
L
,
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
S
T
O
R
M
DR
A
I
N
S
Y
S
T
E
M
,
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
S
I
G
N
A
L
S
A
N
D
O
T
H
E
R
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
RE
L
A
T
E
D
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
0$
,
1
7
$
,
1
)
,
6
+
3
$
6
6
$
*
(
%
(
7
:
(
(
1
(
;
7
(
1
'
(
'
(
;
,
6
7
,
1
*
CU
L
V
E
R
T
T
O
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
T
E
R
C
O
U
R
S
E
F
R
O
M
T
H
E
S
O
U
T
H
ST
A
G
E
2
N
O
T
E
S
(
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
o
f
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
)
67891011
1
PO
N
D
#
3
106POND #1
7
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
ST
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
DE
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
PO
N
D
6
PO
N
D
#
2
6
PO
N
D
#
3
5
8
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
M
I
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
S
T
R
E
A
M
11
8
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
31POND #12
3
4
3
1
PO
N
D
#
2
2
5
LE
G
E
N
D
:
ST
A
G
E
1
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
ST
A
G
E
2
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
ST
A
G
E
3
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
ST
A
G
E
4
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
STAGE
2
P
L
A
N
ST
A
G
E
1
P
L
A
N
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
AUBURN WAY N D STREET NE
L STREET NE
83RD AVE S
G STREET NE
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
AUBURN WAY N D STREET NE
L STREET NE
83RD AVE S
G STREET NE
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' HONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
2075
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
T
A
G
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
ESJWCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-CS.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
RE
M
O
V
E
S
E
D
I
M
E
N
T
A
T
I
O
N
P
O
N
D
,
P
I
P
E
D
O
U
T
F
A
L
L
A
N
D
O
T
H
E
R
TE
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
E
R
O
S
I
O
N
A
N
D
S
E
D
I
M
E
N
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
(
T
E
S
C
)
BE
S
T
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
P
R
A
C
T
I
C
E
S
(
B
M
P
S
)
.
RE
M
O
V
E
T
E
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
H
Y
D
R
A
U
L
I
C
B
A
R
R
I
E
R
A
N
D
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
NE
W
F
I
S
H
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
S
T
O
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
O
N
T
H
E
NO
R
T
H
S
I
D
E
O
F
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
.
MA
I
N
T
A
I
N
F
I
S
H
P
A
S
S
A
G
E
B
E
T
W
E
E
N
N
E
W
F
I
S
H
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
A
N
D
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
T
E
R
C
O
U
R
S
E
F
R
O
M
T
H
E
S
O
U
T
H
ST
A
G
E
3
N
O
T
E
S
(
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
o
f
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
)
121314
FI
N
A
L
M
I
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
S
T
R
E
A
M
A
N
D
E
X
W
A
T
E
R
C
O
U
R
S
E
F
R
O
M
T
H
E
SO
U
T
H
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
E
D
T
O
N
E
W
F
I
S
H
P
A
S
S
A
G
E
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
BA
L
A
N
C
E
O
F
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
,
N
O
N
-
G
R
O
U
N
D
DI
S
T
U
R
B
I
N
G
A
C
T
I
V
I
T
I
E
S
ST
A
G
E
4
N
O
T
E
S
(
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
o
f
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
)
1516
PI
P
E
D
O
U
T
F
A
L
L
W
I
L
L
B
E
P
O
I
N
T
O
F
M
O
N
I
T
O
R
I
N
G
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
WI
T
H
N
P
D
E
S
P
E
R
M
I
T
A
N
D
W
I
L
L
A
L
S
O
H
A
V
E
S
C
R
E
E
N
T
O
PR
E
V
E
N
T
P
O
T
E
N
T
I
A
L
F
I
S
H
I
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
F
R
O
M
AC
C
E
S
S
I
N
G
T
H
E
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
E
D
I
M
E
N
T
A
T
I
O
N
P
O
N
D
S
AN
D
U
P
S
T
R
E
A
M
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
W
O
R
K
A
R
E
A
.
1.
STAGE
4
P
L
A
N
15
16
ST
A
G
E
3
P
L
A
N
12POND #1
12
PO
N
D
#
2
12
PO
N
D
#
3
14
13
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
LE
G
E
N
D
:
ST
A
G
E
1
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
ST
A
G
E
2
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
ST
A
G
E
3
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
ST
A
G
E
4
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
AUBURN WAY N D STREET NE
L STREET NE
83RD AVE S
G STREET NE
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
AUBURN WAY N D STREET NE
L STREET NE
83RD AVE S
G STREET NE
KING COUNTY
ST
A
1
0
0
+
3
4
.
8
5
,
5
8
.
2
'
L
T
BE
G
I
N
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
,
G
U
T
T
E
R
,
AN
D
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
10.0'
ST
A
2
+
8
8
.
1
8
,
(
4
7
.
1
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
,
G
U
T
T
E
R
,
A
N
D
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
MA
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
PC
C
STA 4+87.02, (67.9'LT)BEGIN TRAFFIC CURB, GUTTERAND SIDEWALK
6
.
0
'
6.0'
R=
6
5
'
SE
E
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
NO
T
E
1
R=
5
0
'
SE
E
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
NO
T
E
1
ST
A
1
0
2
+
2
5
.
6
0
,
(
3
3
.
9
'
R
T
)
37
'
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
(
C
E
N
T
E
R
)
R=
8
4
'
SE
E
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
NO
T
E
1
STA 3+
5
7
.
3
7
,
(
4
3
.
2
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
MA
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
STA 99+36.67, (45.9'LT)CENTER OF TRAFFIC ISLANDSEE GENERAL NOTE 1
ST
A
1
0
0
+
6
3
.
7
1
,
(
3
4
.
7
'
R
T
)
CE
N
T
E
R
O
F
TR
A
F
F
I
C
I
S
L
A
N
D
SE
E
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1
ST
A
2
+
8
8
.
1
7
,
(
3
3
.
6
'
R
T
)
MA
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
PI STA 97+49.15
PI STA 100+00.00
1
(
277
T
H
S
T
A
1
0
0
+
0
0
.
0
8
=
AW
N
S
T
A
4
+
0
3
.
4
2
N
1
3
2
1
6
2
.
3
5
E
1
2
9
4
4
3
7
.
5
2
ST
A
1
0
1
+
2
7
.
9
5
,
(
3
3
.
0
'
R
T
)
PT
STA 99+50.40, (42.2'RT)ENDMATCH EXISTING 1
(PVI STA 97+48.00EL=57.57PVI STA 97+75.00EL=56.66PVI STA 98+00.00EL=55.92PVI STA 98+25.00EL=55.16PVI STA 98+50.00EL=54.71PVI STA 98+75.00EL=54.07PVI STA 99+00.00EL=53.86PVI STA 99+25.00EL=53.56PVI STA 99+50.00EL=53.30
PVI STA 99+75.00
EL=52.65
PVI STA 100+00.00
EL=52.00
PVI STA 100+25.00
EL=51.34
PVI STA 100+80.00
EL=50.28
PVI STA 101+25.00
EL=50.14
58.057.5057.556.6656.755.9255.955.1655.254.7154.754.0754.153.8653.953.5653.653.3053.3
52.65
52.6
52.00
52.0
51.34
51.3
50.77
50.5
50.36
50.2
50.12
50.0
50.14
50.0
50.28
50.1
50.42
50.2
50.56
50.4
50.71
50.6
50.85
50.6
49.62
49.85
49.93
50.14
50.23
EX
M
H
4
8
"
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
0
2
+
0
7
5
6
.
6
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
4
7
.
1
1
IE
=
4
2
.
5
1
I
N
(
2
4
"
)
W
IE
=
4
2
.
6
6
I
N
(
2
4
"
)
S
IE
=
4
2
.
5
0
O
U
T
(
1
2
"
)
N
W
45
L
F
1
2
"
S
D
(
C
O
R
R
H
D
P
E
)
S
=
0
.
3
0
%
MH
#
2
4
8
"
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
0
0
+
7
5
2
1
.
7
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
4
9
.
8
0
IE
=
4
2
.
7
0
I
N
(
1
8
"
)
S
IE
=
4
2
.
0
5
I
N
(
1
2
"
)
E
IE
=
4
2
.
0
5
O
U
T
(
1
8
"
)
N
MH
#
3
4
8
"
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
0
1
+
1
8
3
2
.
6
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
5
0
.
1
2
IE
=
4
2
.
1
9
I
N
(
1
2
"
)
E
IE
=
4
2
.
1
9
O
U
T
(
1
2
"
)
W
77
L
F
1
2
"
S
D
(
C
O
R
R
H
D
P
E
)
S
=
0
.
3
0
%
28
L
F
1
2
"
S
D
(
C
O
R
R
H
D
P
E
)
S
=
0
.
3
0
%
MH
#
4
4
8
"
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
0
1
+
9
5
3
1
.
6
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
4
9
.
9
0
IE
=
4
2
.
4
2
I
N
(
1
2
"
)
S
E
IE
=
4
2
.
4
2
O
U
T
(
1
2
"
)
W
BEGIN CONSTRUCTION ALIGNMENT277TH STA 94+95.00 6
(
PL
A
N
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
AUBU
R
N
W
A
Y
N
S 277TH ST
3
6
3
1
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
4
LE
G
E
N
D
:
HM
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
/
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
2"
G
R
I
N
D
4"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
)
2"
G
R
I
N
D
2"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
BU
T
T
J
O
I
N
T
4"
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4"
P
O
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
SI
D
E
W
A
L
K
W
I
T
H
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
I
N
G
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
2
3
.
CE
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
WS
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
1
0
.
1
2
-
0
3
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
/
I
N
D
U
S
T
R
I
A
L
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
0
9
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
P
A
R
A
L
L
E
L
C
U
R
B
R
A
M
P
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F-
4
0
.
1
2
-
0
2
.
ST
R
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
13
ST
O
R
M
N
O
T
E
S
IN
S
T
A
L
L
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
1
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
CO
N
N
E
C
T
S
T
O
R
M
S
E
W
E
R
P
I
P
E
T
O
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
/
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
P
I
P
E
.
S
E
E
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
F
O
R
P
I
P
E
T
Y
P
E
.
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
3
1
F
O
R
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
.
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
V
A
L
V
E
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
56
2469
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
S
3
8
-
3
9
F
O
R
I
N
T
E
R
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
G
E
O
M
E
T
R
Y
.
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
3
1
F
O
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
N
A
N
D
8
3
R
D
A
V
E
S
IM
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
.
FO
R
D
U
A
L
F
A
C
E
C
E
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
L
I
M
I
T
S
S
E
E
SH
E
E
T
S
3
3
-
3
7
.
PR
O
T
E
C
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
U
T
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
A
N
D
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
N
O
T
SC
H
E
D
U
L
E
D
F
O
R
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1.2.3.4.101112
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
2175
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
BE
G
I
N
T
O
S
T
A
1
0
2
+
5
0
ESJWCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-RD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
4
5
6
3 3
6
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
B
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
C
102+06
100+34
ROADWAY SECTION A 97+48EXISTING
G
R
A
D
E
A
T
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FINISH
G
R
A
D
E
A
T
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
CU
R
B
F
L
R
T
(
T
Y
P
)
2
2
2
4 4
1
1
CONSTRUCTION ALIGNMENT CURVE DATAPI - STATION(AWN) 135+50.63 ǻ
RADIUS2865.00'LENGTH1143.97'TANGENT579.71'
SE
C
.
3
1
T
.
2
2
N
.
,
R
.
5
E
W
.
M
.
SEC. 36 T. 22N., R.4E W.M
.
6
6
6
2
2
2
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
2
9
9
1611
11
1212 10 10
10
11
12
12
11
9
3
10
12
12
9
9
TY
P
E
B
TYPEBTYPEA
TY
P
E
A
11
ST
A
1
0
6
+
9
3
.
2
7
,
3
3
.
6
'
R
T
PT
ST
A
1
0
6
+
8
2
.
8
4
,
3
3
.
2
'
R
T
PC
10.0'
10.0'
ST
A
1
0
4
+
7
3
.
3
5
,
(
9
.
0
'
L
T
)
PC
STA 104+29.55, (0.6'RT)END DUAL FACE CEMENT TRAFFIC CURBBEGIN RAISED MEDIANSTA 102+72.68, (68.3'RT)EL=43.22
ST
A
1
0
4
+
9
7
.
6
9
,
(
7
3
.
3
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
2
.
3
8
ST
A
1
0
6
+
8
8
.
3
1
,
(
7
0
.
8
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
1
.
6
5
PC STA 103+44.53 PT STA 103+98.34
6
(
ST
A
1
0
4
+
5
0
.
0
0
,
(
3
9
.
8
'
R
T
)
0.
3
4
%
0.57%
10
0
'
V
C
PV
I
S
T
A
1
0
4
+
9
0
.
0
0
EL
=
5
2
.
2
2
'
K=
1
0
9
.
4
2
BVC STA 104+40.00EL=51.93
EVC STA 105+40.00
EL=52.04
HI
G
H
P
T
S
T
A
1
0
5
+
0
2
.
2
7
HI
G
H
P
T
E
L
=
5
2
.
1
1
'
MH
#
5
4
8
"
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
0
5
+
5
0
3
3
.
5
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
5
1
.
3
4
IE
=
4
6
.
9
2
I
N
(
1
8
"
)
W
IE
=
4
6
.
9
2
O
U
T
(
1
8
"
)
E
MH
#
6
4
8
"
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
0
7
+
1
4
3
4
.
1
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
5
0
.
7
6
IE
=
4
6
.
7
2
I
N
(
1
8
"
)
W
IE
=
4
6
.
7
2
O
U
T
(
1
8
"
)
E
50.8550.650.9950.951.1351.151.2851.251.4251.351.5651.151.7051.651.8551.751.9851.8
52.07
51.9
52.11
52.0
52.08
51.9
52.01
51.9
51.92
51.8
51.84
51.6
51.75
51.5
51.66
51.4
51.58
51.3
51.49
51.2
51.40
51.1
51.32
51.0
CB#14 TYPE ISTA 103+08 34.2' RRIM EL=50.52IE=47.22 OUT (18") E 241 LF 18"SD (CORR HDPE) S=0.13%
16
4
L
F
1
8
"
S
D
(
C
O
R
R
H
D
P
E
)
S
=
0
.
1
3
%
51.96
52.11
52.05
52.25
52.09
52.29
52.08
52.26
52.01
52.19
51.93
52.10
51.85
52.02
51.77
51.93
51.69
51.85
51.61
51.76
51.53
51.68
51.45
51.59
51.37
51.50
50.2350.3750.5450.5850.7850.8250.9651.1151.26
51.35
51.39
51.38
51.31
51.23
51.15
51.07
50.99
50.91
50.81
50.67
50.54
3
3
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
1
2
2
LE
G
E
N
D
:
HM
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
/
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
2"
G
R
I
N
D
4"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
)
2"
G
R
I
N
D
2"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
BU
T
T
J
O
I
N
T
4"
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4"
P
O
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
CE
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
WS
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
1
0
.
1
2
-
0
3
.
ST
R
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
3
ST
O
R
M
N
O
T
E
S
IN
S
T
A
L
L
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
1
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
P
I
P
E
.
S
E
E
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
F
O
R
P
I
P
E
T
Y
P
E
.
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
D
I
T
C
H
S
E
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
3
1
F
O
R
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
H
Y
D
R
A
N
T
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
WA
T
E
R
-
0
7
.
1268
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
2275
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
1
0
2
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
0
7
+
5
0
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-RD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
CENTERLINE CURVE DATAPI - STATION(277TH) 103+71.44 ǻ
RADIUS1000.00'LENGTH53.81'TANGENT26.91'1
2
6
6ROADWAY SECTION C
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
D
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
E
104+29EXISTING GRADE AT CENTERLINE FINISH GRADE AT CENTERLINE CURB FL RT (TYP)
ME
D
I
A
N
F
L
L
T
(
T
Y
P
)
ME
D
I
A
N
F
L
R
T
(
T
Y
P
)
R=100'
R=100'R=100'
8
8
8
2
SEC. 31
T
.
2
2
N
.
,
R
.
5
E
W
.
M
.
6
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
PL
A
N
105+50
FO
R
D
U
A
L
F
A
C
E
C
E
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
L
I
M
I
T
S
S
E
E
SH
E
E
T
S
3
3
-
3
7
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1.15
15
STA 107+98.43, 42.7'RTPT STA 109
+
5
2
.
8
7
,
(
4
0
.
6
'
R
T
)
PCSTA 109+88.47, 89.2'RTEND TRAFFIC CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALKMATCH EXISTING
ST
A
1
1
0
+
1
6
.
4
6
,
8
9
.
6
'
R
T
BE
G
I
N
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
,
G
U
T
T
E
R
,
A
N
D
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
MA
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
STA 107+88.00, 42.3'RTPC
ST
A
1
1
0
+
5
6
.
9
8
,
(
2
9
.
5
'
R
T
)
PT
10.0'10.0'
10.0'
10.0'
R=
3
5
'
L=
5
5
.
9
6
'
'
R=
4
0
'
L=
6
2
.
7
8
'
'
ST
A
1
1
0
+
4
1
.
7
7
,
(
7
.
2
'
L
T
)
EN
D
R
A
I
S
E
D
M
E
D
I
A
N
BE
G
I
N
D
U
A
L
-
F
A
C
E
D
C
E
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
STA 109+88.34,
(
7
6
.
1
'
R
T
)
PT
ST
A
1
1
0
+
1
6
.
4
4
,
(
6
8
.
9
'
R
T
)
PC
48''SDSTA 107+93.30, (80.4'RT)EL=41.25 STA 109+50.92, (78.2'RT)EL=42.65 STA 109+23.55, (78.6'RT)EL=40.75
ST
A
1
1
0
+
7
5
.
6
1
,
(
6
1
.
3
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
6
.
3
9
ST
A
1
1
1
+
0
0
.
0
6
,
(
5
8
.
3
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
6
.
3
6
PI
S
T
A
1
1
0
+
0
3
.
7
5
PI
S
T
A
1
1
0
+
0
2
.
0
1
6
(
STA 1
0
9
+
5
0
.
0
0
,
(44.2'R
T
)
ST
A
1
1
0
+
6
3
.
9
1
,
(
4
8
.
2
'
R
T
)
PC
C
ST
A
1
1
0
+
7
3
.
0
3
,
(4
5
.
3
'
R
T
)
PT
ST
A
1
1
0
+
4
3
.
6
8
,
(
5
4
.
9
'
R
T
)
PC
STA 109+9
9
.
0
1
,
(
9
.
5
'
L
T
)
PC
ST
A
1
1
0
+
0
3
.
0
1
,
(
9
.
4
'
L
T
)
PT
0.
3
6
%
100' VCPVI STA 109+40.00EL=50.66'K=141.37BVC STA 108+90.00EL=50.84
EVC STA 109+90.00
EL=50.84
LOW PT STA 109+38.74LOW PT EL=50.75'221 LF 18"SD (CORR HDPE) S=0.12%
13
3
L
F
1
8
"
S
D
(
C
O
R
R
H
D
P
E
)
S
=
0
.
1
3
%
13
4
L
F
1
8
"
S
D
(
C
O
R
R
H
D
P
E
)
S
=
0
.
1
2
%
MH
#
8
4
8
"
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
1
0
+
6
7
2
8
.
2
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
5
0
.
5
6
IE
=
4
6
.
2
8
I
N
(
1
8
"
)
W
IE
=
4
6
.
2
8
O
U
T
(
1
8
"
)
E
MH
#
9
4
8
"
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
1
2
+
0
0
3
2
.
0
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
5
0
.
9
7
IE
=
4
6
.
1
1
I
N
(
1
8
"
)
W
IE
=
4
6
.
1
1
O
U
T
(
1
8
"
)
E
51.3251.051.2350.951.1550.851.0650.850.9750.750.8950.650.8050.650.7650.450.7650.5
50.80
50.6
50.88
50.8
50.97
50.7
51.06
50.9
51.15
51.0
51.24
51.1
51.33
51.2
51.42
51.2
51.52
51.3
51.61
51.4
51.70
51.6
51.79
51.6
50.5450.4150.2950.2150.1350.0549.9849.9449.94
48.73
51.3751.5051.2951.4251.2151.3351.1351.2551.0551.1650.9751.0850.9050.9950.8650.95
50.86
50.95
50.91
50.99
51.00
51.07
51.10
51.14
48.55
50.53
50.56
50.64
50.72
50.79
50.87
50.95
51.02
51.09
MH#7 48" TYPE ISTA 109+34 39.4' RRIM EL=49.97IE=46.45 IN (18") WIE=46.45 OUT (18") E
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
D STREET NE
86TH AVE
S
3
3
3
3
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
LE
G
E
N
D
:
HM
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
/
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
2"
G
R
I
N
D
4"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
)
2"
G
R
I
N
D
2"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
BU
T
T
J
O
I
N
T
4"
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4"
P
O
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
CE
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
WS
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
1
0
.
1
2
-
0
3
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
P
A
R
A
L
L
E
L
C
U
R
B
R
A
M
P
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F-
4
0
.
1
2
-
0
2
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
S
I
N
G
L
E
D
I
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
C
U
R
B
R
A
M
P
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
4
0
.
1
6
.
0
2
.
ST
R
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
367
ST
O
R
M
N
O
T
E
S
IN
S
T
A
L
L
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
1
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
P
I
P
E
.
S
E
E
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
F
O
R
P
I
P
E
T
Y
P
E
.
CO
N
N
E
C
T
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
P
I
P
E
T
O
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
I
P
E
.
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
D
I
T
C
H
S
E
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
3
1
F
O
R
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
.
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
V
A
L
V
E
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
H
Y
D
R
A
N
T
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
WA
T
E
R
-
0
7
.
2678
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
S
3
8
-
3
9
F
O
R
I
N
T
E
R
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
R
A
M
P
G
E
O
M
E
T
R
Y
.
FO
R
D
U
A
L
F
A
C
E
C
E
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
L
I
M
I
T
S
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
S
33
-
3
7
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1.2.10
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
2375
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
1
0
7
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
1
2
+
5
0
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-RD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
ROADWAY SECTION E
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
F
110+42
EXISTING GRADE AT CENTERLINE FINISH GRADE AT CENTERLINE CURB FL RT (TYP)MEDIAN FL LT (TYP)MEDIAN FL RT (TYP)3 R=100'3 6
6
6
6
7
3
3
7
7
8
8
8 88 2
2
2
SE
C
.
3
1
T
.
2
2
N
.
,
R
.
5
E
W
.
M
.
2
2
2
10
10
PL
A
N
R=15'
R=35'
11
11
11
10
26
.
0
'
3
3
15
15
ST
A
1
1
6
+
1
4
.
0
3
,
(
5
0
.
1
'
R
T
)
PT
ST
A
1
1
6
+
0
4
.
7
5
,
(
4
9
.
4
'
R
T
)
PC
ST
A
1
1
7
+
0
8
.
3
1
,
(
6
1
.
7
'
R
T
)
PC
10.0'
10.0'
ST
A
1
1
7
+
1
9
.
9
0
,
(
6
2
.
4
'
R
T
)
PC
C
3.5'
ST
A
1
1
6
+
1
3
.
8
7
,
(
7
9
.
0
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
5
.
6
9
ST
A
1
1
7
+
1
4
.
5
5
,
(
9
0
.
7
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
5
.
5
6
6
(
ST
A
1
1
7
+
4
9
.
9
3
,
(
6
2
.
5
'
R
T
)
PT
STA 115+00.0
0
,
(
4
9
.
0
'
R
T
)
0.
3
4
%
10
0
'
V
C
PV
I
S
T
A
1
1
7
+
6
5
.
0
0
EL
=
5
0
.
6
9
'
K=
1
4
4
.
7
4
BVC STA 117+15.00
EL=50.86LO
W
P
T
S
T
A
1
1
7
+
6
4
.
6
8
LO
W
P
T
E
L
=
5
0
.
7
8
'
100' VCPVI STA 113+45.00EL=52.13'K=141.68BVC STA 112+95.00EL=51.95EVC STA 113+95.00EL=51.96 HIGH PT STA 113+46.37HIGH PT EL=52.04'353 LF 18"SD (CORR HDPE) S=0.12%
21
4
L
F
1
8
"
S
D
(
C
O
R
R
H
D
P
E
)
S
=
0
.
1
2
%
MH
#
1
0
4
8
"
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
1
5
+
5
2
4
6
.
1
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
5
0
.
5
0
IE
=
4
5
.
6
7
I
N
(
1
8
"
)
W
IE
=
4
5
.
6
7
O
U
T
(
1
8
"
)
E
51.7951.651.8851.751.9751.852.0351.852.0451.852.0151.851.9451.751.8651.651.7751.5
51.69
51.4
51.60
51.0
51.51
51.2
51.43
51.2
51.34
51.1
51.26
51.0
51.17
50.9
51.09
50.8
51.00
50.7
50.91
50.6
50.83
50.5
50.78
50.5
51.0951.1651.2351.2751.2651.2151.1251.0250.91
50.81
50.70
50.59
50.49
50.37
50.27
50.23
50.09
49.94
49.79
49.58
49.53
S 277TH
S
T
3
3
3
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
LE
G
E
N
D
:
HM
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
/
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
2"
G
R
I
N
D
4"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
)
2"
G
R
I
N
D
2"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
BU
T
T
J
O
I
N
T
4"
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4"
P
O
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
CE
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
WS
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
1
0
.
1
2
-
0
3
.
ST
R
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
3
ST
O
R
M
N
O
T
E
S
IN
S
T
A
L
L
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
1
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
D
I
T
C
H
S
E
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
3
1
F
O
R
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
.
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
H
Y
D
R
A
N
T
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
WA
T
E
R
-
0
7
.
28
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
2475
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
1
1
2
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
1
7
+
5
0
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-RD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
F
EXISTING GRADE AT CENTERLINE FINISH GRADE AT CENTERLINE CURB FL RT (TYP)
R=100'
3
R=100'
8
8
2
SEC.
3
1
T
.
2
2
N
.
,
R
.
5
E
W
.
M
.
2
6
6
3
PLAN
FO
R
D
U
A
L
F
A
C
E
C
E
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
L
I
M
I
T
S
S
E
E
SH
E
E
T
S
3
3
-
3
7
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1.11
11
15
15
STA 118+71.23, (62.5'RT)PC STA 118+79.27, (62.2'RT)PT
ST
A
1
2
0
+
4
0
.
4
9
,
(
4
9
.
5
'
R
T
)
PT
10.0'
10.0'
10.0'
ST
A
1
2
0
+
3
2
.
4
5
,
(
4
9
.
8
'
R
T
)
PC
STA 118+75.31, (92.2'RT)EL=45.35 STA 119+84.99, (93.2
'
R
T
)
EL=
4
5
.
2
1
ST
A
1
2
0
+
4
8
.
6
3
,
(
8
5
.
5
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
5
.
2
9
ST
A
1
2
0
+
7
0
.
1
6
,
(
8
0
.
3
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
5
.
3
8
STA 12
0
+
1
0
.
5
1
,
(
1
0
4
.
6
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
5
.
1
7
STA 118+65.08, (66.0'RT)0.35%100' VCPVI STA 117+65.00EL=50.69'K=144.74EVC STA 118+15.00EL=50.86 LOW PT STA 117+64.68LOW PT EL=50.78'
10
0
'
V
C
PV
I
S
T
A
1
2
1
+
3
5
.
0
0
EL
=
5
1
.
9
8
'
K=
1
5
4
.
9
6
BVC STA 120+85.00
EL=51.80
EVC STA 121+85.00
EL=51.83
HI
G
H
P
T
S
T
A
1
2
1
+
3
8
.
8
7
HI
G
H
P
T
E
L
=
5
1
.
9
0
'
MH#11 48" TYPE ISTA 117+65 61.0' RRIM EL=49.56IE=45.41 IN (18") WIE=45.41 OUT (18") E 273 LF 18"SD (CORR HDPE) S=0.13%
24
3
L
F
1
8
"
S
D
(
C
O
R
R
H
D
P
E
)
S
=
0
.
1
3
%
MH
#
1
2
4
8
"
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
2
0
+
3
6
4
8
.
0
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
5
0
.
6
7
IE
=
4
5
.
0
6
I
N
(
1
8
"
)
W
IE
=
4
5
.
0
6
O
U
T
(
1
8
"
)
E
)
50.7850.550.7850.550.8250.650.9050.750.9950.851.0750.951.1651.051.2551.251.3351.3
51.42
51.3
51.51
51.5
51.59
51.5
51.68
51.6
51.77
51.7
51.85
51.8
51.89
51.9
51.89
51.9
51.85
51.8
51.78
51.8
51.71
51.7
51.63
51.5
49.5349.5349.5749.6549.7449.8250.2750.5850.71
50.83
50.96
51.09
50.69
50.78
50.86
50.90
50.90
50.86
50.79
50.72
50.64
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
33
3
EXISTING GRADEAT CENTERLINE FINISH GRADEAT CENTERLINE
LE
G
E
N
D
:
HM
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
/
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
2"
G
R
I
N
D
4"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
)
2"
G
R
I
N
D
2"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
BU
T
T
J
O
I
N
T
4"
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4"
P
O
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
CE
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
WS
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
1
0
.
1
2
-
0
3
.
ST
R
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
3
ST
O
R
M
N
O
T
E
S
IN
S
T
A
L
L
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
1
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
P
I
P
E
.
S
E
E
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
F
O
R
P
I
P
E
T
Y
P
E
.
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
D
I
T
C
H
S
E
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
3
1
F
O
R
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
H
Y
D
R
A
N
T
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
WA
T
E
R
-
0
7
.
268
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
2575
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
1
1
7
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
2
2
+
5
0
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-RD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
F
EXISTING GRADE AT CENTERLINE FINISH GRADE AT CENTERLINE CURB FL RT (TYP)
3
R=100'
R=100'
R=50'
8
2
8
8 88 2
SE
C
.
3
1
T
.
2
2
N
.
,
R
.
5
E
W
.
M
.
21
L
F
1
2
"
D
I
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
S
=
3
.
7
5
%
2
2 6
6
6
PL
A
N
FO
R
D
U
A
L
F
A
C
E
C
E
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
L
I
M
I
T
S
S
E
E
SH
E
E
T
S
3
3
-
3
7
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1.
R
=
3
5
'
15
15
ST
A
1
2
5
+
1
0
.
7
4
,
(
5
0
.
0
'
R
T
)
PC
ST
A
1
2
6
+
4
4
.
7
0
,
(
4
7
.
7
'
R
T
)
PT
10.0'
10.0'
ST
A
1
2
7
+
2
1
.
0
7
,
(
3
.
8
'
L
T
)
EN
D
R
A
I
S
E
D
M
E
D
I
A
N
STA 124+53.55, (14.0'RT)BEGIN RAISED MEDIAN STA 124+53.95, (13.5'RT)PC STA 124+82.52, (3.0
'
R
T
)
PR
C
ST
A
1
2
5
+
3
0
.
9
3
,
(
9
.
5
'
L
T
)
PT
ST
A
1
2
5
+
3
6
.
0
7
,
(
1
4
.
4
'
R
T
)
PC
ST
A
1
2
5
+
7
1
.
9
8
,
(
7
.
6
'
R
T
)
PR
C
ST
A
1
2
6
+
0
5
.
7
0
,
(
0
.
7
'
R
T
)
PT
ST
A
1
2
7
+
1
9
.
6
1
,
(
2
.
3
'
L
T
)
PT
ST
A
1
2
7
+
1
9
.
6
3
,
(
5
.
3
'
L
T
)
PC
ST
A
1
2
7
+
4
0
.
4
3
,
(
9
.
1
'
R
T
)
EN
D
D
U
A
L
-
F
A
C
E
D
C
E
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
BE
G
I
N
R
A
I
S
E
D
M
E
D
I
A
N
STA 122+50.60, (78.3'RT)EL=46.04STA 123+10.93, (80.0'RT)EL=45.86 STA 123+97.95, (84.5'RT)EL=43.42
ST
A
1
2
4
+
7
6
.
2
7
,
(
8
5
.
6
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
3
.
6
7
ST
A
1
2
6
+
4
0
.
2
2
,
(
8
0
.
0
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
4
.
1
8
PI STA 124+58.41
ST
A
1
2
6
+
1
7
.
7
5
,
(
9
.
4
'
L
T
)
AP
ST
A
1
2
6
+
0
0
.
0
0
,
(
5
2
.
2
'
R
T
)
0.30%
10
0
'
V
C
PV
I
S
T
A
1
2
5
+
9
0
.
0
0
EL
=
5
0
.
6
2
'
K=
1
4
0
.
6
5
BVC STA 125+40.00
EL=50.77
EVC STA 126+40.00
EL=50.83
LO
W
P
T
S
T
A
1
2
5
+
8
1
.
8
7
LO
W
P
T
E
L
=
5
0
.
7
1
'
226 LF 12"SD (DI) S=
0
.
1
0
%
20
7
L
F
1
2
"
S
D
(
D
I
)
S
=
0
.
1
0
%
CB
#
2
1
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
2
5
+
7
5
4
8
.
1
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
5
0
.
3
3
IE
=
4
7
.
7
5
I
N
(
1
2
"
)
E
IE
=
4
7
.
7
5
O
U
T
(
1
2
"
)
W
MH#13 48" TYPE ISTA 123+50 48.0' RRIM EL=50.38IE=47.52 IN (12" DI) EIE=45.99 OUT (18") W 72 LF 18"SD (CORR HDPE) S=1.74%51.6351.551.5651.551.4951.451.4151.351.3451.251.2651.151.1951.051.1150.951.0450.9
50.96
50.8
50.89
50.8
50.82
50.6
50.74
50.6
50.71
50.6
50.72
50.8
50.77
50.7
50.87
50.8
50.97
50.9
51.08
51.0
51.18
51.1
51.28
51.0
CB#15 TYPE ISTA 122+79 48.0' RRIM EL=50.59IE=44.74 IN (18") WIE=44.74 IN (18") EIE=44.74 OUT (18") S50.6450.5750.5050.4250.3550.2750.2050.1250.05
49.97
49.90
49.83
49.76
49.73
49.75
49.81
49.92
50.04
50.16
50.28
50.39
50.67
50.83
50.60
50.98
50.53
51.00
50.48
50.93
50.58
50.90
50.70
50.91
50.77
50.96
50.88
51.03
51.00
51.12
51.11
51.20
51.18
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
3
3
EXISTING GRA
D
E
AT CENTERLIN
E
FINISH GRADEAT CENTERLIN
E
LE
G
E
N
D
:
HM
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
/
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
2"
G
R
I
N
D
4"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
)
2"
G
R
I
N
D
2"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
BU
T
T
J
O
I
N
T
4"
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4"
P
O
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
CE
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
WS
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
1
0
.
1
2
-
0
3
.
ST
R
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
3
ST
O
R
M
N
O
T
E
S
IN
S
T
A
L
L
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
1
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
P
I
P
E
.
S
E
E
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
F
O
R
P
I
P
E
T
Y
P
E
.
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
D
I
T
C
H
S
E
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
3
1
F
O
R
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
H
Y
D
R
A
N
T
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
WA
T
E
R
-
0
7
.
1268
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
4
3
F
O
R
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
F
I
S
H
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
.
FO
R
D
U
A
L
F
A
C
E
C
E
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
L
I
M
I
T
S
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
S
33
-
3
7
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1.2.
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
2675
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
1
2
2
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
2
7
+
5
0
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-RD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
ROADWAY SECTION FROADWAY
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
G
124+54EXISTING GRADE AT C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FINISH GRADE AT C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
CURB
F
L
R
T
(
T
Y
P
)
ME
D
I
A
N
F
L
L
T
(
T
Y
P
)
ME
D
I
A
N
F
L
R
T
(
T
Y
P
)
R=100
'
R=100'
R=100'
R=100'
R=
1
'
R=0.5'PROPOSED FISH CULVERTSEE GENERAL NOTE 1
8
8
88 21
1
8
SE
C
.
3
1
T
.
2
2
N
.
,
R
.
5
E
W
.
M
.
1 2
1
66
6
6
1110PROPOSED FISH CULVERTSEE GENERAL NOTE 1
PL
A
N
124+88
126+33
127+21
127+40
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
D
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
E
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
SE
C
T
I
O
N
F
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
SE
C
T
I
O
N
G
15
15
ST
A
1
3
0
+
5
1
.
2
6
,
(
3
8
.
5
'
R
T
)
PT
10.0'
10.0'
STA 129+
4
3
.
3
7
,
(
4
.
1
'
R
T
)
END RAIS
E
D
M
E
D
I
A
N
BEGIN DU
A
L
-
F
A
C
E
D
C
E
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
STA 127+64.60, (3.2'LT)PRCRAISED MEDIANSTA 127+65.58, (3.5'LT)PCRAISED MEDIANSTA 129+18.23, (40.3'RT)PCSTA 127+75.25, (77.4'RT)EL=44.61 STA 128+25.02, (74.3'RT)EL=44.76STA 129+25.27, (78.9'RT
)
EL=45.03
ST
A
1
2
9
+
6
4
.
3
2
,
(
7
1
.
4
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
5
.
2
8
ST
A
1
3
0
+
2
4
.
4
1
,
(
7
0
.
6
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
5
.
6
7
ST
A
1
3
0
+
9
5
.
8
4
,
(
6
9
.
5
'
R
T
)
EL
=
4
6
.
1
2
6
(
EL
=
4
6
.
0
3
0.41%
0.
5
1
%
100
'
V
C
PVI STA 1
2
9
+
6
0
.
0
0
EL=5
2
.
1
5
'
K=10
8
.
8
4
BVC STA 129+10.00EL=51.94
EVC STA 130+10.00
EL=51.90
HIGH PT ST
A
1
2
9
+
5
4
.
9
8
HIGH PT
E
L
=
5
2
.
0
4
'
CB#22 TYPE ISTA 127+81 42.5' RRIM EL=50.56IE=47.95 IN (12") EIE=47.95 OUT (12") W 265 LF 12"SD (DI) S=0.15%
CB
#
2
3
T
Y
P
E
I
ST
A
1
3
0
+
4
5
3
7
.
0
'
R
RI
M
E
L
=
5
0
.
9
8
IE
=
4
8
.
3
5
I
N
(
1
2
"
)
E
IE
=
4
8
.
3
4
O
U
T
(
1
2
"
)
W
10
5
L
F
1
2
"
S
D
(
D
I
)
S
=
0
.
1
0
%
51.2851.051.3951.051.4951.351.5951.451.7051.551.8051.751.9051.752.0051.752.0451.8
52.02
51.8
51.94
51.6
51.82
51.5
51.70
51.5
51.57
51.4
51.44
51.3
51.32
51.2
50.3950.5150.6350.7450.8650.9851.0951.3051.35
51.24
51.26
51.16
50.95
50.80
50.67
50.55
51.0951.1851.2051.4551.3251.5351.4451.6251.5551.7051.6751.7851.7951.8751.8951.94
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
LE
G
E
N
D
:
HM
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
/
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
2"
G
R
I
N
D
4"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
)
2"
G
R
I
N
D
2"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
BU
T
T
J
O
I
N
T
4"
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4"
P
O
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
CE
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
WS
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
1
0
.
1
2
-
0
3
.
ST
R
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
3
ST
O
R
M
N
O
T
E
S
IN
S
T
A
L
L
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
P
I
P
E
.
S
E
E
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
F
O
R
P
I
P
E
T
Y
P
E
.
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
D
I
T
C
H
S
E
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
X
X
F
O
R
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
.
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
16811
3
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
2775
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
1
2
7
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
3
2
+
5
0
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-RD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
ROADWAY SECTION D
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
H
129+43EXISTING GRADE AT CENTERLINE FINISH GRADE AT CENTERLINE CURB FL RT (TYP)MEDIAN FL LT (TYP)MEDIAN FL RT (TYP)R=1'3 R=4924'
8
1
1
1
8
8
8
88 SEC. 31 T. 22N., R.5E W.M.1
1
11
11
66
6
PLANROADWAYSECTION G128+53127+60ROADWAY SECTION G
FO
R
D
U
A
L
F
A
C
E
C
E
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
L
I
M
I
T
S
S
E
E
SH
E
E
T
S
3
3
-
3
7
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1.%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
STA 132+08.05, (70.9'RT)PTEND TRAFFIC CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALKMATCH EXISTING 10.0'6.0'R=35'L=44.78''
STA 132+6
0
.
8
8
,
(
7
4
.
9
'
R
T
)
PCBEGIN TRA
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
,
G
U
T
T
E
R
A
N
D
C
U
R
B
R
A
M
P
MATCH EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
ST
A
1
3
2
+
9
4
.
2
4
,
(
4
1
.
9
'
R
T
)
PTEN
D
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
,
G
U
T
T
E
R
A
N
D
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
MA
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
STA 131+72.47, (38.5'RT)PC PC STA 131+82.42STA 131+70.56, (42.0'RT)0.47%0.38%0.50%0.71%0.02%
0.
1
1
%
0.
1
4
%
0.
1
8
%
0.
4
9
%
0.
2
6
%
0.
3
7
%
0.
4
6
%
0.
5
1
%
0.
4
5
%
0.
4
3
%
51.3251.251.1951.051.0750.950.9650.950.8350.850.6650.750.5650.6
50.57
50.6
50.54
50.5
50.58
50.6
50.62
50.6
50.68
50.7
50.78
50.8
50.89
50.9
51.01
51.0
51.13
51.1
51.23
51.2
51.36
51.4
PVI STA 131+50.00EL=51.19PVI STA 132+09.00EL=50.92PVI STA 132+50.00EL=50.66PVI STA 132+75.00EL=50.56
PVI STA 133+00.00
EL=50.57
PVI STA 133+25.00
EL=50.54
PVI STA 133+50.00
EL=50.58
PVI STA 133+75.00
EL=50.62
PVI STA 134+00.00
EL=50.68
PVI STA 134+25.00
EL=50.78
PVI STA 134+50.00
EL=50.89
PVI STA 134+75.00
EL=51.01
PVI STA 135+00.00
EL=51.13
PVI STA 135+25.00
EL=51.23
PVI STA 135+50.00
EL=51.36
50.5550.42 CB#24 TYPE ISTA 131+50 37.0' RRIM EL=51.20IE=48.45 OUT (12") W S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
L STREET NE
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
LE
G
E
N
D
:
HM
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
/
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
2"
G
R
I
N
D
4"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
)
2"
G
R
I
N
D
2"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
BU
T
T
J
O
I
N
T
4"
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4"
P
O
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
SI
D
E
W
A
L
K
W
I
T
H
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
I
N
G
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
2
3
.
CE
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
WS
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
1
0
.
1
2
-
0
3
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
S
I
N
G
L
E
D
I
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
C
U
R
B
R
A
M
P
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
4
0
.
1
6
-
0
2
.
ST
R
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
137
ST
O
R
M
N
O
T
E
S
IN
S
T
A
L
L
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
V
A
L
V
E
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
CO
N
N
E
C
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
T
O
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
H
Y
D
R
A
N
T
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
WA
T
E
R
-
0
7
.
1101112
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
2875
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
1
3
2
+
5
0
T
O
E
N
D
O
F
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-RD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
G
N
M
E
N
T
C
U
R
V
E
D
A
T
A
PI
-
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
13
5
+
5
0
.
6
3
ǻ
RA
D
I
U
S
10
0
0
0
.
0
0
'
LE
N
G
T
H
73
5
.
9
3
'
TA
N
G
E
N
T
36
8
.
2
1
'
ROADWAY SECTION H
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
A
132+09
SE
C
.
3
1
T
.
2
2
N
.
,
R
.
5
E
W
.
M
.
33
3
3
66 114EXISTING GRADE AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FINISH GRADE AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
1
11
11
12
1011101
PL
A
N
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
S
3
8
-
3
9
F
O
R
I
N
T
E
R
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
G
E
O
M
E
T
R
Y
.
FO
R
D
U
A
L
F
A
C
E
C
E
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
L
I
M
I
T
S
S
E
E
SH
E
E
T
S
3
3
-
3
7
.
1.2.1415
121 15
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
PT STA 139+18.51
1
(
PVI STA 135+50.00EL=51.36PVI STA 135+75.00EL=51.49PVI STA 136+00.00EL=51.60PVI STA 136+25.00EL=51.71PVI STA 136+50.00EL=51.80PVI STA 136+75.00EL=52.00PVI STA 137+00.00EL=52.09PVI STA 137+25.00EL=52.18PVI STA 137+50.00EL=52.27
PVI STA 137+75.00
EL=52.40
PVI STA 138+00.00
EL=52.54
PVI STA 138+25.00
EL=52.70
PVI STA 138+50.00
EL=52.87
PVI STA 138+75.00
EL=53.04
PVI STA 139+00.00
EL=53.21
PVI STA 139+25.00
EL=53.32
PVI STA 139+57.05
EL=53.39
51.3651.451.4951.551.6051.651.7151.751.8051.852.0052.052.0952.152.1852.252.2752.3
52.40
52.4
52.54
52.5
52.70
52.7
52.87
52.9
53.04
53.0
53.21
53.2
53.32
53.3
53.38
53.4
53.5
53.6
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
LE
G
E
N
D
:
HM
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
/
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
2"
G
R
I
N
D
4"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
)
2"
G
R
I
N
D
2"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
BU
T
T
J
O
I
N
T
4"
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4"
P
O
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
ST
O
R
M
N
O
T
E
S
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
AD
J
U
S
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
O
N
U
M
E
N
T
T
O
G
R
A
D
E
.
1113
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
2975
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
1
3
2
+
5
0
T
O
E
N
D
O
F
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-RD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
CONSTRUCTION ALIGNMENT CURVE DATAPI - STATION(277TH) 135+50.63 ǻ
RADIUS10000.00'LENGTH735.93'TANGENT368.21'ROADWAY SEC
T
I
O
N
A
139+57.05
SE
C
.
3
1
T
.
2
2
N
.
,
R
.
5
E
W
.
M
.
EXISTING GRADE AT CENTERLINE FINISH GRADE AT CENTERLINE 1112PLAN
12
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
S 277TH ST AUBURN WAY N
83
R
D
A
V
E
S
3
3
3
3
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
LE
G
E
N
D
:
HM
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
/
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
2"
G
R
I
N
D
4"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
)
2"
G
R
I
N
D
2"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
BU
T
T
J
O
I
N
T
4"
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4"
P
O
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
SI
D
E
W
A
L
K
W
I
T
H
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
I
N
G
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
2
3
.
CE
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
WS
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
1
0
.
1
2
-
0
3
.
ST
R
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
13
ST
O
R
M
N
O
T
E
S
IN
S
T
A
L
L
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
CO
N
N
E
C
T
S
T
O
R
M
S
E
W
E
R
P
I
P
E
T
O
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
/
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
.
14
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
3075
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
AU
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
N
O
R
T
H
/
8
3
R
D
A
V
E
S
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
2
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
7
+
5
0
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-RD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
A
T
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
A
T
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
CU
R
B
F
L
L
T
(
T
Y
P
)
CU
R
B
F
L
R
T
(
T
Y
P
)
R=2911'
3
R=2832'
1
1
1
6
4
6
1
R=10
0
'
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
G
N
M
E
N
T
C
U
R
V
E
D
A
T
A
PI
-
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
(A
W
N
)
1
3
5
+
5
0
.
6
3
ǻ
RA
D
I
U
S
28
6
5
.
0
0
'
LE
N
G
T
H
11
4
3
.
9
7
'
TA
N
G
E
N
T
57
9
.
7
1
'
AUBURN WAY N
SE
C
.
3
6
T
.
2
2
N
.
,
R
.
4
E
W
.
M
.
1
1
22
10
PL
A
N
FOR ROADWAY INFORMATIONOF S 277TH ST SEE SHEET 21
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
83RD AVE S 3 3
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
LE
G
E
N
D
:
HM
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
FU
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
/
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
2"
G
R
I
N
D
4"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
)
2"
G
R
I
N
D
2"
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
H
M
A
C
L
12"
P
G
6
4
-
2
2
BU
T
T
J
O
I
N
T
4"
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4"
P
O
R
O
U
S
H
M
A
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
CE
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
WS
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
F
-
1
0
.
1
2
-
0
3
.
ST
R
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
3
ST
O
R
M
N
O
T
E
S
IN
S
T
A
L
L
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
T
Y
P
E
I
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
B
-
5
.
2
0
-
0
1
.
CO
N
N
E
C
T
S
T
O
R
M
S
E
W
E
R
P
I
P
E
T
O
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
/
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
P
I
P
E
.
S
E
E
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
F
O
R
P
I
P
E
T
Y
P
E
.
CO
N
N
E
C
T
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
P
I
P
E
T
O
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
I
P
E
.
1467
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
S
3
8
-
3
9
F
O
R
I
N
T
E
R
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
G
E
O
M
E
T
R
Y
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1.
3No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
3175
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
AU
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
N
O
R
T
H
/
8
3
R
D
A
V
E
S
RO
A
D
W
A
Y
A
N
D
S
T
O
R
M
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
7
+
5
0
T
O
E
N
D
O
F
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-RD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
EXISTING GRADE AT CENTERLINE FINISH GRADE AT CENTERLINECURB FL LT (TYP)CURB FL RT (TYP)R=100'3R=2836'74 66
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
G
N
M
E
N
T
C
U
R
V
E
D
A
T
A
PI
-
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
(A
W
N
)
1
3
5
+
5
0
.
6
3
ǻ
RA
D
I
U
S
28
6
5
.
0
0
'
LE
N
G
T
H
11
4
3
.
9
7
'
TA
N
G
E
N
T
57
9
.
7
1
'
SEC. 36 T. 22N., R.4E W.M.R=2893'1 PLAN
DE
T
A
I
L
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
1-
CU
R
B
T
R
A
N
S
I
T
I
O
N
DE
T
A
I
L
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
2-
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
D
I
T
C
H
2.
0
0
'
NST
2:1
NS
T
2:1HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
P
O
I
N
T
MA
T
C
H
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
MA
T
C
H
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
E
M
B
A
N
K
M
E
N
T
MA
I
N
T
A
I
N
E
D
G
E
O
F
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
C
U
R
B
CE
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
CU
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
DU
A
L
F
A
C
E
CE
M
E
N
T
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
CU
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
3'
-
0
"
H
A
N
D
TR
O
W
E
L
L
E
D
SE
C
T
I
O
N
(C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
)
STA 123+73.04, (2.7'RT)%(1' 0- STA 123+79.26, (2.6'RT)%(1' 0- STA 124+15.26, (2.4'RT)%(1' 0- STA 124+22.11, (2.4'RT)%(1' 0- STA 123+80.75, (2.6'RT)AIR AND VACCUM RELIEF VALVE51.6351.551.5651.551.4951.451.4151.351.3451.251.2651.151.1951.051.1150.951.0450.9
50.96
50.8
50.89
50.8
50.82
50.6
50.74
50.6
50.71
50.6
50.72
50.8
50.6450.5750.5050.4250.3550.2750.2050.1250.05
49.97
49.90
49.83
49.76
49.73
49.75
50.67
50.83
50.60
50.98
50.53
51.00
50.48
50.93
50.58
50.90
50.70
50.91
STA 124+15.26IE = 47.6STA 124+22.11IE = 40.7 STA 123+79.26IE = 47.6STA 123+73.04IE = 41.4 STA 123+80.75AIR AND VACCUM RELIEF VALVEIE = 47.6
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
4
3
F
O
R
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
F
I
S
H
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
.
CO
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
T
O
F
I
E
L
D
V
E
R
I
F
Y
A
L
L
U
T
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
.
FO
R
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
A
I
R
A
N
D
V
A
C
U
U
M
R
E
L
I
E
F
V
A
L
V
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
,
S
E
E
CI
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
W
A
T
E
R
-
0
2
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
1.2.3.
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
3275
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
WA
T
E
R
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
1
2
3
+
0
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
2
5
+
0
0
JBJW11/2015PSO2141931024-WA.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
VE
R
T
I
C
A
L
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
EXISTING GRADE AT C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FINISH GRADE AT C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
CURB
F
L
R
T
(
T
Y
P
)
ME
D
I
A
N
F
L
L
T
(
T
Y
P
)
ME
D
I
A
N
F
L
R
T
(
T
Y
P
)
SEC. 31 T. 22N., R.5E W.M.PROPOSED FISH CULVERTSEE GENERAL NOTE 2 PLAN12"W (DI)24" STL CASING
12
"
W
(
D
I
)
CA
S
I
N
G
S
P
A
C
E
R
S
24
"
S
T
L
C
A
S
I
N
G
DE
T
A
I
L
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
2-
ST
E
E
L
C
A
S
I
N
G
S
P
A
C
E
R
NO
T
E
:
SE
A
L
E
N
D
S
W
I
T
H
C
C
E
S
12
"
W
(
D
I
)
22
'
-
2
4
"
S
T
L
C
A
S
I
N
G
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
O
X
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
%
(
1
'
0
-
%
(
1
'
0
-
%
(
1
'
0
-
%
(
1
'
0
-
12
"
W
(
D
I
)
EX
1
2
"
W
(
D
I
)
EX
1
2
"
W
(
D
I
)
12
"
W
(
D
I
)
DE
T
A
I
L
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
1-
CU
L
V
E
R
T
C
R
O
S
S
I
N
G
12"SD18"SD
12
"
S
D
5'
CA
S
I
N
G
S
P
A
C
E
R
(
T
Y
P
)
SE
E
2-
EN
D
S
E
A
L
(
T
Y
P
)
CULVERT CROSSINGSEE1-
36
'
-
1
2
"
W
(
D
I
)
30
'
-
2
4
"
S
T
L
C
A
S
I
N
G
%
(
1
'
0
-
%
(
1
'
0
-
%
(
1
'
0
-
%
(
1
'
0
-
12
"
W
(
D
I
)
12"W (DI)
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
O
X
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
CA
S
I
N
G
S
P
A
C
E
R
(
T
Y
P
)
EX
1
2
"
W
(
D
I
)
EX
1
2
"
W
(
D
I
)
EX
1
2
"
W
(
D
I
)
5'
2'
2'
PL
A
N
SE
C
T
I
O
N
7 LF- 12"W (DI)36 LF- 12"W (DI)6 LF- 12"W (DI)
EN
D
S
E
A
L
(
T
Y
P
)
17"x28" CONC METER BOX
AI
R
A
N
D
V
A
C
C
U
M
R
E
L
I
E
F
V
A
L
V
E
11
'
11
'
11
'
11
'
11
'
21
'
21
'
12
'11
'
13
.
8
'
11
'
11
'
11
'
12
'
11
'
13
.
8
'
11
'
11
'
11
'
12
'
11
'
12
'
12
'
11
'
11
'
11
'
STA 98+59(34.4' LT)P.C.STA 99+14(34.0' LT)BEGIN STA 99+10(60.9' LT)ENDSTA 99+37(22.0' LT)ENDSTA 99+37(11.0' LT)ENDSTA 99+37(0.0' LT)ENDSTA 99+37(11.0' RT)ENDSTA 99+37(22.0' RT)ENDSTA 99+37(35.8' RT)BEGIN
ST
A
9
9
+
5
5
(3
4
.
0
'
L
T
)
A.
P
.
ST
A
9
9
+
5
0
(2
1
.
8
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
0
0
+
0
5
(1
9
.
1
'
R
T
)
P.
T
.
ST
A
1
0
0
+
4
6
(0
.
6
'
L
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
0
0
+
1
1
(3
6
.
5
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
0
0
+
4
8
(1
0
.
0
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
9
9
+
5
2
(1
2
.
2
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
9
9
+
8
5
(4
9
.
2
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
9
9
+
8
9
(3
4
.
9
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
0
0
+
4
2
(2
1
.
0
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
0
0
+
9
4
(2
1
.
0
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
0
1
+
5
4
(2
1
.
0
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
0
1
+
6
3
(1
0
.
0
'
R
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
0
1
+
6
3
(2
1
.
0
'
R
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
0
1
+
6
3
(1
.
5
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
0
1
+
6
3
(1
3
.
0
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
0
1
+
6
3
(3
5
.
0
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
0
1
+
6
3
(4
7
.
0
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
0
1
+
6
3
(2
4
.
0
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
0
1
+
7
1
(3
5
.
0
'
L
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
0
1
+
7
1
(4
7
.
0
'
L
T
)
A.
P
.
ST
A
1
0
0
+
3
5
(5
8
.
2
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
0
0
+
7
1
(4
7
.
0
'
L
T
)
P.
T
.
ST
A
1
0
0
+
6
1
(4
7
.
8
'
L
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
0
0
+
6
1
(3
5
.
0
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
0
0
+
6
1
(2
4
.
0
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
0
0
+
6
1
(1
3
.
0
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
0
0
+
6
1
(1
0
.
0
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
0
0
+
6
1
(1
.
5
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
(33.0' LT)
ST
A
4
+
7
5
(1
1
.
0
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
STA 4+75(22.0' LT
)
BEGINSTA
4
+
7
5
(33.0
'
L
T
)
END
ST
A
4
+
7
8
(0
.
0
'
L
T
)
EN
D
(1
1
.
0
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
9
9
+
5
7
(2
1
.
9
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
11
'
11
'
12
'
ST
A
3
+
4
0
.
0
0
(0
.
3
'
L
T
)
EN
D
STA 3+39.88(11.2' LT)BEGIN
ST
A
3
+
4
4
.
5
8
(0
.
3
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
3
+
4
5
.
0
3
(3
3
.
9
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
3
+
1
6
.
5
5
(3
3
.
9
'
R
T
)
STA 103+59, (9.2' LT)END STA 102+76,(33.7' LT)P.C.STA 103+63,(13.9' RT)P.T.13.8'
12
'
11
'
12
'
11
'
STA 103+64,(31.1' LT)P.T.11'11'11'12'11'
18
.
5
'
12
'
11
'
18
.
5
'
13.8'11'11'11'12'STA 103+63,(2.4' RT)P.T.STA 103+64,(20.1' LT)P.T.STA 103+63,(24.9' RT)P.T.STA 104+10,(2.4' RT)P.C.STA 104+20,(1.7' RT)END
11
'
ST
A
1
0
5
+
1
3
,
(3
2
.
5
'
L
T
)
A.
P
.
ST
A
1
0
5
+
1
3
,
(2
1
.
5
'
L
T
)
A.
P
.
STA 97+49MATCH EX.BEGINSTA 97+49MATCH EX.BEGINSTA 97+45MATCH EX.BEGIN STA 96+30(0.0' LT)BEGINSTA 96+30(22.0' RT)BEGIN STA 97+49(0.0' T)A.P.STA 97+49(22.0' RT)A.P.STA 97+49(11.0' RT)A.P.
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
AUBU
R
N
W
A
Y
N
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
12'11'21'11.6'11'11'13'12'11'11'11'
7
11'11'22'11'
12
'
1
51132
2
3
6
PL
A
N
2
2
11'231 2226No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' HONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
3375
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
CH
A
N
N
E
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
S
I
G
N
I
N
G
BE
G
I
N
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
T
O
S
T
A
1
0
7
+
5
0
MKKHCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-CH.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
WH
I
T
E
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
W
I
D
E
L
A
N
E
L
I
N
E
W
I
T
H
R
P
M
T
Y
P
E
2
W
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
3
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
"
A
"
.
WH
I
T
E
4
"
P
A
I
N
T
L
I
N
E
.
WH
I
T
E
P
A
I
N
T
L
I
N
E
W
I
T
H
R
P
M
T
Y
P
E
2
W
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
TR
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
0
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
"
A
"
.
YE
L
L
O
W
D
O
U
B
L
E
P
A
I
N
T
L
I
N
E
W
I
T
H
R
P
M
T
Y
P
E
2
Y
Y
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
DE
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
3
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
"
B
"
.
PL
A
S
T
I
C
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
A
R
R
O
W
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
2
4
.
4
0
-
0
1
.
R
I
G
H
T
(T
Y
P
E
2
S
R
)
A
N
D
L
E
F
T
(
T
Y
P
E
2
S
L
)
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
A
R
R
O
W
S
P
A
C
I
N
G
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
AU
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
1
.
T
Y
P
E
6
S
R
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
A
R
R
O
W
A
T
ST
A
T
I
O
N
S
N
O
T
E
D
O
N
P
L
A
N
.
PL
A
S
T
I
C
C
R
O
S
S
W
A
L
K
L
I
N
E
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
1
5
.
1
0
-
0
1
.
PL
A
S
T
I
C
S
T
O
P
L
I
N
E
,
2
4
"
W
I
D
E
.
PL
A
S
T
I
C
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
L
E
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
8
0
.
3
0
-
0
0
.
LO
C
A
T
I
O
N
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
3
9
.
PR
E
C
A
S
T
D
U
A
L
F
A
C
E
D
S
L
O
P
E
D
M
O
U
N
T
A
B
L
E
C
U
R
B
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
6
6
.
WH
I
T
E
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
D
O
T
T
E
D
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
L
I
N
E
,
4
"
W
I
D
E
,
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
DE
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
2
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
"
B
"
.
YE
L
L
O
W
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
D
O
T
T
E
D
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
L
I
N
E
,
4
"
W
I
D
E
,
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
2
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
"
B
"
.
YE
L
L
O
W
4
"
P
A
I
N
T
L
I
N
E
.
CH
A
N
N
E
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
LE
G
E
N
D
:
S-
X
X
R-
X
X
NE
W
S
I
G
N
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
G
N
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
ST
R
I
P
I
N
G
N
O
T
E
NE
W
S
I
G
N
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
G
N
NE
W
L
U
M
I
N
A
I
R
E
(
S
E
E
S
I
G
N
A
L
/
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
S
)
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
1.
AL
L
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
/
O
F
F
S
E
T
S
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
T
H
E
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
CE
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
O
R
T
H
E
A
U
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
N
/
8
3
R
D
A
V
E
N
U
E
S
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
CE
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
.
C
A
L
L
O
U
T
S
A
R
E
T
O
T
H
E
C
E
N
T
E
R
O
F
P
A
I
N
T
E
D
/
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
LI
N
E
S
O
R
C
E
N
T
E
R
O
F
C
U
R
B
S
.
2.
LA
N
E
W
I
D
T
H
S
A
R
E
M
E
A
S
U
R
E
D
F
R
O
M
C
E
N
T
E
R
O
F
P
A
I
N
T
E
D
/
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
LI
N
E
S
O
R
F
A
C
E
S
O
F
C
U
R
B
S
.
3.
PL
A
N
V
I
E
W
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
S
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
A
F
T
E
R
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
H
A
V
E
BE
E
N
C
O
M
P
L
E
T
E
D
.
S
E
E
S
I
T
E
P
R
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
PR
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
F
O
R
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
O
F
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
H
A
N
N
E
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
.
4.
FO
R
S
I
G
N
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
,
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
3
7
.
5.
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
3
1
F
O
R
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
C
U
R
B
T
R
A
N
S
I
T
I
O
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
.
6.
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
S
2
1
-
3
1
F
O
R
R
A
I
S
E
D
M
E
D
I
A
N
,
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
,
C
U
R
B
I
N
G
A
N
D
CU
R
B
I
S
L
A
N
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
.
33
12
'
11.2'11.7'12'12'1 366663111'11'13'11'13'11'11.2'11.7'11.2'11.6'2664 EA4 EA1 13 85998
2
7
7
8
8
14
13
R
=
5
0
'
R
=
5
0
'
R=6
1
'
R=6
1
'
13
14
13
14
13
13
8
8
2
R=63'R=84'
R=
7
1
'
215
EN
D
BE
G
I
N
12
BE
G
I
N
EN
D
13
EN
D
BE
G
I
N
33
11
6
6
6
4
E
A
9
4
E
A
9
1
3
2
1
S-
0
4
R=
6
5
'
2
8
8
11
3 1 3
1
11R=100.5'1111
S-
0
5
S-02 S-01
R-
0
2
R-01 APPX. 260'REPLACE EXISTINGWIDE LINE WITH .SEE SHEET 13FOR REMOVALLIMITS.3 S 277TH STS 277TH STS-06
R-
0
3
PL
A
N
13
13
CU
R
B
T
R
A
N
S
I
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
ME
D
I
A
N
I
S
L
A
N
D
.
S
E
E
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
5
A
N
D
6
.
RA
I
S
E
D
M
E
D
I
A
N
.
SE
E
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
6
.
3BEGIN
KI
N
G
C
O
U
N
T
Y
BO
U
N
D
A
R
Y
KING COUNTYBOUNDARYR=4981'R=4970'R=4947'R=4936'
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
12'11'11'11'11'
11
'
11
'
12
'
23
'
12
'
11
'
12
'
12'12'11'24'
11
'
11
'
24' / 25'24'11'11'11'12'STA 118+75,(39.5' RT)A.P.STA 118+51,(17.0' RT)ENDSTA 118+51,(17.5' RT)BEGIN STA 118+75,(28.5' RT)A.P.STA 118+75,(50.5' RT)P.T.STA 118+75,(17.5' RT)A.P.
ST
A
1
2
0
+
4
0
,
(1
5
.
5
'
R
T
)
A.
P
.
ST
A
1
2
0
+
4
0
,
(2
6
.
5
'
R
T
)
A.
P
.
ST
A
1
2
0
+
4
0
,
(3
7
.
5
'
R
T
)
A.
P
.
ST
A
1
2
1
+
4
3
,
(1
4
.
5
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
2
1
+
4
5
,
(9
.
5
'
L
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
2
1
+
4
5
,
(1
0
.
0
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
2
1
+
4
3
,
(1
4
.
0
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
2
2
+
0
1
,
(1
4
.
0
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
2
0
+
7
8
,
(9
.
0
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
2
0
+
2
3
,
(4
9
.
6
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
2
2
+
0
1
,
(1
0
.
5
'
L
T
)
A.
P
.
23
.
5
'
/
2
2
.
5
'
/
2
3
.
5
'
24
'
/
2
3
'
23
'
/
2
4
'
11
'
12
'
12
'
12
'
23'12'11'23'
11
'
12
'
11
'
12
'
26
.
7
'
11'11'23'12'11'12'11'11'
12
'
11
'
12
'
26
.
7
'
11'
12
'
12'
11
'
STA 123+33,(10.5' LT)A.P.
ST
A
1
2
5
+
3
1
,
(9
.
5
'
L
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
2
5
+
1
1
,
(3
7
.
5
'
R
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
2
5
+
1
1
,
(2
6
.
5
'
R
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
2
6
+
4
4
,
(3
5
.
7
'
R
T
)
P.
T
.
ST
A
1
2
6
+
4
4
,
(2
4
.
7
'
R
T
)
P.
T
.
ST
A
1
2
6
+
5
8
,
(1
1
.
8
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
2
7
+
1
7
,
(1
0
.
2
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
2
7
+
2
9
,
(9
.
9
'
R
T
)
EN
D
12
.
5
'
/
1
2
'
12
'
12
.
5
'
R=
4
9
3
5
.
5
'
R=
4
9
4
6
.
5
'
S 277TH STS 277TH ST 12'11'11'11'
12
'
3
3 15
15
3
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' HONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
3575
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
CH
A
N
N
E
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
S
I
G
N
I
N
G
ST
A
1
1
7
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
2
7
+
5
0
MKKHCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-CH.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
WH
I
T
E
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
W
I
D
E
L
A
N
E
L
I
N
E
W
I
T
H
R
P
M
T
Y
P
E
2
W
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
3
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
"
A
"
.
WH
I
T
E
4
"
P
A
I
N
T
L
I
N
E
.
WH
I
T
E
P
A
I
N
T
L
I
N
E
W
I
T
H
R
P
M
T
Y
P
E
2
W
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
TR
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
0
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
"
A
"
.
PL
A
S
T
I
C
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
A
R
R
O
W
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
2
4
.
4
0
-
0
1
.
R
I
G
H
T
(T
Y
P
E
2
S
R
)
A
N
D
L
E
F
T
(
T
Y
P
E
2
S
L
)
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
A
R
R
O
W
S
P
A
C
I
N
G
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
AU
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
1
.
T
Y
P
E
6
S
R
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
A
R
R
O
W
A
T
ST
A
T
I
O
N
S
N
O
T
E
D
O
N
P
L
A
N
.
PL
A
S
T
I
C
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
L
E
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
8
0
.
3
0
-
0
0
.
LO
C
A
T
I
O
N
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
3
9
.
YE
L
L
O
W
8
"
D
I
A
G
O
N
A
L
P
A
I
N
T
E
D
C
R
O
S
S
H
A
T
C
H
M
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
2
4
.
6
0
-
0
4
.
PR
E
C
A
S
T
D
U
A
L
F
A
C
E
D
S
L
O
P
E
D
M
O
U
N
T
A
B
L
E
C
U
R
B
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
6
6
.
YE
L
L
O
W
4
"
P
A
I
N
T
L
I
N
E
.
WH
I
T
E
8
"
D
I
A
G
O
N
A
L
P
A
I
N
T
E
D
C
R
O
S
S
H
A
T
C
H
M
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
2
4
.
6
0
-
0
4
.
CH
A
N
N
E
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
3 11215
3
2
16
11
11
11
15
11
15
15
3
3 3
15
1
1
15
11
11
9
6
EN
D
BE
G
I
N
12
'
4
E
A
10
PL
A
N
PL
A
N
DUAL-FACED CEMENT CONC.TRAFFIC CURB AND GUTTER.SEE GENERAL NOTE 6.
DU
A
L
-
F
A
C
E
D
C
E
M
E
N
T
C
O
N
C
.
TR
A
F
F
I
C
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
G
U
T
T
E
R
.
SE
E
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
6
.
DUAL-FACED CEMENT CONC.TRAFFIC CURB AND GUTTER.SEE GENERAL NOTE 6.
3
2
10(TYP)16(TYP)CURB TRANSITION ANDMEDIAN ISLAND. SEEGENERAL NOTES 5 AND 6.
CU
R
B
T
R
A
N
S
I
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
ME
D
I
A
N
I
S
L
A
N
D
.
S
E
E
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
5
A
N
D
6
.
RA
I
S
E
D
M
E
D
I
A
N
.
SE
E
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
6
.
3210(TYP)
LE
G
E
N
D
:
S-
X
X
R-
X
X
NE
W
S
I
G
N
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
G
N
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
ST
R
I
P
I
N
G
N
O
T
E
NE
W
S
I
G
N
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
G
N
NE
W
L
U
M
I
N
A
I
R
E
(
S
E
E
S
I
G
N
A
L
/
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
S
)
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
1.
AL
L
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
/
O
F
F
S
E
T
S
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
T
H
E
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
CE
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
O
R
T
H
E
A
U
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
N
/
8
3
R
D
A
V
E
N
U
E
S
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
CE
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
.
C
A
L
L
O
U
T
S
A
R
E
T
O
T
H
E
C
E
N
T
E
R
O
F
P
A
I
N
T
E
D
/
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
LI
N
E
S
O
R
C
E
N
T
E
R
O
F
C
U
R
B
S
.
2.
LA
N
E
W
I
D
T
H
S
A
R
E
M
E
A
S
U
R
E
D
F
R
O
M
C
E
N
T
E
R
O
F
P
A
I
N
T
E
D
/
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
LI
N
E
S
O
R
F
A
C
E
S
O
F
C
U
R
B
S
.
3.
PL
A
N
V
I
E
W
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
S
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
A
F
T
E
R
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
H
A
V
E
BE
E
N
C
O
M
P
L
E
T
E
D
.
S
E
E
S
I
T
E
P
R
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
PR
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
F
O
R
R
E
M
O
V
A
L
O
F
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
H
A
N
N
E
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
.
4.
FO
R
S
I
G
N
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
,
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
3
7
.
5.
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
3
1
F
O
R
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
C
U
R
B
T
R
A
N
S
I
T
I
O
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
.
6.
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
S
2
1
-
3
1
F
O
R
R
A
I
S
E
D
M
E
D
I
A
N
,
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
C
U
R
B
I
N
G
A
N
D
CU
R
B
I
S
L
A
N
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
.
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
26.7'11'
13
'
11
'
11'12'11'12'26.7'
11
'
11
'
14'
13
'
/
1
3
.
5
'
STA 129+18,(17.3' RT)P.C.STA 129+16,(10.5' LT)BEGINSTA 129+18,(28.3' RT)P.C.STA 129+17STA 129+43,(4.1' RT)BEGIN
ST
A
1
3
0
+
5
1
,
(1
5
.
5
'
R
T
)
P.
T
.
ST
A
1
3
0
+
5
1
,
(2
6
.
5
'
R
T
)
P.
T
.
ST
A
1
3
0
+
6
7
,
(1
0
.
0
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
3
0
+
6
7
,
(1
0
.
5
'
L
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
0
+
6
7
ST
A
1
3
1
+
8
7
,
(1
5
.
5
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
1
+
8
7
,
(2
6
.
5
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
1
+
8
7
,
(4
.
0
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
1
+
8
7
,
(4
0
.
4
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
3
1
+
6
7
,
(4
.
0
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
3
2
+
1
5
,
(9
.
4
'
L
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
3
2
+
3
4
,
(2
.
3
'
R
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
3
1
+
8
2
,
(2
1
.
5
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
3
1
+
8
2
,
(3
2
.
5
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
3
1
+
8
2
,
(1
0
.
0
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
ST
A
1
3
2
+
3
9
,
(6
5
.
8
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
3
2
+
8
6
,
(1
5
.
5
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
3
2
+
6
2
,
(6
5
.
7
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
2
+
8
6
,
(2
6
.
5
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
3
2
+
8
6
,
(3
.
5
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
3
2
+
8
6
,
(4
.
0
'
R
T
)
ST
A
1
3
2
+
8
6
,
(9
.
5
'
L
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
2
+
5
3
,
(9
.
3
'
L
T
)
EN
D
13'
14
'
/
1
3
'
11
'
12'
ST
A
1
3
2
+
3
0
,
(4
4
.
1
'
R
T
)
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
3
2
+
3
9
,
(5
2
.
5
'
R
T
)
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
1
+
9
0
,
(4
.
0
'
R
T
)
PC
ST
A
1
3
2
+
7
9
,
(4
.
0
'
R
T
)
PT
13
'
R=4947'R=4936'
11
'
11
'
11
'
11'11'11'11'
11
'
12.5'STA 134+07,(21.5' LT)P.C.C.STA 135+07,(20.5' LT)P.C.C.
ST
A
1
3
6
+
2
2
,
(2
0
.
5
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
C
.
ST
A
1
3
6
+
9
2
,
(1
9
.
8
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
C
.
STA 133+72,(15.5' RT)P.C.
ST
A
1
3
6
+
0
9
,
(8
.
7
'
R
T
)
P.
C
.
C
.
STA 133+73,(26.5' RT)P.C.STA 133+72,(4.0' RT)P.C.STA 134+57,(1.6' RT)STA 133+58,(10.0' LT)STA 134+07,(10.0' LT)END STA 134+88,(4.0' LT)P.R.C.STA 134+07,(32.5' LT)P.C.C.STA 135+07,(31.5' LT)P.C.C.STA 135+20,(9.5' LT)P.T.
ST
A
1
3
6
+
2
2
,
(3
1
.
5
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
C
.
ST
A
1
3
6
+
2
2
,
(9
.
5
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
C
.
ST
A
1
3
6
+
9
2
,
(8
.
8
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
C
.
ST
A
1
3
6
+
9
2
,
(3
0
.
8
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
C
.
ST
A
1
3
6
+
0
9
,
(1
9
.
7
'
R
T
)
P.
C
.
C
.
ST
A
1
3
6
+
0
8
,
(2
.
8
'
L
T
)
P.
C
.
C
.
ST
A
1
3
5
+
5
5
,
MA
T
C
H
E
X
.
A
T
F
A
C
E
O
F
G
U
T
T
E
R
BE
G
I
N
ST
A
1
3
6
+
5
0
,
(2
9
.
8
'
R
T
)
P.
C
.
11.5'
11
'
13'13'
ST
A
1
3
9
+
5
7
,
MA
T
C
H
E
X
.
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
9
+
5
7
,
MA
T
C
H
E
X
.
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
9
+
5
7
,
MA
T
C
H
E
X
.
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
9
+
5
7
,
MA
T
C
H
E
X
.
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
9
+
5
8
,
MA
T
C
H
E
X
.
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
9
+
5
7
,
MA
T
C
H
E
X
.
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
9
+
5
7
,
MA
T
C
H
E
X
.
EN
D
ST
A
1
3
7
+
6
6
,
(3
.
2
'
L
T
)
P.
T
.
ST
A
1
3
7
+
6
6
,
(8
.
3
'
R
T
)
P.
T
.
ST
A
1
3
7
+
6
6
,
(1
9
.
3
'
R
T
)
P.
T
.
L ST NE
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
S 277TH ST
11
'
11'
3
11
'
12
'
11
'
3
8
3
3
7
8
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' HONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
3675
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
CH
A
N
N
E
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
S
I
G
N
I
N
G
ST
A
1
2
7
+
5
0
T
O
E
N
D
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
MKKHCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-CH.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
WH
I
T
E
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
W
I
D
E
L
A
N
E
L
I
N
E
W
I
T
H
R
P
M
T
Y
P
E
2
W
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
3
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
"
A
"
.
WH
I
T
E
4
"
P
A
I
N
T
L
I
N
E
.
WH
I
T
E
P
A
I
N
T
L
I
N
E
W
I
T
H
R
P
M
T
Y
P
E
2
W
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
TR
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
0
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
"
A
"
.
YE
L
L
O
W
D
O
U
B
L
E
P
A
I
N
T
L
I
N
E
W
I
T
H
R
P
M
T
Y
P
E
2
Y
Y
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
DE
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
3
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
"
B
"
.
PL
A
S
T
I
C
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
A
R
R
O
W
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
2
4
.
4
0
-
0
1
.
R
I
G
H
T
(T
Y
P
E
2
S
R
)
A
N
D
L
E
F
T
(
T
Y
P
E
2
S
L
)
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
A
R
R
O
W
S
P
A
C
I
N
G
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
AU
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
1
.
T
Y
P
E
6
S
R
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
A
R
R
O
W
A
T
ST
A
T
I
O
N
S
N
O
T
E
D
O
N
P
L
A
N
.
PL
A
S
T
I
C
C
R
O
S
S
W
A
L
K
L
I
N
E
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
1
5
.
1
0
-
0
1
.
CH
A
N
N
E
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
3 36
6
3
11
3
11
S-
1
4
S-
1
5
S-
1
6
S-
1
8
3
14
11 2
8
R
=
6
8
'
R=
6
8
'
16
2
2
6R=100'R=100'1 5 111ENDBEGIN11ENDBEGIN1133 33
3
3
3
3
3
5 5
5
5
5
5
2
2
22
2
2
3
11
.
5
'
11' / 11.5'13
.
2
'
R-10
PL
A
N
PLAN
11
EN
D
BE
G
I
N
14
14
R
=
5
0
'
R=5
0
'
14
PL
A
S
T
I
C
S
T
O
P
L
I
N
E
,
2
4
"
W
I
D
E
.
PL
A
S
T
I
C
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
L
E
T
T
E
R
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
8
0
.
3
0
-
0
0
.
LO
C
A
T
I
O
N
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
U
B
U
R
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
3
9
.
YE
L
L
O
W
8
"
D
I
A
G
O
N
A
L
P
A
I
N
T
E
D
C
R
O
S
S
H
A
T
C
H
M
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
2
4
.
6
0
-
0
4
.
PR
E
C
A
S
T
D
U
A
L
F
A
C
E
D
S
L
O
P
E
D
M
O
U
N
T
A
B
L
E
C
U
R
B
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
6
6
.
YE
L
L
O
W
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
D
O
T
T
E
D
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
L
I
N
E
,
4
"
W
I
D
E
,
P
E
R
A
U
B
U
R
N
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
-
4
2
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
"
B
"
.
YE
L
L
O
W
4
"
P
A
I
N
T
L
I
N
E
.
WH
I
T
E
8
"
D
I
A
G
O
N
A
L
P
A
I
N
T
E
D
C
R
O
S
S
H
A
T
C
H
M
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
E
R
W
S
D
O
T
ST
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
N
M
-
2
4
.
6
0
-
0
4
.
11
'
S-
1
7
7
6
4
E
A
9
16
2
8
8
11
33
14
EN
D
BE
G
I
N
14
8
11
'
11
'
11'11'
2
3
3
3
5
5
2
RAISED MEDIAN.SEE GENERAL NOTE 6.CURB TRANS
I
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
MEDIAN ISLA
N
D
.
S
E
E
GENERAL NO
T
E
S
5
A
N
D
6
.
11
'
LEGEND:S-XXR-XX NEW SIGN ASSEMBLYEXISTING SIGN ASSEMBLY TO BE REMOVEDSTRIPING NOTENEW SIGNEXISTING SIGNNEW LUMINAIRE (SEE SIGNAL/ILLUMINATION PLANS)GENERAL NOTES:1.ALL STATION/OFFSETS REFER TO THE S 277TH STREET CONSTRUCTIONCENTERLINE OR THE AUBURN WAY N/83RD AVENUE S CONSTRUCTIONCENTERLINE. CALLOUTS ARE TO THE CENTER OF PAINTED/PLASTICLINES OR CENTER OF CURBS.2.LANE WIDTHS ARE MEASURED FROM CENTER OF PAINTED/PLASTICLINES OR FACES OF CURBS.3.PLAN VIEW REPRESENTS CONDITIONS AFTER IMPROVEMENTS HAVEBEEN COMPLETED. SEE SITE PREPARATION PLAN AND SPECIALPROVISIONS FOR REMOVAL OF EXISTING CHANNELIZATION.4.FOR SIGN SCHEDULE, SEE SHEET 37.5.SEE SHEET 31 FOR TYPICAL CURB TRANSITION DETAILS.6.SEE SHEETS 21-31 FOR RAISED MEDIAN, ROADWAY CURBING ANDCURB ISLAND DETAILS.R=10023'R=10012'R=10000'
R=
4
3
9
5
.
5
'
R=
4
4
0
6
.
5
'
R=
4
4
1
8
'
R=
9
9
9
0
'
R=
4
9
2
5
'
R=
7
4
0
0
'
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
41 A
4
2 E
42 D
42 C42B
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
4075
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
PO
N
D
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-PD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
LE
G
E
N
D
:
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
I
L
L
LI
M
I
T
O
F
C
U
T
CH
A
I
N
L
I
N
K
F
E
N
C
E
SP
L
I
T
R
A
I
L
F
E
N
C
E
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
NO
A
C
C
E
S
S
,
U
S
E
,
O
R
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
A
N
C
E
O
F
A
N
Y
K
I
N
D
I
S
A
L
L
O
W
E
D
BE
Y
O
N
D
T
H
E
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
L
I
M
I
T
S
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
T
H
E
S
E
P
L
A
N
VI
E
W
S
.
S
E
E
S
I
T
E
P
R
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
H
O
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
CO
N
T
R
O
L
O
F
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
L
I
M
I
T
S
.
SE
E
P
O
N
D
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
P
O
I
N
T
T
A
B
L
E
O
N
S
H
E
E
T
3
7
F
O
R
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
.
PO
N
D
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
P
O
I
N
T
SE
E
P
O
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
F
O
R
F
I
N
A
L
SU
R
F
A
C
I
N
G
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
M
E
N
T
S
.
TH
E
B
O
N
D
B
E
R
M
A
N
D
T
H
E
A
C
C
E
S
S
R
O
A
D
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
E
D
A
S
F
O
L
L
O
W
S
.
T
H
E
F
O
L
L
O
W
I
N
G
N
O
T
E
S
D
O
NO
T
A
P
P
L
Y
T
O
T
H
E
W
A
T
E
R
Q
U
A
L
I
T
Y
P
O
N
D
B
E
R
M
S
.
A.
TH
E
P
O
N
D
B
E
R
M
A
N
D
T
H
E
A
C
C
E
S
S
R
O
A
D
S
U
B
G
R
A
D
E
S
SH
A
L
L
I
N
I
T
I
A
L
L
Y
B
E
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
E
D
T
O
1
F
O
O
T
H
I
G
H
E
R
TH
A
N
T
H
E
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
D
G
R
A
D
E
(
O
R
S
U
B
G
R
A
D
E
F
O
R
T
H
E
AC
C
E
S
S
R
O
A
D
S
)
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
T
H
E
P
L
A
N
S
.
B.
IN
S
T
A
L
L
H
U
B
A
N
D
T
A
C
K
E
V
E
R
Y
5
0
F
E
E
T
M
I
N
I
M
U
M
.
C.
ME
A
S
U
R
E
A
N
D
R
E
C
O
R
D
T
A
C
K
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
IM
M
E
D
I
A
T
E
L
Y
F
O
L
L
O
W
I
N
G
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
A
T
I
O
N
.
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
E
TA
C
K
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
M
E
A
S
U
R
E
M
E
N
T
S
A
N
D
R
E
C
O
R
D
I
N
G
S
WE
E
K
L
Y
U
N
T
I
L
C
O
N
S
O
L
I
D
A
T
I
O
N
(
S
E
T
T
L
E
M
E
N
T
)
H
A
S
SU
B
S
I
D
E
D
T
O
T
H
E
S
A
T
I
S
F
A
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
T
H
E
C
I
T
Y
.
D.
AF
T
E
R
T
H
E
C
O
N
S
O
L
I
D
A
T
I
O
N
/
S
E
T
T
L
E
M
E
N
T
P
E
R
I
O
D
H
A
S
EN
D
E
D
,
C
O
M
P
L
E
T
E
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
T
O
T
H
E
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
D
G
R
A
D
E
(O
R
S
U
B
G
R
A
D
E
)
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
T
H
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
VE
G
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
,
F
E
N
C
E
,
R
A
M
P
S
,
A
N
D
A
C
C
E
S
S
R
O
A
D
P
E
R
PL
A
N
A
N
D
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
1.
PO
N
D
B
O
T
T
O
M
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
=
4
4
.
6
2
41 1
41 2
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
L
I
N
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
AT
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
L
I
N
E
HO
R
I
Z
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
"
=
2
0
'
VE
R
T
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
"
=
1
0
'
A-
DR
A
I
N
A
G
E
P
O
N
D
SE
C
T
I
O
N
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
4175
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
PO
N
D
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
A
N
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-PD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
6'
T
A
L
L
C
H
A
I
N
L
I
N
K
F
E
N
C
E
6'
T
A
L
L
S
P
L
I
T
R
A
I
L
F
E
N
C
E
EL = 48.0WETLANDBOTTOMEL = 39.0 TOP OF BERMEL = 50.62(TYP)
EL
=
4
8
.
0
6' TALL CHAIN LINK FENCETYPICAL SECTIONSCALE: NOT TO SCALE 137 POND ACCESS ROAD 1.0'13.0'1.0'4:1 MAX
TY
P
I
C
A
L
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
237
PO
N
D
A
C
C
E
S
S
R
A
M
P
1.
0
'
13
.
0
'
1.
0
'
3" CSBC (MIN COMPACTED DEPTH)9" FOUNDATION MATERIAL CLASS A(MIN COMPACTED DEPTH)
4"
C
S
B
C
(
M
I
N
C
O
M
P
A
C
T
E
D
D
E
P
T
H
)
12
"
-
Q
U
A
R
R
Y
S
P
A
L
L
S
(
M
I
N
D
E
P
T
H
)
3:
1
M
A
X
4:1 MAX
3:1 M
A
X
TR
A
S
H
R
A
C
K
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
337
ST
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
P
I
P
E
2
5
/
$
5
*
(
5
1
1
3/
4
"
D
I
A
G
A
L
V
A
N
I
Z
E
D
ST
E
E
L
B
A
R
S
,
W
E
L
D
EN
D
S
T
O
F
R
A
M
E
ȭ
(2
)
1
/
4
"
X
3
"
G
A
L
V
A
N
I
Z
E
D
ST
E
E
L
S
T
R
I
P
S
DR
I
L
L
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
P
I
P
E
MA
T
E
R
I
A
L
@
S
T
E
E
L
S
T
R
I
P
S
.
BO
L
T
W
I
T
H
1
/
2
"
S
.
S
T
L
.
H
E
X
B
O
L
T
S
(4
)
1
/
4
"
x
2
"
x
8
"
G
A
L
V
A
N
I
Z
E
D
S
T
E
E
L
ST
R
I
P
S
.
B
E
N
D
A
N
D
W
E
L
D
T
O
F
R
A
M
E
.
SP
A
C
E
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
L
Y
.
*
$
/
9
$
1
,
=
(
'
ST
E
E
L
B
A
R
EXISTING GRADEAT SECTION LINE FINISH GRADEAT SECTION LINE
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
L
I
N
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
AT
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
L
I
N
E
EXISTING GRADEAT SECTION LINE FINISH GRADEAT SECTION LINE
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
L
I
N
E
FI
N
I
S
H
G
R
A
D
E
AT
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
L
I
N
E
HORIZ SCALE: 1"=20'VERT SCALE: 1"=10'B-DRAINAGE PONDSECTION
HO
R
I
Z
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
"
=
2
0
'
VE
R
T
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
"
=
1
0
'
C-
DR
A
I
N
A
G
E
P
O
N
D
SE
C
T
I
O
N
HORIZ SCALE: 1"=20'VERT SCALE: 1"=10'D-DRAINAGE PONDSECTION
HO
R
I
Z
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
"
=
2
0
'
VE
R
T
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
"
=
1
0
'
E-
DR
A
I
N
A
G
E
P
O
N
D
SE
C
T
I
O
N
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 20' H1" = 10' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
4275
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
PO
N
D
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
A
N
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-PD.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
TO
P
O
F
BE
R
M
E
L
=
50
.
6
2
(
T
Y
P
)
6' TALL CHAIN LINK FENCE
TO
P
O
F
BE
R
M
E
L
=
50
.
6
2
(
T
Y
P
)
TOP OFBERM EL =50.62 (TYP)TOP OFBERM EL =50.62 (TYP)
0.27%PVI STA 0+00.00EL=41.91
FL
=
4
2
.
9
1
FL
=
4
2
.
8
1
FL
=
4
2
.
6
1
FL
=
4
2
.
4
1
FL=42.18 TPGTPTV12" DI WATERFL=41.94FL=42.05
0.
2
0
%
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
FINISH GRADEAT CENTERLINE
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
T
R
E
A
M
B
E
D
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
WE
T
L
A
N
D
B
U
F
F
E
R
PRECAST REINFORCEDCONCRETE BOX CULVERTPRECASTREINFORCEDCONCRETE BOXCULVERT
6"
S
T
R
E
A
M
B
E
D
MI
X
GW
L
E
V
E
L
AP
P
R
O
X
E
L
E
V
.
=
4
1
'
WINGWALL #4SEE SHEET EV4FOR PROFILEWINGWALL #3SEE SHEET EV4FOR PROFILE WINGWALL #2SEE SHEET EV4FOR PROFILEWINGWALL #1SEE SHEET EV4FOR PROFILE 46 AFL=41.94IE=41.44FL=42.27IE=41.77
LE
G
E
N
D
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
4375
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
ST
R
E
A
M
R
E
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
F
I
S
H
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
PL
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
BE
G
I
N
T
O
S
T
A
4
+
5
0
BPCBCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-EV.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
EXISTING 54" PVCSANITARY SEWER
146
EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. LOCATION AND DEPTHTO BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR BEFORE EXCAVATION BEGINS.PROPOSED 12"STORM DRAIN
ST
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
F
A
C
I
L
I
T
Y
SE
E
P
D
S
H
E
E
T
S
F
O
R
PL
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
UTILIITY PROTECTIONSEE SECTIONS B AND C.
4'
x
1
8
'
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
(;
,
6
7
,
1
*
PV
C
S
S
EC
O
L
O
G
Y
B
L
O
C
K
S
EA
C
H
S
I
D
E
O
F
SA
N
I
T
A
R
Y
S
E
W
E
R
EX
T
E
N
D
1
/
2
BL
O
C
K
P
A
S
T
SI
D
E
W
A
L
L
O
F
CU
L
V
E
R
T
,
T
Y
P
CU
L
V
E
R
T
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
B-
-C
-B
PI
P
E
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
C-
KE
Y
E
D
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
JO
I
N
T
A
S
O
C
C
U
R
4"
E
P
S
F
O
A
M
O
V
E
R
T
O
P
(
M
I
N
)
2"
E
P
S
F
O
A
M
E
A
.
S
I
D
E
4"
M
I
N
G
R
O
U
T
LE
V
E
L
I
N
G
C
O
U
R
S
E
2'
x
2
'
M
I
N
E
C
O
L
O
G
Y
B
L
O
C
K
UT
I
L
I
T
Y
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
UT
I
L
I
T
Y
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
PI
P
E
Z
O
N
E
B
E
D
D
I
N
G
95
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
MO
D
I
F
I
E
D
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
BA
S
E
T
H
I
C
K
N
E
S
S
TO
A
C
C
O
M
O
D
A
T
E
UT
I
L
I
T
Y
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
,
CO
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
T
O
IN
C
L
U
D
E
I
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
DE
S
I
G
N
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
6"
F
O
U
N
D
A
T
I
O
N
MA
T
E
R
I
A
L
C
L
A
S
S
A
STEEL CASING ETHAFOAMPAD
45 A
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1.
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
M
E
T
H
O
D
S
S
H
A
L
L
C
O
M
P
L
Y
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
T
E
R
M
S
A
N
D
CO
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
O
F
T
H
E
H
P
A
P
E
R
M
I
T
.
I
S
O
L
A
T
E
I
N
-
W
A
T
E
R
W
O
R
K
A
R
E
A
S
US
I
N
G
D
A
M
S
,
I
F
A
P
P
L
I
C
A
B
L
E
.
TYP46C46BHEADW
A
L
L
,
S
E
E
W
I
N
G
W
A
L
L
DETAIL
S
S
H
E
E
T
4
6
(
T
Y
P
)
LO
G
J
A
M
A
,
S
E
E
146
LO
G
J
A
M
B
,
S
E
E
0.20%FL=42.91FL=43.01FL=43.22
FL
=
4
3
.
4
2
FL
=
4
3
.
6
2
FL
=
4
3
.
8
2
EXISTING GRADEAT CENTERLINEPROPOSED STREAMBEDAT CENTERLINE PROPOSEDWETLAND BUFFER6" STREAM
B
E
D
MIX
GW
L
E
V
E
L
AP
P
R
O
X
E
L
E
V
.
=
4
1
'
LE
G
E
N
D
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
4475
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
ST
R
E
A
M
R
E
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
F
I
S
H
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
PL
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
4
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
9
+
0
0
BPCBCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-EV.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
146
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
WE
T
L
A
N
D
B
U
F
F
E
R
95
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1.
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
M
E
T
H
O
D
S
S
H
A
L
L
C
O
M
P
L
Y
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
T
E
R
M
S
A
N
D
CO
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
O
F
T
H
E
H
P
A
P
E
R
M
I
T
.
I
S
O
L
A
T
E
I
N
-
W
A
T
E
R
W
O
R
K
A
R
E
A
S
US
I
N
G
D
A
M
S
,
I
F
A
P
P
L
I
C
A
B
L
E
.
STORMWATER FACILITYSEE PD SHEETS FORPLAN AND PROFILE
LO
G
J
A
M
A
,
S
E
E
146
LO
G
J
A
M
B
,
S
E
E
GRADE BREAK STA 11+14.33
EL=44.26
FL
=
4
4
.
0
2
FL
=
4
3
.
8
2
0.
2
0
%
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
E
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
T
R
E
A
M
B
E
D
AT
C
E
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
4 (TYP)12'EXISTING GRADETYPICAL SECTIONSCALE: NOT TO SCALE A-STREAM RELOCATION
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
WE
T
L
A
N
D
B
U
F
F
E
R
6"
S
T
R
E
A
M
B
E
D
MI
X
GW
L
E
V
E
L
A
P
P
R
O
X
4
'
BE
L
O
W
G
R
O
U
N
D
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
LE
G
E
N
D
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
4575
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
ST
R
E
A
M
R
E
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
F
I
S
H
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
PL
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
ST
A
9
+
0
0
T
O
E
N
D
O
F
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
BPCBCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-EV.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
0.5'FINISHED GRADE SEE SHEETS 73-75FOR PLANTING PLAN6" STREAMBEDMIX
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
WE
T
L
A
N
D
B
U
F
F
E
R
LO
G
J
A
M
A
,
S
E
E
146
LO
G
J
A
M
B
,
S
E
E
146
95
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
1.
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
M
E
T
H
O
D
S
S
H
A
L
L
C
O
M
P
L
Y
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
T
E
R
M
S
A
N
D
CO
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
O
F
T
H
E
H
P
A
P
E
R
M
I
T
.
I
S
O
L
A
T
E
I
N
-
W
A
T
E
R
W
O
R
K
A
R
E
A
S
US
I
N
G
D
A
M
S
,
I
F
A
P
P
L
I
C
A
B
L
E
.
DI
T
C
H
CL
CO
N
V
E
Y
A
N
C
E
D
I
T
C
H
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
3
1
F
O
R
GR
A
D
I
N
G
A
N
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
STORMWATER FACILITYSEE SHEET 40 FORPLAN AND PROFILE
CULVERTCLEXISTING GROUND FINISHED GRADE
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
G
E
O
T
E
X
T
I
L
E
FO
R
S
O
I
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
,
W
O
V
E
N
GRAVEL BORROW
PR
E
C
A
S
T
R
E
I
N
F
O
R
C
E
D
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
B
O
X
CU
L
V
E
R
T
1
1.
5
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
TE
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
SL
O
P
E
11.50.5'1'
1'
2'
4'
3'
18'FOUNDATION MATERIALCLASS A 1.5'MIN 2' COVER12" DI WATER MAIN 0.87'24" STEEL SLEEVE12" STORM DRAINSTREAMBED MIX2'TYP41TYP
FLOW
2
'
M
A
I
N
CH
A
N
N
E
L
2'
M
A
I
N
CH
A
N
N
E
L
NO
T
E
1
BU
R
Y
6
'
M
I
N
W/
0
.
5
'
M
I
N
C
O
V
E
R
ST
R
E
A
M
C
L
12
"
D
I
A
.
L
O
G
W
I
T
H
RO
O
T
W
A
D
.
S
E
E
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
PR
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
MA
I
N
T
A
I
N
1
.
5
'
M
I
N
CL
E
A
R
C
H
A
N
N
E
L
LO
G
J
A
M
A
SE
C
T
I
O
N
(
T
Y
P
)
PL
A
N
2'
M
A
I
N
CH
A
N
N
E
L
NO
T
E
1
10
'
ST
R
E
A
M
B
E
D
MI
X
LO
G
J
A
M
B
SE
C
T
I
O
N
(
T
Y
P
)
ST
R
E
A
M
B
E
D
MI
X
FLO
W
2
'
M
A
I
N
CH
A
N
N
E
L
C
H
A
N
N
E
L
S
L
O
P
E
ST
R
E
A
M
C
L
MA
I
N
T
A
I
N
1
.
5
'
M
I
N
CL
E
A
R
C
H
A
N
N
E
L
PL
A
N
SM
A
L
L
L
O
G
,
NO
T
E
5
BU
R
Y
1
ME
D
I
U
M
L
O
G
ME
D
I
U
M
L
O
G
SE
E
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
PR
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
SM
A
L
L
L
O
G
,
N
O
T
E
5
SE
E
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
P
R
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
EL=50.77EL=47.77 EL=47.77EL=41.77 EL=41.77 WINGWALL #2WINGWALL #1 EL=50.77 FINISHED GRADEWINGWALL FOOTING,TO BE DESIGNEDBY CONTRACTOR, SEEPRECAST REINFORCEDCONCRETE BOX CULVERTSPECIAL PROVISIONS.EXISTING GROUND HEADWALL
WI
N
G
W
A
L
L
#
4
EL
=
4
5
.
7
2
EL
=
4
9
.
4
4
EL=49.44EL=45.74EL=41.44
EL
=
4
1
.
4
4
WINGWALL #3
WI
N
G
W
A
L
L
F
O
O
T
I
N
G
,
TO
B
E
D
E
S
I
G
N
E
D
BY
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
SE
E
P
R
E
C
A
S
T
R
E
I
N
F
O
R
C
E
D
CO
N
C
R
E
T
E
B
O
X
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
SP
E
C
I
A
L
P
R
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
.
EXISTING GROU
N
D
HE
A
D
W
A
L
L
FINISHED GRADE
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
TYPICAL SECTIONSCALE: NOT TO SCALE
A-
PRECAST REINFORCEDCONCRETE BOX CULVERT
DE
T
A
I
L
SC
A
L
E
:
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
1-
LA
R
G
E
W
O
O
D
Y
D
E
B
R
I
S
1.CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FOR CULVERT, HEADWALLS,AND WINGWALLS SHALL NOT OCCUR UNTIL AFTERSTRUCTURAL ENGINEERING APPROVAL IS OBTAINED.SEE PRECAST REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERTSPECIAL PROVISIONS.2.BOX CULVERTS AND STREAM WORK BELOW ORDINARYHIGH WATER LINE SHALL ONLY OCCUR BETWEEN DATESSPECIFIED IN THE HPA APPROVAL CONDITIONS THATARE INCLUDED IN AN APPENDIX OF THE SPECIALPROVISIONS.UPSTREAM WINGWALL PROFILEB-DOWNSTREA
M
W
I
N
G
W
A
L
L
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
HO
R
I
Z
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
"
=
1
0
'
VE
R
T
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
"
=
5
'
C-
HORIZ SCALE: 1" = 10'VERT SCALE: 1" = 5'No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
4675
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
ST
R
E
A
M
R
E
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
F
I
S
H
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
DE
T
A
I
L
S
BPCBCS11/201511/201511/2015PSO2141931024-EV.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
1.
MA
I
N
T
A
I
N
1
.
5
'
O
F
M
A
I
N
C
H
A
N
N
E
L
U
N
O
B
S
T
R
U
C
T
E
D
A
C
R
O
S
S
F
R
O
M
RO
O
T
W
A
D
A
N
D
M
E
D
I
U
M
L
O
G
.
2.
BU
R
Y
M
E
D
U
I
M
L
O
G
A
M
I
N
I
M
U
M
O
F
5
'
I
N
T
O
B
A
N
K
T
O
S
E
C
U
R
E
.
3.
LO
G
J
A
M
A
(
1
1
)
S
H
A
L
L
C
O
N
S
I
S
T
O
F
1
S
M
A
L
L
L
O
G
A
N
D
1
L
O
G
W
I
T
H
RO
O
T
W
A
D
.
4.
LO
G
J
A
M
B
(
1
0
)
S
H
A
L
L
C
O
N
S
I
S
T
O
F
2
S
M
A
L
L
L
O
G
S
A
N
D
1
M
E
D
I
U
M
L
O
G
.
5.
SE
C
U
R
E
S
M
A
L
L
L
O
G
T
O
M
E
D
I
U
M
L
O
G
O
R
L
O
G
W
I
T
H
R
O
O
T
W
A
D
U
S
I
N
G
LO
G
F
A
S
T
E
N
E
R
S
.
S
E
E
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
P
R
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
.
6.
LO
G
S
W
I
T
H
R
O
O
T
W
A
D
(
1
1
)
,
M
E
D
I
U
M
L
O
G
S
(
1
0
)
,
A
N
D
S
M
A
L
L
L
O
G
S
(
3
1
)
SH
A
L
L
B
E
T
A
K
E
N
F
R
O
M
C
O
N
I
F
E
R
T
R
E
E
S
S
A
L
V
A
G
E
D
D
U
R
I
N
G
S
I
T
E
CL
E
A
R
I
N
G
,
T
O
T
H
E
E
X
T
E
N
T
A
V
A
I
L
A
B
L
E
.
S
E
E
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
P
R
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
.
KING COUNTY
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
AUBUR
N
WAY N
83RDAVE SS 2
7
7
T
H
S
T
1.
A
L
L
W
O
R
K
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
P
E
R
F
O
R
M
E
D
T
O
T
H
E
S
A
T
I
S
F
A
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
T
H
E
OW
N
E
R
'
S
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
/
C
I
T
Y
.
2.
S
E
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
F
O
R
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
3.
A
L
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
E
A
S
S
H
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
6
"
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
D
E
P
T
H
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
IM
P
O
R
T
E
D
T
O
P
S
O
I
L
.
4.
A
L
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
E
A
S
S
H
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
3
"
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
D
E
P
T
H
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
BA
R
K
M
U
L
C
H
.
5.
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
I
B
L
E
F
O
R
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
O
R
R
E
P
A
I
R
OF
A
N
Y
A
R
E
A
S
/
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
D
A
M
A
G
E
D
O
R
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D
B
O
T
H
I
N
S
I
D
E
OR
O
U
T
S
I
D
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
L
I
M
I
T
S
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
LE
G
E
N
D
:
RE
D
O
A
K
30
'
O
.
C
.
HY
D
R
O
S
E
E
D
L
A
W
N
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
L
U
M
I
N
A
I
R
E
'M
A
G
I
C
C
A
R
P
E
T
'
S
P
I
R
A
E
A
3'
O
.
C
.
'H
A
M
E
L
N
'
D
W
F
.
F
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
G
R
A
S
S
2'
O
.
C
.
CR
E
E
P
I
N
G
B
R
A
M
B
L
E
PL
A
N
PL
A
N
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
6575
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
BE
G
I
N
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
T
O
S
T
A
1
0
7
+
5
0
DS12/2014PSO2141931024-LS.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
D STREET NE
86TH
AVE S
PL
A
N
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
6675
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
ST
A
1
0
7
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
1
7
+
5
0
DS12/2014PSO2141931024-LS.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
1.
A
L
L
W
O
R
K
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
P
E
R
F
O
R
M
E
D
T
O
T
H
E
S
A
T
I
S
F
A
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
T
H
E
OW
N
E
R
'
S
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
/
C
I
T
Y
.
2.
S
E
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
F
O
R
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
3.
A
L
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
E
A
S
S
H
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
6
"
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
D
E
P
T
H
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
IM
P
O
R
T
E
D
T
O
P
S
O
I
L
.
4.
A
L
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
E
A
S
S
H
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
3
"
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
D
E
P
T
H
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
BA
R
K
M
U
L
C
H
.
5.
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
I
B
L
E
F
O
R
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
O
R
R
E
P
A
I
R
OF
A
N
Y
A
R
E
A
S
/
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
D
A
M
A
G
E
D
O
R
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D
B
O
T
H
I
N
S
I
D
E
OR
O
U
T
S
I
D
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
L
I
M
I
T
S
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
LE
G
E
N
D
:
RE
D
O
A
K
30
'
O
.
C
.
HY
D
R
O
S
E
E
D
L
A
W
N
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
L
U
M
I
N
A
I
R
E
'M
A
G
I
C
C
A
R
P
E
T
'
S
P
I
R
A
E
A
3'
O
.
C
.
'H
A
M
E
L
N
'
D
W
F
.
F
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
G
R
A
S
S
2'
O
.
C
.
CR
E
E
P
I
N
G
B
R
A
M
B
L
E
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
I STREET NE
PL
A
N
PL
A
N
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
6775
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
ST
A
1
1
7
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
2
7
+
5
0
DS12/2014PSO2141931024-LS.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
1.
A
L
L
W
O
R
K
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
P
E
R
F
O
R
M
E
D
T
O
T
H
E
S
A
T
I
S
F
A
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
T
H
E
OW
N
E
R
'
S
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
/
C
I
T
Y
.
2.
S
E
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
F
O
R
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
3.
A
L
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
E
A
S
S
H
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
6
"
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
D
E
P
T
H
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
IM
P
O
R
T
E
D
T
O
P
S
O
I
L
.
4.
A
L
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
E
A
S
S
H
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
3
"
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
D
E
P
T
H
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
BA
R
K
M
U
L
C
H
.
5.
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
I
B
L
E
F
O
R
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
O
R
R
E
P
A
I
R
OF
A
N
Y
A
R
E
A
S
/
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
D
A
M
A
G
E
D
O
R
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D
B
O
T
H
I
N
S
I
D
E
OR
O
U
T
S
I
D
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
L
I
M
I
T
S
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
LE
G
E
N
D
:
RE
D
O
A
K
30
'
O
.
C
.
HY
D
R
O
S
E
E
D
L
A
W
N
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
L
U
M
I
N
A
I
R
E
'M
A
G
I
C
C
A
R
P
E
T
'
S
P
I
R
A
E
A
3'
O
.
C
.
'H
A
M
E
L
N
'
D
W
F
.
F
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
G
R
A
S
S
2'
O
.
C
.
CR
E
E
P
I
N
G
B
R
A
M
B
L
E
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
SEE PD SERIES SHEETS FOR PONDPLANTING INFORMATION
L STREET NE
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
S 277TH ST
PL
A
N
PL
A
N
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
6875
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
ST
A
1
2
7
+
5
0
T
O
S
T
A
1
3
2
+
5
0
DS12/2014PSO2141931024-LS.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
1.
A
L
L
W
O
R
K
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
P
E
R
F
O
R
M
E
D
T
O
T
H
E
S
A
T
I
S
F
A
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
T
H
E
OW
N
E
R
'
S
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
/
C
I
T
Y
.
2.
S
E
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
F
O
R
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
3.
A
L
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
E
A
S
S
H
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
6
"
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
D
E
P
T
H
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
IM
P
O
R
T
E
D
T
O
P
S
O
I
L
.
4.
A
L
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
E
A
S
S
H
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
3
"
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
D
E
P
T
H
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
BA
R
K
M
U
L
C
H
.
5.
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
I
B
L
E
F
O
R
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
O
R
R
E
P
A
I
R
OF
A
N
Y
A
R
E
A
S
/
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
D
A
M
A
G
E
D
O
R
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D
B
O
T
H
I
N
S
I
D
E
OR
O
U
T
S
I
D
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
L
I
M
I
T
S
.
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
LE
G
E
N
D
:
RE
D
O
A
K
30
'
O
.
C
.
HY
D
R
O
S
E
E
D
L
A
W
N
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
L
U
M
I
N
A
I
R
E
'M
A
G
I
C
C
A
R
P
E
T
'
S
P
I
R
A
E
A
3'
O
.
C
.
'H
A
M
E
L
N
'
D
W
F
.
F
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
G
R
A
S
S
2'
O
.
C
.
CR
E
E
P
I
N
G
B
R
A
M
B
L
E
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
6975
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
A
N
D
N
O
T
E
S
DS12/2014PSO2141931024-LS.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
1.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
T
H
I
S
S
H
E
E
T
F
O
R
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
A
T
I
O
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
.
2.
A
L
L
W
O
R
K
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
P
E
R
F
O
R
M
E
D
T
O
T
H
E
S
A
T
I
S
F
A
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
T
H
E
O
W
N
E
R
'
S
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
/
C
I
T
Y
3.
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
I
S
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
T
O
V
E
R
I
F
Y
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
.
4.
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
I
S
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
I
B
L
E
F
O
R
A
T
H
O
R
O
U
G
H
C
L
E
A
N
-
U
P
F
O
R
H
I
S
/
H
E
R
R
E
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
W
O
R
K
,
D
A
I
L
Y
A
N
D
A
T
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
C
L
O
S
E
-
O
U
T
.
5.
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
I
S
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
I
B
L
E
F
O
R
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
G
A
L
L
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
.
D
A
M
A
G
E
T
O
T
H
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
B
Y
T
H
E
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
R
E
P
A
I
R
E
D
O
R
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
D
B
Y
T
H
E
CO
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
A
N
D
/
O
R
Q
U
A
L
I
F
I
E
D
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
R
S
/
T
R
A
D
E
S
A
C
C
E
P
T
A
B
L
E
T
O
T
H
E
S
O
L
E
S
A
T
I
S
F
A
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
T
H
E
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
O
B
S
E
R
V
E
R
A
N
D
A
T
N
O
C
O
S
T
T
O
T
H
E
O
W
N
E
R
.
6.
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
6
"
D
E
P
T
H
I
M
P
O
R
T
T
O
P
S
O
I
L
T
Y
P
E
A
I
N
A
L
L
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
S
T
R
I
P
S
A
N
D
M
E
D
I
A
N
S
.
7.
P
L
A
N
T
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
S
H
A
L
L
M
E
E
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
S
S
E
T
F
O
R
T
H
I
N
T
H
E
L
A
T
E
S
T
E
D
I
T
I
O
N
O
F
T
H
E
A
M
E
R
I
C
A
N
A
S
S
O
C
I
A
T
I
O
N
O
F
N
U
R
S
E
R
Y
M
E
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
(
A
N
S
I
Z
6
0
.
1
)
A
N
D
W
A
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
S
T
A
T
E
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
S
FO
R
N
U
R
S
E
R
Y
S
T
O
C
K
O
R
D
E
R
N
O
.
1
6
2
7
.
A
L
L
P
L
A
N
T
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
S
H
A
L
L
H
A
V
E
S
U
F
F
I
C
I
E
N
T
R
O
O
T
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
T
O
A
S
S
U
R
E
S
U
R
V
I
V
A
L
A
N
D
H
E
A
L
T
H
Y
G
R
O
W
T
H
.
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
G
R
O
W
N
P
L
A
N
T
MA
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
A
R
E
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
T
O
H
A
V
E
S
U
F
F
I
C
I
E
N
T
R
O
O
T
G
R
O
W
T
H
T
O
H
O
L
D
T
H
E
S
O
I
L
I
N
T
A
C
T
W
H
E
N
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
F
R
O
M
T
H
E
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
,
B
U
T
S
H
A
L
L
N
O
T
B
E
R
O
O
T
B
O
U
N
D
.
8.
P
L
A
N
T
L
I
S
T
Q
U
A
N
T
I
T
I
E
S
A
R
E
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
I
S
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
I
B
L
E
F
O
R
V
E
R
I
F
Y
I
N
G
A
L
L
Q
U
A
N
T
I
T
I
E
S
I
N
L
I
S
T
W
I
T
H
P
L
A
N
C
A
L
L
-
O
U
T
S
A
N
D
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
S
P
E
R
T
H
E
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
.
G
R
O
U
N
D
C
O
V
E
R
Q
U
A
N
T
I
T
I
E
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
A
D
J
U
S
T
E
D
A
S
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
F
O
R
F
I
E
L
D
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
A
T
T
H
E
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
S
P
A
C
I
N
G
.
9.
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
B
A
R
K
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
,
A
L
L
S
H
R
U
B
B
E
D
A
R
E
A
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
T
R
E
A
T
E
D
W
I
T
H
A
P
R
E
E
M
E
R
G
E
N
T
H
E
R
B
I
C
I
D
E
.
F
O
L
L
O
W
A
L
L
M
A
N
U
F
A
C
T
U
R
E
R
'
S
A
P
P
L
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
I
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
.
P
R
E
E
M
E
R
G
E
N
T
HE
R
B
I
C
I
D
E
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
E
L
A
N
C
O
X
L
2
G
O
R
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
E
Q
U
A
L
.
12
.
M
U
L
C
H
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
T
O
D
E
P
T
H
O
F
3
I
N
C
H
E
S
I
N
A
L
L
N
E
W
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
S
.
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
M
U
L
C
H
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
G
R
A
D
E
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
B
R
O
U
G
H
T
T
O
A
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
L
I
N
E
W
I
T
H
N
O
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
IR
R
E
G
U
L
A
R
I
T
I
E
S
.
W
A
T
E
R
I
N
G
B
E
R
M
S
A
R
O
U
N
D
P
L
A
N
T
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
H
A
N
D
C
O
M
P
A
C
T
E
D
A
N
D
O
F
A
S
M
O
O
T
H
A
N
D
E
V
E
N
G
R
A
D
E
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
M
U
L
C
H
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
.
M
U
L
C
H
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
W
A
T
E
R
-
C
O
M
P
A
C
T
E
D
UP
O
N
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
.
13
.
N
O
S
U
B
S
T
I
T
U
T
I
O
N
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
C
O
N
S
I
D
E
R
E
D
F
O
R
P
L
A
N
T
S
O
R
O
T
H
E
R
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
D
U
R
I
N
G
T
H
E
B
I
D
D
I
N
G
P
R
O
C
E
S
S
.
13
.
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
S
H
A
L
L
W
A
R
R
A
N
T
Y
A
L
L
P
L
A
N
T
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
F
O
R
A
P
E
R
I
O
D
O
F
O
N
E
Y
E
A
R
A
F
T
E
R
F
I
N
A
L
A
C
C
E
P
T
A
N
C
E
H
A
S
B
E
E
N
G
R
A
N
T
E
D
.
O
W
N
E
R
S
H
A
L
L
T
H
E
N
A
S
S
U
M
E
A
L
L
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
I
B
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
F
O
R
MA
I
N
T
A
I
N
I
N
G
A
L
L
P
L
A
N
T
S
I
N
A
H
E
A
L
T
H
Y
G
R
O
W
I
N
G
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
F
O
R
T
H
E
L
I
F
E
O
F
T
H
I
S
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
.
14
.
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
&
Q
U
A
N
T
I
T
I
E
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
F
I
E
L
D
A
D
J
U
S
T
E
D
T
O
F
I
T
A
C
T
U
A
L
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
I
F
N
E
C
E
S
S
A
R
Y
.
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
C
O
N
S
T
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
W
/
O
W
N
E
R
'
S
RE
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
.
15
.
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
S
H
A
L
L
H
Y
D
R
O
S
E
E
D
A
L
L
A
R
E
A
S
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D
D
U
R
I
N
G
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
.
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
7075
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
PO
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-LS-POND.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
1.
AL
L
W
O
R
K
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
P
E
R
F
O
R
M
E
D
T
O
T
H
E
S
A
T
I
S
F
A
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
T
H
E
OW
N
E
R
'
S
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
/
C
I
T
Y
.
2.
SE
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
F
O
R
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
3.
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
7
2
F
O
R
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
A
N
D
N
O
T
E
S
.
4.
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
S
M
P
-
0
1
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
M
P
-
0
3
M
I
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
PL
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
,
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
S
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
A
N
D
N
O
T
E
S
.
5.
PL
A
N
T
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
L
I
M
I
T
S
A
N
D
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
S
T
A
K
E
D
IN
T
H
E
F
I
E
L
D
A
N
D
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
B
Y
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
P
R
I
O
R
TO
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
.
6.
AL
L
N
A
T
I
V
E
P
L
A
N
T
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
S
A
V
E
D
A
N
D
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
E
D
W
I
T
H
I
N
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
A
R
E
A
S
.
N
O
T
I
F
Y
B
I
O
L
O
G
I
S
T
/
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
5
DA
Y
S
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
S
T
A
R
T
O
F
C
L
E
A
R
I
N
G
A
C
T
I
V
I
T
Y
.
U
S
E
O
N
L
Y
H
A
N
D
TO
O
L
S
A
N
D
M
E
T
H
O
D
S
W
H
E
N
W
O
R
K
I
N
G
I
N
S
I
D
E
T
H
E
D
R
I
P
L
I
N
E
A
R
E
A
O
F
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
E
E
S
A
N
D
S
H
R
U
B
S
.
7.
$1
<
&
+
$
1
*
(
6
7
2
3
/
$
1
7
0
$
7
(
5
,
$
/
6
,
=
(
2
5
6
3
$
&
,
1
*
0
8
6
7
%
(
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
B
Y
T
H
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
IN
S
T
A
L
L
A
T
I
O
N
.
8.
AL
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
E
A
S
S
H
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
3
"
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
D
E
P
T
H
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
B
A
R
K
M
U
L
C
H
.
9.
CO
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
I
B
L
E
F
O
R
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
O
R
R
E
P
A
I
R
OF
A
N
Y
A
R
E
A
S
/
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
D
A
M
A
G
E
D
O
R
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D
B
O
T
H
IN
S
I
D
E
O
R
O
U
T
S
I
D
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
L
I
M
I
T
S
.
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
7175
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
PO
N
D
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-LS-POND.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95
GE
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
1.
AL
L
W
O
R
K
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
P
E
R
F
O
R
M
E
D
T
O
T
H
E
S
A
T
I
S
F
A
C
T
I
O
N
O
F
T
H
E
OW
N
E
R
'
S
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
/
C
I
T
Y
.
2.
SE
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
F
O
R
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
3.
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
7
2
F
O
R
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
A
N
D
N
O
T
E
S
.
4.
PL
A
N
T
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
L
I
M
I
T
S
A
N
D
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
S
T
A
K
E
D
IN
T
H
E
F
I
E
L
D
A
N
D
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
B
Y
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
P
R
I
O
R
TO
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
.
5.
AL
L
N
A
T
I
V
E
P
L
A
N
T
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
S
A
V
E
D
A
N
D
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
E
D
W
I
T
H
I
N
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
A
R
E
A
S
.
N
O
T
I
F
Y
B
I
O
L
O
G
I
S
T
/
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
5
DA
Y
S
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
S
T
A
R
T
O
F
C
L
E
A
R
I
N
G
A
C
T
I
V
I
T
Y
.
U
S
E
O
N
L
Y
H
A
N
D
TO
O
L
S
A
N
D
M
E
T
H
O
D
S
W
H
E
N
W
O
R
K
I
N
G
I
N
S
I
D
E
T
H
E
D
R
I
P
L
I
N
E
A
R
E
A
O
F
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
E
E
S
A
N
D
S
H
R
U
B
S
.
6.
$1
<
&
+
$
1
*
(
6
7
2
3
/
$
1
7
0
$
7
(
5
,
$
/
6
,
=
(
2
5
6
3
$
&
,
1
*
0
8
6
7
%
(
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
B
Y
T
H
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
IN
S
T
A
L
L
A
T
I
O
N
.
7.
AL
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
A
R
E
A
S
S
H
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
3
"
U
N
I
F
O
R
M
D
E
P
T
H
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
B
A
R
K
M
U
L
C
H
.
8.
CO
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
I
B
L
E
F
O
R
R
E
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
O
R
R
E
P
A
I
R
OF
A
N
Y
A
R
E
A
S
/
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
D
A
M
A
G
E
D
O
R
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D
B
O
T
H
IN
S
I
D
E
O
R
O
U
T
S
I
D
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
L
I
M
I
T
S
.
No.DateRevisionDRAWN TO SCALE, SCALE MAY BE DISTORTED FROM REPRODUCTIONThese drawings conform to theContractor's construction records.RECORD DRAWINGCERTIFICATIONDrawn By: DateConstruction InspectionFile:DrawnReviewedApproved BYDATESCALE:1" = 10' H1" = 5' VONE INCHAS DRAWN
PU
B
L
I
C
W
O
R
K
S
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
25
W
e
s
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Au
b
u
r
n
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D
B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
&
Kn
o
w
w
h
a
t
'
s
RC2
2
2
A
7275
S
2
7
7
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
A
N
D
NO
N
-
M
O
T
O
R
I
Z
E
D
T
R
A
I
L
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
PO
N
D
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
ESJWCS6/20156/20156/2015PSO2141931024-LS-POND.DWG
C222A S 277TH STREET CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
1.PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, CLEARING LIMITS SHALL BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED WITH HIGH VISIBILITY FENCE. THE OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE
S
H
A
L
L
V
E
R
I
F
Y
A
N
D
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
F
E
N
C
E
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL ARRANGE TO MEET ON SITE WITH OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE AND BIOLOGIST TO DISCUSS LIMITS OF WORK AND MET
H
O
D
S
.
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
C
T
I
V
I
T
I
E
S
S
H
A
L
L
N
O
T
COMMENCE UNTIL ACCESS, LIMITS OF WORK, AND METHODS ARE APPROVED.3.LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLANS REPRESENT A CONCEPTUAL PLANT LAYOUT. FINAL PLANT LOCATIONS SHALL BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
.
4.USE ONLY HAND TOOLS TO CLEAR AND CULTIVATE SOIL UNDER THE CANOPY (WITHIN AND 5' OUTSIDE THE DRIPLINE) OF EXISTING TREES.5.ALL PLANTS SHALL BE NURSERY GROWN A MINIMUM OF ONE YEAR. PLANT MATERIAL IS TO BE SUPPLIED BY COMMERCIAL NURSERIES THAT
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
I
Z
E
I
N
P
L
A
N
T
S
N
A
T
I
V
E
T
O
T
H
E
P
A
C
I
F
I
C
NORTHWEST. PLANT SUBSTITUTIONS ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY BIOLOGIST/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.6.PLANTING SHALL TAKE PLACE DURING THE DORMANT SEASON (NOVEMBER 1ST TO FEBRUARY 28TH). PLANTING MAY BE ALLOWED AT OTHE
R
T
I
M
E
S
A
F
T
E
R
R
E
V
I
E
W
A
N
D
W
R
I
T
T
E
N
A
P
P
R
O
V
A
L
B
Y
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.7.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROPER DISPOSING OF ALL DEBRIS AND EXCESS SOIL OCCASIONED BY THIS PROJECT.8.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES PRIOR TO EXCAVATION.9.ALL DIMENSIONS FOR PLANT SIZES ARE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.10. EXISTING AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND NOT SHOWN TO BE RE-VEGETATED ON THESE PLANS SHALL BE RESTORED
.
11. DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE PLANS AND SITE CONDITIONS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIO
R
T
O
P
R
O
C
E
E
D
I
N
G
.
12. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WATERING PLANTS FOR THE FIRST YEAR.QUANTITYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE & SPACINGCAREX OBNUPTASLOUGH SEDGE EMERGENT PLANTING MIXPLUG @ 6" OC PLANT MATERIALS LISTSCIRPUS ACUTUSHARDSTEM BULRUSHJUNCUS TENUISSLENDER RUSH PLUG @ 6" OCPLUG @ 6" OC 480448044804HYDROSEED TURF MIXPERENNIAL RYEANNUAL RYECREEPING RED FESCUEWHITE CLOVER 40%35%15%10%TRIFOLIUM REPENS FESTUCA RUBRA LOLIUM MULTIFLORUM LOLIUM PERENNE100 LBS/SF
%
R
E
V
I
E
W
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
95