Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L98-0054 - KING COUNTY - NORTH WIND WEIR PARK SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT WAIVER (CECIL MOSES MEMORIAL PARK)This record contains information which is exempt from public disclosure pursuant to the Washington State Public Records Act, Chapter 42.56 RCW as identified on the Digital Records Exemption Log shown below. L98 -0054 King County NORTH WIND WEIR PARK SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT WAIVER OF SHORELINE PERMIT GRANTED FOR DEVELOPMENTOF INTERTIDAL ESTUARY UNDER WAC 173-27-040(2)(P). 11013 West Marginal Place South RECORDS DIGITAL D- ) EXEMPTION LOG THE ABOVE MENTIONED PERMIT FILE INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING REDACTED INFORMATION Page # tode Exemption = Brief Explanatory DeSctiptiop t tutel ule The Privacy Act of 1974 evinces Congress' intent that Personal Information — social security numbers are a private concern. As such, individuals' social security numbers are Social Security Numbers redacted to protect those individuals' privacy pursuant 5 U.S.C. sec. DR1 Generally — 5 U.S.C. sec. to 5 U.S.C. sec. 552(a), and are also exempt from 552(a); RCW 552(a); RCW disclosure under section 42.56.070(1) of the 42.56.070(1) 42.56.070(1) Washington State Public Records Act, which exempts under the PRA records or information exempt or prohibited from disclosure under any other statute. Redactions contain Credit card numbers, debit card Personal Information — numbers, electronic check numbers, credit expiration 332 DR2 Financial Information — dates, or bank or other financial account numbers, RCW RCW 42.56.230(4 5) which are exempt from disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56.230(5) 42.56.230(5), except when disclosure is expressly required by or governed by other law. L98 -0054 NORTH WIND WEIR PARK 11013 W. Marginal Pl. So. W et 6_ O 0, W =: • LL u. ct W Z f. I- 0 Z I-: W ju U0 O -. O I-, 2uj w Z; P I.. O /- z et vacation • From: Jill Mosqueda To: Connier @mcleodreckord.com Date: 9/11/02 1:54PM Subject: cecil moses file 3.40.49 street vacation This vacation is recorded. Recording number 20020708001552. ben is correct that the verbal description does not match the drawing. The verbal clearly does not include S 110th. However the drawing does include what appears to be a portion of S. 110th st. (the east -west) piece of the outlined vacation area on the drawing. If the vavcation does indeed include this east -west right of way, then only 1/2 of that right of way goes to the properties abutting on the south. The verbal and the drawing for this vacation were already set when i was assigned this vacation. I just did not notice the discrepancy. Perhaps Ben, being a surveyor can provide guidance on what overrides, the drawing or the verbal? CC: Brian Shelton; Deborah Ritter Z . 0 0. U) 0. uJ ul J H • u-. W0 • ¢: a `_- _ z F..; F- 01 z —, 0 I• -' uJ W: • U,. E" O .. z W OA 1= • _[ O H; z SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT WAIVER DATE: September 5, 2002 TO: Mike Lozano FROM: L. Jill Mosqueda SUBJECT: Cecil Moses Park (Aka: North Wind Weir Park, King County) PRE97 -028 Project Number L98 -0054 L98 -0055 L99 -0036 3.40.49 Street Vacation Public Works has the following comments to help you through the remaining Public Works permit processes. MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT Provide the City the following for the Miscellaneous permit for the land altering related to the estuary provide: 1. A completed miscellaneous permit application 2. Plans that meet the requirements in Bulletin 1 Standard Construction Notes, Bulletin 2 Plan Submittal Guidelines, Bulletin 9 Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control enclosed. 3. A written description of the sequence and timing for breaching the bank at the estuary connection to the river. 4. A bond for 10% of the project construction value for erosion prevention and sediment control. 5. A $1,000,000 liability insurance policy certificate with the City named as additional insured. 6. Application requirements for hauling per Bulletin 12 Hauling Permit. LETTER OF MAP REVISION Provide the City a completed Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for submittal to FEMA. Since the City administers the FEMA regulations within its city limits, FEMA requires that the City submit the LOMR and that it keep a record of activity related to the LOMR. CC: Ryan Larson Deb Ritter Laurie Werle Files (4) City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director August 21, 2002 Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section King County Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, Washington 98104 -2337 VIA FAX 206 - 296 -0186 & US Mail Re: Cecil Moses Memorial Park ( —aka- North Wind Weir Park) at 11013 West Marginal Place South Project No. PRE97 -028 Dear Mr. Lozano: We wanted to take this opportunity to provide you with a list of items that must be completed before you can begin construction on the Cecil Moses Park. We understand that you have a tight timeline and that you would like to move forward on this project. The following items must be approved and finalized prior to the issuance of a permit for the estuary construction: 1. A lot consolidation application must be submitted and approved and a copy of the recorded lot consolidation documents provided to the City of Tukwila. We have enclosed an application packet and a copy of Title 17 "Subdivisions & Plats" for your reference. 2. An application must be submitted for the estuary construction. The scope of this application must also include your proposal for the removal and replacement of significant trees on the site per Tukwila's Tree Regulations (TMC 18.54, copy attached). We would be happy to arrange a meeting with you and all of your consultants to discuss these requirements and respond to any questions you may have. I anticipate that the meeting will include myself, Gary Schulz, Deb Ritter and Jill Mosqueda. If you wish to have such a meeting, please contact Deb Ritter at 206 -431 -3663 as soon as possible with your team's list of preferred meeting dates and times. She will then coordinate the best possible meeting date with you. Sincerely, Jack Pace Deputy Director cc: Deb Ritter, Senior Planner Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist Jill Mosqueda, Associate Engineer 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 -431 -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665 From: Jill Mosqueda To: Lozano, Mike Date: 8/16/02 9:26AM Subject: RE: Cecil Moses Park Mike, On July 3rd, 1 hand - carried the documents to Dave Preugshat, who signed the tax affidavit in your stead. I then immediately delivered the vacation documents to the KC Records for recording. The City has not received a copy of the recorded documents, so I do not have a recoding number. So, I can not tell you if they the vacation is complete. »> "Lozano, Mike" <Mike.Lozano @METROKC.GOV> 08/15/02 12:06PM »> Jill and Deborah, To date, I have not received the affidavit requiring my signature. Has the Mayor signed, or are you still waiting for him to do so? My understanding is that the County has provided all required of the City for the Street Vacation. Thanks. Original Message From: Jill Mosqueda (mailto:imosqueda anci.tukwila.wa.usj Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 3:36 PM To: Deborah Ritter Cc: Mike.LozanoCu�METROKC.GOV Subject: Re: Cecil Moses Park Deb and Mike, Regarding the street vacation: I am waiting for the Mayor to sign the excise tax affidavit, required by KC whenever property changes hands. As soon as I have the signature, I will personally bring the affidavit to you, Mike, for signature, and then I will hand carry the paper work to KC Records for recording. At that time the street vacation will be complete. Lot Consolidation VS Easements Once the vacation is complete, PW will not be involved in the lot consolidation, except possibly application review, nor will it be involved with King County providing itself easements over its own property, if that is what KC decides to do. Any questions? I am looking forward to one day soon, seeing the constrcution permit application. »> Deborah Ritter 06/14/02 03:40PM »> I've been assigned to the Sound Transit project so another planner will likely handle any new submissions on this file. However, as a heads -up, after the street vacation is recorded, King County must choose one of the following options: 1. Submit a lot consolidation application (which must be approved and recorded prior to the issuance of any land altering permits). OR 2. Submit a reciprocal easement for ingress, egress and maintenance over and hDe ora Ritter - - E: Cea oses ark , \ between all parcels comprising the site. The form and content of the easement must be acceptable to Tukwila and be recorded prior to the issuance of any land altering permits. NOTE: A Tree permit must be processed as part of the land altering permit to satisfy Sensitive Area Ordinance regulations. CC: Deborah Ritter z cc W. 0O 2 J I- al O. 2 gQ co 2 0 Z �. 1- O Z IL al H; W N U • Z 0 .114 0 Elliott Bay/Duwamish Restoration Program Panel Minutes - 04 April, 2002 Location: NMFS Regional Directorate Conference Room, Building 1, Sand Point Convened: 9:40 AM - 1:35 PM Chair: Dr. Robert C. Clark, Jr. (206 -526 -4338) Introduction of Guests/ Announcements Joanne Polayes, Ecology, announced she will no longer be able to participate in the Panel and HDTWG due to changing work responsibilities and the Panel's longevity. Her replacement from DOE is Rick Huey. Review of Meeting Minutes The minutes of the January 3, 2002 Panel Meeting were approved as amended. Public Participation The public comment meeting for the Duwamish/Diagonal sediment remediation project was held on 17 February, and lots of questions /comments were addressed. The public comment period for the Du/Di Draft Alternatives Report ended 1 March. Budget Committee No report. Habitat Development Technical Working Group (Chair: Curtis Tanner) Turning Basin No. 3 Glen St. Amant, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, reported that he has the final permits he needs for construction. The project should go to construction this summer /fall season. North Winds Weir Curtis Tanner, USFWS, reported from Jody Heintzman that King County adopted the restrictive covenant for the site. This will set the stage for KC receiving credit for the money expended to purchase the property. Curtis explained that the street vacation and underground utilities easement necessary for construction of the project is being held by the City of Seattle who is waiting for an unrelated permit from KC, and that the project cannot proceed until this easement is acquired. The easement is the last step in permitting before NWW can go to construction. Herring's House Park The status of the restrictive covenant for the site was discussed: The City's attorney has been looking at the language and will check with DOE's and NOAA's attorneys to work out any issues. Year 1 Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Report Comments on the report are due to the AD. General consensus was that the report was very good, and members agreed with the report authors that the trespassing by people Draft: April 4, 2002 1 and dogs at Hamm Creek is a concern. There was some discussion about possibly posting signs to decrease or stop the trespassing, and about easement limitations. Jeff Stern, King County, will check with the County to find out if signs are allowable. It was decided that the final version of this report should be sent to Steve Hagen at City Light (or Gary Zarker, Superintendent of Cit Light), as a courtesy. Signage z Curtis summarized the sign discussion from the HDTWG meeting last week regarding completed na a for leted Panel projects. At the meeting, it was agreed that a consistent Z g g P sign should be common to all sites, acknowledging the Panel agencies, and showing 6 D perhaps a schematic map of the Duwamish and the location of sites. A rough guess for o costs of signs is around $10,000. The City and County members said they both have w = good graphics departments that might be able to help if their time were reimbursed, to u, i develop designs and decrease outside costs. Rick Huey, Ecology, mentioned the possible w o necessity of posting the health hazard (fish/shellfish) sign at sites. The complexities of 2 placing Panel signs at some sites due to property owners, and of placing signs at u_ sediment remediation sites since the work is not apparent, were discussed. u a =w F-= Alaskan Way Viaduct Modification Project Z o Representatives from the City (Robert Chandler) and WSDOT (Tom Madden) gave a z w presentation on the various plans for modifying the Alaskan Way Viaduct (or some ? n structure serving the same purpose) for earthquake stability. U o� Sediment Remediation Technical Working Group (Chair: Pat Romberg) w w Norfolk Recontamination ~ ~ Pat Romberg, King County, relayed that the letter from the Panel to Ecology and EPA w z co produced a meeting between Ecology and Boeing, with the decision to sample further. U He summarized that the agencies agree that the local contamination needs to be z 1- examined, but more discussion is necessary to determine what samples are needed, and how to rectify the situation. Rick supposed that some work toward remedying the recontamination problem might be done this upcoming construction season. Ecology and the Manchester lab will probably be involved in taking and analyzing samples. Diagonal /Duwamish • Pat relayed the fact that there was a public meeting on 17 February, with a public comment period ending 1 March for the Duwamish/Diagonal Site Analysis and Draft Alternatives Report. This comment period brought about a letter from NOAA recommending the expansion of the proposed cleanup site to include the adjacent chemical hotspot. In February, verbal approval was gained from all Panel members for King County to examine the additional costs of including the hotspot in the cleanup (this would increase the area from near five -acres to seven acres). The County is working on three documents to give to Ecology as a result of the public comment period -- an expanded project document, a source control summary document, and a responsiveness summary to public comments on the Draft Du/Di A/E Report. Pat said the cleanup Draft: April 4, 2002 2 action decision should occur by the end of April, followed by a 30 -day comment period in May, and subsequently the decision would be final. • Jeff Stern noted that a special Panel meeting would probably be necessary when the decision in final, for the County to continue with project plans. The group decided that the Panel will soon have to pass a resolution adding Area B to the cleanup, and adopting a new budget for this project to proceed. . Pat presented the Expanded Area Document, explained parts of it, and requested comments by 19 April. Diagrams in the document show areas and depths to be dredged. The hotspot would add a 40% increase in volume, and the project would require an in -water total of 80 days of work (38 days dredging, remaining days backfilling). Glen mentioned that the Muckleshoots will need to know the dredging plan to minimize interference with tribal fishing. Pat explained a table comparing costs of cleaning Area A (the previous size) and Areas A and B (original plus hotspot). Jeff noted that mitigation is included in the contingency costs of the project, depending on Ecology's requirements. Panel Business Resolution 2002 -02 on Trustee Disbursement was presented and passed unanimously by Panel members in attendance. Next Meeting Agenda • HDTWG Meeting - 20 June, 2002 • Regular Panel Meeting - 18 July, 2002 (different date than regular schedule). Meeting Adjourned: 1:35 PM Dr. Robert C. Clark, Jr., Chair LT Alexandra Von Saunder, NOAA Administrative Director Panel Secretary Draft: April 4, 2002 After recording send to: City of Seattle SPU Real Estate Services/VVTR 710 Second Avenue 10' Floor Seattle, WA 98104 20020521001112 SEATTLE PUBLIC EAS 17.00 PAGE 001 OF 009 05/21/2002 10:59 KING COUNTY, WA• WATER AND ELECTRICAL UTILITIES EASEMENT AGREEMENT Reference No.: Grantor: Grantee: Legal. Description: Tax ID No.: none King County The City of Seattle Portions of Lots 1 through 7, inclusive and portions of Lots 12 and 13, together with portions of West Marginal Place South adjoining Lots 1 through 13, inclusive, Gordon's Addition No. 2, Volume 36 of Plats, page 42 (full legal descriptions attached) portions of 284380 -0005, 284380 -0010, 284380 -0015, 284380 -0020, 284380 -0025, 284380 -0030, 284380 -0035, 284380 -0040, 284380 -0045, 284380 -0050, 284380 -0055, 284380 -0060 & 284380 -0065 THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT made this 4-4 day of 1 yher -200/ , by and between KING COUNTY, a Home Rule Charter County of the State of Washington, hereinafter called "Grantor ", and THE CITY OF SEATTLE, by and through its Seattle Public Utilities Department, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, hereinafter called "Grantee "; WITNESSETH; Grantor intends to and has applied for permits to develop an intertidal estuary on a parcel of undeveloped land (the "Cecil Moses Memorial Park ") located in Tukwila, Washington. The site of the Cecil Moses Memorial Park currently contains certain street rights -of -way, which belong to the City of Tukwila ( "Tukwila "). Grantee has certain water and electrical utility facilities located in certain portions of the aforementioned rights -of -way. Tukwila has agreed to vacate the aforementioned rights -of -way so that Grantor may develop its intertidal estuary, provided that, Grantor simultaneously grants and conveys to Grantee a permanent easement that allows Grantee to continue to operate and maintain its electrical and water utility facilities in the area. That the Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other valuable considerations, receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby conveys, grants and warrants to the Grantee, its successors and assigns, the right, privilege and authority to F3 C rif D MAY 3 0 2002 TUKWWILA PUBLIC 'A /ORK6 install, construct, reconstruct, erect, alter, improve, repair, operate, monitor and maintain a water m -in, electrical service and appurtenances (related to both), including but not limited to connecting water service pipes, vaults, hydrants, electrical lines and meters, together with the right of ingress and egress, over, under, through, across, along and upon property located in King County, Washington, described as follows: (Legal Description on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof). (Legal Description on Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof). The Grantor and the Grantee agree and covenant as follows: SPECIAL TERMS 1. The Grantor shall maintain the existing asphalt roadway located in what is now S. 110' St. and 7 " Ave. S. as an access roadway (at least twelve (12) feet in width) and turnaround, which will provide Grantee non - exclusive access to the Grantee's water and electrical utility facilities and the park itse f. If the said existing roadway is ever replaced or relocated the new access roadway and turnaround shall be constructed according to design plans, which must be approved in advance by the Granter in r—1 writing. C> 2. The Stone Column construction as shown in the March 14, 2001 HWA Geosciences, Inc. Repo ( "Geosciences Report "), and as may be referred to in King County's Cecil Moses Memorial Park Estuary Project Plans, King.County Plan # C13130C, dated October 10, 2001 and subsequent Addendum Number 1, dated November 14, 2001 and Addendum #2, dated November 21, 2001 CD (hereinafter the "Cecil Moses Memorial Park Estuary Plans "), are to be designed and installed in a manner approved by Grantee and operated and maintained by Grantor in a manner that will neithe interfere with or damage the Grantee's water and electrical utility facilities. CP 3. Grantor, and its successors and assigns, agree to defend, indemnify and save the Grantee, its t elected officials, directors, employees, agents and affiliates harmless from and against any and all claims, liabilities, actions, demands, judgments, losses, costs, expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees), suits or damages which are caused by the negligence of the Grantor, its authorize' agents or employees in Grantor's development of the Cecil Moses Memorial Park Estuary, includin•, but not limited to the construction, maintenance, repair and /or design of the underground Stone Columns referred to in the preceding paragraph and in the Geosciences Report. 4. The Grantee agrees to defend, indemnify and save Grantor, its elected officials, inspectors, employees, agents and affiliates harmless from and against any and all claims, liabilities, actions, demands, judgements, losses, costs, expenses (including reasonable attorney fees), suit or damages which are caused by the negligence of the Grantee, its authorized agents or employees. 5. Loading on the Grantee's water and electrical utility facilities shall not exceed HS -20. GENERAL TERMS 1. The Grantee and its agents shall have the right without prior institution of any suit or proceedin• at law, at such times as may be necessary, to enter upon said easement area for the purposes herei described, without incurring any legal obligation or liability therefore. The Grantee shall use reasonable efforts to return park property to its preexisting condition after its entry is complete. Notwithstanding this provision, the Grantee shall bear no responsibility for the construction, maintenance and /or repair of Grantor property and the Grantee shall be insulated from liability for such under Provision No. 3 of the SPECIAL TERMS; provided, however, that the Grantee shall remain responsible for any failures in the Grantee's facilities which do not arise out of, and /or are not in any way connected to Grantor's development of the area as more specifically identified in the Cecil Moses Plans. z 2. • Grantor shall have the right to use said property for any legal purpose not inconsistent with the 1- w rights herein granted to the Grantee. 6D 3. • Other than those depicted in the Cecil Moses Plans as approved by the Grantee, the Grantor U O hereby agrees that no building, fence, wall, rockery, trees, shrubbery or obstruction of any kind shall be : to o erected or planted, or any fill material placed within the boundaries of said easement area without the w = •written permission of the City of Seattle's Director of Seattle Public Utilities. No excavation shall be —' F- made within three feet of the Grantee's water and electrical utility facilities, and that the earth cover w w0 over the Grantee's water and electrical utility facilities shall be maintained at not less than 35 inches nor more than 48 inches. u. ?. N 4. Grantor hereby agrees that no other utility facilities, such as conduits, cables, pipelines, vaults = d ? poles, posts, whether public or private, will be installed within the granted easement area, without prior F- _ 7-4 written approval from the Grantee. z 1' I-( ® 5. Vehicle parking or storage of materials over utility facilities, such as vaults, water meter or valve 111 Lu C) boxes will not be allowed. Vehicles or materials may be moved or impounded at the expense of owner 2 D and the Grantee shall be held harmless from any damage, claim, liability actions, judgment or costs U arising out of the movement or impoundment of said vehicle or material. p F- ww 115 6. Grantor agrees to allow the Grantee, itsagentsor assigns, the use of such additional area H H C) immediately adjacent to said easement area, as shall be required for the non - emergency installation, u.. p Gst construction, reconstruction, erection, alteration, improvement, repair, monitoring, maintenance and w z ® operation of the Grantee's water and electrical utility facilities. Prior to such non - emergency work, the cd p Grantee shall apply to Grantor for its standard Special Use Permit. Said area will be returned to the ~O Y C■t same condition as it was immediately before entry by the Grantee or its agents. Notwithstanding this z provision, no restrictions are placed on the Grantee's entry and /or right of entry onto the Grantee's actual easement area as provided for in Provision No. 1 of this section. 7. In an emergency, Grantor agrees that the Grantee, its agents or assigns, shall have the right to close the easement area and to cut into any private roadway without prior notice and the use of such additional area immediately adjacent to said easement area, as shall be required for the installation, construction, reconstruction, erection, alteration, improvement, repair, monitoring, maintenance and operation of said water and electrical service facilities. Said area will be returned to•the same condition as it was immediately before entry by the Grantee or its agents. Notwithstanding this provision, no restrictions are placed on the Grantee's entry and/or right of entry onto the Grantee's actual easement area as provided for in Provision No. 1 of this section. 8. Grantor waives any present or future claim against the Grantee relating to hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants, and shall indemnify the defend the Grantee from any such claim, including enforcement action by a regulatory agency, unless the hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants result from the Grantee's operations. 9. Any references to the word "approve" by the Grantee with respect to any plans, reports or other items prepared for or in response to the terms in this Easement Agreement refer to the Grantee's ` approval for internal purposes only and are not and should not be construed or relied on in any way as a validation, confirmation or other attestation of the statem-nts made therein. 10. This agreement and each of the terms, provisions, con•itions and covenant herein, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto nd their respective heirs, successor and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, pursuant to the provisio s of Ordinance No. 0.0 7 ?3 of the City of Seattle, said City has caused this instrument to be executed by the Director of Seattle Public Utilities on this ,P. 0 day of /ti Gl l- , 2002. G■2 CD C9 • KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON C9 • C) • • ave Preugsch- , for the County rrecutive, t CNj Manager, Property Services Division DATED: D2Cet 6e-r Lbb I THE CI OF SEATTLE, u� X By: Signatu e Name Title '1 vclC C /ark & - %IrecJ2 y- Seattle 'ublic Utilities PROVED AS•TO FORM: D nature puty Prosecuting Attomey TED: STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY CqF KING ss. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 1-161-o Id /14 C V e Ily signed this instRimn on oath stated that they were authorized to execute the instrumentd acknowledged it as tivANGYager, Property Services, of King County to be the free and voluntary act of such parties for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF KING ) Dated: Mecernhe,v 2_ool i a �j Notary (print name) Ca z) J Thorr+Psoh Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing ata'G My appointment expires / /— / S -0 V ss. ,l I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that CA ith. c / d r- k a signed this instrument, on oath stated that he is authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the DIRECTOR, SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES, to be the free and voluntary act of the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. ,.u•n,tii,l• „1 t A, •J... ,:1F Dated: Notary (print name) >F�� k. At od (/ Notary Public in and for the State of Washingtorf, residing at ta�llr . .' /tt. /e; l;L'A My appointment expires : z1-- tY 61i 0 oO W = J I w CO =w zI I- o' Z ui U0 C) 1- w W! • H , -O z vc 0 z EXHIBIT A ELECTRICAL LINE EASEMENT DESCRIPTION THAT PORTION OF GORDON'S ADDITION NO. 2, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 36 OF PLATS PAGE 42, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, BEING A PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 11 IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W. M., INCLUDING THOSE PORTIONS DEDICATED FOR PUBLIC USE AND SHOWN AS SOUTH 110TH STREET AND 27TH AVENUE SOUTH ON SAID PLAT, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: HZ 6 JU U O: = J A STRIP OF LAND 10 FEET IN WIDTH LYING 5 FEET EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING co r-I REFERENCE LINE: W O CD COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF WEST MARGINAL WAY g a SOUTH (AS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT) AND THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 460 FEET OF GOVERNMENT LOT 11; = a I-- 1-1-1 T GN/ THENCE NORTH 85 °13'00" EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 185.07 FEET TO z F-. 3i) THE POINT OF BEGINNING; z O' CD W W V THENCE SOUTH 21 °09'25" WEST A DISTANCE OF 16.10 FEET; m p' . CD THENCE SOUTH 20 °13'00" EAST A DISTANCE OF 264.77 FEET; O 0 N` f-;. �2 W uJ THENCE NORTH 69 °37'47" EAST A DISTANCE OF 22.25 FEET; H U. u. O: THENCE SOUTH 20 °13'00" EAST A DISTANCE OF 10.71 FEET; LL. z, U D. THENCE SOUTH 03 °22'51" WEST A DISTANCE OF 70.00 FEET TO THE TERMINUS OF SAID ~O H' REFERENCE LINE. z. THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS EASEMENT DESCRIPTION IS AS REFERENCED FROM SAID PLAT OF GORDON'S ADDITION NO 2. THE SIDELINES OF SAID EASEMENTS SHALL BE SHORTENED OR LENGTHENED. SO AS TO COMMENCE AND TERMINATE IN THE PROPERTY LINES STATED IN THE CORRESPONDING REFERENCE LINE DESCRIPTION. PREPARED BY: BEN ENRICH PENHELLEGON ASSOCIATES JOB NO. 01605.10 UNDER GROUND ELECTRICAL LINE EASEMENT EXHIBIT A ►i 8. 110TH 8T. 0 N 85 3 00'E 185.07' =1 t \ r..-1 1 >) CZ CL • N 0 n P.O.B. N. UNE OF S. 460' GOV. LOT 11 1 N 8513'00• E S 21'09'25'W 16.10' 8 5.00' GORDON'S ADD1TIONNO.2 5.00' VOLUME 36 OF PLATS PAGE 42 VosAR„ • • • 13 8. 112TH ST. Engineering Planning Surveying Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc. 750 Sixth Street South Kirkland, WA 98033 www.paceengrs.com PH: (425) 827 -2014 1- 800 - 945 -8408 , FAX: (425) 827 -5043 Kirkland • Federal Way • Cie aim SCALE: 1 " =80' FILE: \1605ESMNT�LEC8X11.DWG DATE: 8/13/01 PROJ. NO.: 01605.10 EXHIBIT B WATER LINE EASEMENT DESCRIPTION THAT PORTION OF GORDON'S ADDITION NO. 2, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 36 OF PLATS Q • PAGE 42, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, BEING A PORTION OF GOVERNMENT H z LOT 11 IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, w TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W. M., INCLUDING THOSE PORTIONS DEDICATED FOR 6= PUBLIC USE AND SHOWN AS SOUTH 110TH STREET AND 27TH AVENUE SOUTH ON'SAID PLAT, U O! MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ; 0 W a/ W s 7.1 A STRIP OF LAND 30 FEET IN WIDTH LYING 10 FEET NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY AND 20 FEET SOUTHERLY AND WESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING REFERENCE LINE: w O 2 COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF WEST MARGINAL WAY g a SOUTH (AS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT) AND THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 460 FEET OF u. u. C) GOVERNMENT LOT 11; = O 7-1 w ~_ V THENCE NORTH 85 °13'00" EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 94.88 FEET TO z 1... 2l) THE INTERSECTION WITH A WATER MAIN AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; Z O CD W w. V THENCE SOUTH 65 °21'37" EAST ALONG SAID WATER MAIN A DISTANCE OF 100.57 FEET TO D p AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID WATER MAIN; 0 ® (2; C) 0 H: at THENCE SOUTH 20 °13'00" EAST ALONG SAID WATER MAIN A DISTANCE OF 363.71 FEET TO A = W' POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 60 FEET OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 11, AND 1.- U THE TERMINUS OF SAID REFERENCE LINE. SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 88 °13'00" EAST A 0 DISTANCE OF 168.84 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE OF WEST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH, (AS w N SHOWN ON SAID PLAT), AS MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTH LINE. U O THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS EASEMENT DESCRIPTION IS AS REFERENCED FROM ' Z SAID PLAT OF GORDON'S ADDITION NO 2. THE SIDELINES OF SAID EASEMENTS SHALL BE SHORTENED OR LENGTHENED SO AS TO COMMENCE AND TERMINATE IN THE PROPERTY LINES STATED IN THE CORRESPONDING REFERENCE LINE DESCRIPTION. PREPARED BY: BEN ENRICH PENHELLEGON ASSOCIATES JOB NO. 01605.10 • WATER LINE EASEMENT EXHIBIT B Q S.110TH ST. N8513'00 -Es% 94 88'� -"-r C■2 1— N a_ L N cn . O m 1 �a N. UNE OF 5. 460' GOV. LOT 11 5 8513'00' W •� GORDON'S ADDITIONNO.2 \ rOps�h VOLUME 36 OF PLATS PACE 42 7 8 10.00' \N • 1 i • N X 8513'00" E 168.84' I, S.112TH ST. 13 R35.00' N. UNE OF S. 60' GOV. LOT 11 60' CITY OF SEATTLE PIPE UNE R.W. Engineering Planning Surveying Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc. 750 Sixth Street South PH: (425) 827 -2014 Kirkland SCALE: 1 " =80' FILE: \1605ESMNT8X11.DWG Kirkland, WA 98033 1- 800- 945 -8408 • Federal Way • DATE: 6/27/01 www.paceengrs.com FAX: (425) 827 -5043 Cle Elum PROJ. NO.: 01605.10 z CeW J V o00 t <n W = --1 F—; CO u_ W0 i =1. CW F- 0 zF- w uj U 0 g2 0F W. F— V — 0 iu in = 0 ,Z . 2 3 7 8 9 10 11 :..12.. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 t)V.e7�111 December 3,2001 ORD. -Cecil Moses Park Accept ^ (Ver.2) . — ORDINANCE / 0 ? 9:3 AN ORDINANCE relating to Seattle Public Utilities; authorizing an easement agreement from King County allowing the City of Seattle, by and through Seattle Public Utilities to install, construct, reconstruct, erect, alter, improve, repair, operate, monitor and maintain electrical and water utility facilities in real property located in the Cecil Moses Park area, SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W. M., King County, Washington. WHEREAS, King County intends to and has applied for permits to develop an intertidal estuary on a parcel of undeveloped land (the "Cecil Moses Memorial Park ") located in Tukwila, Washington; and WHEREAS, the site of the Cecil Moses Memorial Park currently contains certain street rights -of -way, • which belong to the City of Tukwila ( "Tukwila "); and WHEREAS, The City of Seattle, by and through Seattle Public Utilities ( "SPU") has certain water and electric .al.utility_faci lilies. located in certain. portions •of the aforementioned. rights-of-way; and— WHEREAS, Tukwila has agreed to vacate the aforementioned rights -of -way so that King County may develop its intertidal estuary, provided that, King County simultaneously grants and conveys to SPU a.permanent easement that allows SPU to continue to operate and maintain its electrical and water utility facilities in the area; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. As requested by the Managing Director of the Seattle Public Utilities and recommended by the. Mayor, said Managing Director is hereby authorized to execute and accept. an Easement Agreement from. King County, in substantially the same form as set forth in the Easement Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A. This Easement Agreement allows SPU to install, construct, reconstruct, erect, alter, improve, repair, operate, monitor and maintain electrical and water utility facilities, together with the right of ingress to and egress from the premises, over, under, through, across and upon the following described real property in Seattle, King County, Washington: ..�. u6p U0 moo: W 2. -I F- C!)w w0. u_ a �_ z� H 0 Z r. LLI U� - o 0 F- w w. F=- V; z ui U = o 1- z 1 2 3 4 6 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 BG.elan _. December 3, 2001 ORD.-Cecil Moses Park Accept (Ver.1) EXHIBIT A ELECTRICAL LINE EASEMENT DESCRIPTION THAT PORTION OF GORDON'S ADDITION NO. 2,.AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 36 OF PLATS PAGE 42, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, BEING A PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 11 IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W. M., INCLUDING THOSE PORTIONS DEDICATED FOR PUBLIC USE AND SHOWN AS SOUTH 110TH STREET AND 27TH AVENUE SOUTH ON SAID PLAT, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: A STRIP OF LAND 10 FEET IN WIDTH LYING 5 FEET EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING REFERENCE LINE: COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF WEST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH (AS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT) AND THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 460 FEET OF GOVERNMENT LOT 11; THENCE NORTH 85 °13'00" EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 185.07 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 21 °09'25" WEST A DISTANCE OF 16.10 FEET; • THENCE SOUTH 20 °13'00" EAST A DISTANCE OF 264.77 FEET; THENCE NORTH 69 °37'47" EAST A DISTANCE OF 22.25 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 20 °13'00" EAST A DISTANCE OF 10.71 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 03 °22'51" WEST A DISTANCE OF 70.00 FEET TO THE TERMINUS OF.SAID REFERENCE LINE. THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS EASEMENT DESCRIPTION IS AS REFERENCED FROM SAID PLAT OF GORDON'S ADDITION NO 2. THE SIDELINES OF SAID EASEMENTS SHALL BE SHORTENED OR LENGTHENED SO AS TO COMMENCE AND TERMINATE IN THE PROPERTY LINES STATED IN THE CORRESPONDING REFERENCE LINE DESCRIPTION. PREPARED BY: BEN ENRICH PENHELLEGON ASSOCIATES JOB NO. 01605.10 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 BG.ckm December 3, 2001 ORD.-Cecil Moses Park Accept (Ver.1) EXHIBIT B WATER LINE EASEMENT DESCRIPTION THAT PORTION OF GORDON'S ADDITION NO. 2, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 36 OF PLATS PAGE 42, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, BEING A PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 11 IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W. M., INCLUDING THOSE PORTIONS DEDICATED FOR PUBLIC USE AND SHOWN AS SOUTH 110TH STREET AND 27TH AVENUE SOUTH ON SAID PLAT, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: A STRIP OF LAND 30 FEET IN WIDTH LYING 10 FEET NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY AND 20 FEET SOUTHERLY AND WESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING REFERENCE LINE: COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF WEST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH (AS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT) AND THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 460 FEET OF GOVERNMENT LOT 11; THENCE NORTH 85 °13'00" EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 94.88 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH A WATER MAIN AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 65 °21'37" EAST ALONG SAID WATER MAIN A DISTANCE OF 100.57 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID WATER MAIN; THENCE SOUTH 20 °13'00" EAST ALONG SAID WATER MAIN A DISTANCE OF 363.71 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 60 FEET OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 11, AND THE TERMINUS OF SAID -- REFERENCE• LINE.- SAID- P- OINTBEARS.NORTH.88 _13:00__ ".EAST A_ DISTA. NCE_OF 16.8.84 FEET_EROM THE CENTERLINE OF WEST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH, (AS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT), AS MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTH LINE. • THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS EASEMENT DESCRIPTION IS AS REFERENCED FROM SAID PLAT OF GORDON'S ADDITION NO 2. THE SIDELINES OF SAID EASEMENTS SHALL BE SHORTENED OR LENGTHENED SO AS TO COMMENCE AND TERMINATE IN THE PROPERTY LINES STATED IN THE CORRESPONDING REFERENCE LINE DESCRIPTION. PREPARED BY: BEN EHRICH PENHELLEGON ASSOCIATES JOB NO. 01605.10 The real property interests conveyed by the easement agreement is hereby placed under the jurisdiction of Seattle Public Utilities. 3 ". z moQw` JU UO to 0: WI wO = a. w z� 1- O w~ uj UCa O= w w'. 1-- H w Z U� 1= F' O z O 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 13G.eknr — December 3, 2001 ORD.-Cecil Moses Park Accept (Ver.1)-- • Section 2. Any act pursuant to and prior to the effective date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and confirmed. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its approval by the Mayor, but if not approved and returned by the Mayor within ten (10) days after presentation, it shall take effect as provided by Municipal Code Section 1.04.020. Passed by the City Council the tel day of Aria,/ • , 2007,..and signed by me in open session in authentication of its passage this 6 01 day of May , 2002. .La-Z-A4A6IM1-e-t-). President of the City Council Approved by me this !I day of t"'kel , 2002, et • Filed by me this 200 erk 4 " A 20020204000847 KENYON DORNAY AG 63 00 PAGE 001 OF 005 02/04/2002 10:01 KING COUNTY, WA RETURN ADDRESS Kenyon Dornay Marshall, PLLC 11 Front Street South Issaquah, Washington 98027 -3820 Please print neatly or type information Document Title(s) Agreement for Indemnification Reference Number(s) of Related Documents Grantor(s) (Last, First and Middle Initial) King County Grantees) (Last, First and Middle Initial) City of Tukwila Additional Reference #'s on page Additional grantors on page Additional grantees on page Legal Description (abbreviated form: i.e. lot, block, plat or section, township, range, quarter /quarter) Gordon's Addition No. 2, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 -5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 Additional legal on page Assessor's Property Tax Parcel /Account Number 284380 -0005; 284380 -0010; 284380 -0015; 284380 -0020; 284380 -0030; 284380 -0035; 284380- 0040; 284380 -0045; 284380 -0046; 284380 -0055; 284380 - 0060;284380 -0065 Additional parcel #'s on page The Auditor /Recorder will rely on the information provided on this form. The staff will not read the document to verify the accuracy or completeness of the indexing information provided herein. Z M' J U, o Oi l w =: J H: 0 gQ �w z1 �- o z I-; LL! ai U 0 co W` ham-0 - 0 Z. tii ol- z AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Robert F. Noe Kenyon Dornay Marshall, PLLC 11 Front Street South Issaquah, WA 98027 AGREEMENT FOR INDEMNIFICATION This agreement is entered between King County (hereinafter "County ") and the City of Tukwila (hereinafter "City ") on the date below indicated. 1. County is the owner of certain real property located within the City commonly referred to as Cecil Moses Memorial Park (North Wind Weir Park) (hereinafter, "Park ") and legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 2. County wishes to engage in development activities related to the aforementioned property. 3. County's proposed development activities for the property include cutting away , a portion' of the riverbank on the Duwamish River adjacent to the Park to establish an estuary: Agreement. 1. County agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless against any and all claims, demands, damages, losses, liens, liabilities, penalties, fines, lawsuits or other proceedings and , costs and expenses (including attorneys fees) which accrue, arise or are incurred as a result of County's action in cutting away portions of the Duwamish River riverbank for its estuary project associated with the property described in Exhibit "A ". The County's liability under this Indemnification Agreement shall be limited to the County's negligence. 2. This agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties, their respective heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns. 3. This agreement shall be governed under the laws of the State of Washington. In any suit, action or appeal therefrom to enforce or interpret this agreement, the prevailing party 1 o13 ,..>.. z 11-• �u IU, U O U O; W = JH; V) u_ Q0 LL z� �o Z t- 0. o io w w�, OF W Wr, f ..z U= O ~' z STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Kevin Owens is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Interim Division Manager of the Department of Construction and Facilities Management for King County to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. so OOP WOO Dated: !_ iia� �0 � A ', / .ems, tip® .f. Poetry` U/ A SH` �`�� ame Printed: i9417/72. roi/fi , . /- NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State of Washington, residing at: Se_44 7-/-} C My commission expires: +' /i5 /O4/ 3 of 3 i- u6= LU LU J U: . oo 1- wo LLa 52 a I-w zF wC) w Ua o ff' o 1-. I w u. O ui • 1-: z PROJECT CONTACTS KING COUNTY'S CONSULTANT Don Benson URS Greiner, Inc. 1501 4th Avenue, Suite 1500 Seattle, WA 98101 voice: 206 - 343 -7933 x 284 fax: 206 - 343 -0513 KING COUNTY SEPA Lynn Lewicki SEPA Coordinator King County Division of Capital Planning & Development Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management 320 King County Administration Bldg. 500 4th Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 KING COUNTY'S CONSULTANT Connie Reckord MacLeod Reckord Landscape Architects 231 Summit Avenue East Seattle, WA 98102 voice: 206 - 323 -7919 fax: 206 - 323 -9242 KING COUNTY LEAD Michael G. Lozano Project manager, Parks CIP Section Division of Capital Planning & Development Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County Administration Bldg. 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 voice: 206- 296 -4240 fax: 206- 296 -0186 ►- w 6 JU UO 0 co w w X - w0 a �w z� zo w off' 0 I--: w w' �U z' U- 0 z King County Division of Capital Department of Constru 320 King County Adm 500 Fourth Avenue' Seattle, Washington 9 (206) 296 -0648 F. February 21, 20 [�?. 1l0•o ( - c_C*Odt. V L l <412tvJ o„`st a_ rr Rio e C("<P 64-11- \ua_SACI- �- U i L L_ Wii-b CS an,fNe (z, Jill Mosqueda City of Tukwila Dept. of Public Works 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Dear Jill: RECEIVED FED 2 2201 Mill A PUBLIC liVt:PKS Please find enclosed the County's standard construction specification General Terms and Conditions Table of Contents and pages 00700 -64 and 00700 -65 of the General Terms and Conditions, which includes Article 9: Miscellaneous, 9.1 Indemnification /Hold Harmless. Also enclosed is a revised Indemnification/Hold Harmless section adding the City of Tukwila to the indemnification section. I have hi- lited, in red, the added text including the City in the indemnification. After reviewing the draft Indemnity Agreement provided by your City attorney, the County attorney made the recommendation to include the City in our existing General Terms and Conditions specification, as presented. I realize that a great amount of time has elapsed since you sent me your letter dated January 21, 2000 requesting the indemnification. As I explained to you last week, I was involved with Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) project review all of last year and could not move forward with permitting until I felt comfortable with my understanding of SPU's needs and concerns. Please call me at 206 - 296 -4240 with any questions related to the proposal. 'merely, Mich Lozano, Project Manager Enclosures Table of Contents ARTICLE 1: GENERAL PROVISIONS 1.0 Definitions 1.1 Intent and Interpretation of the Documents 1.2 Order of Precedence 1.3 Detail Drawings and Clarifying Instructions ARTICLE 2: COUNTY 2.0 Authority 2.1 Information Supplied by County 2.2 Work by County or Separate Contractors ARTICLE 3: CONTRACTOR 6 7 7 8 9 9 3.0 Contractor Representations 10 3.1 General Duties 10 3.2 Duty to Inspect Drawings and Specifications 11 3.3 Communications 11 3.4 Contractor's Supervision and Employees 11 3.5 Contractor's Duty When County Performs Work On -Site 12 3.6 Materials and Equipment Furnished by County 12 3.7 Subcontractors 13 3.8 Schedule of Working Hours, Overtime, Shift and Tide Work 14 3.9 Record Documents 14 3.10 Cost Records 15 3.11 Maintenance and Inspections of Documents 15 3.12 Maintenance and Site Cleanup 18 3.13 Protection of Existing Structures, Equipment, Vegetation, Utilities, and Improvements 18 3.14 Permits, Laws and Regulations 19 3.15 Patents and Royalties 20 3.16 Contractor's Certification 20 3.17 County - Contractor Coordination: Deviation from Contract 21 3.18 Operations, Material Handling, and Storage Areas 22 3.19 Year 2000 Compliance 22 3.20 Contractor's Overall Responsibility For Protection of Work, Property, and Persons 23 3.21 Protection of Persons 24 3.22 Safety Program 24 3.23 Contractor's Property 25 3.24 Archaelogical and Historical Preservation 25 3.25 Water Pollution Control Requirements 25 3.26 Rights Of Way 26 3.27 Environmental Mitigation Plan 26 ARTICLE 4: ADMINISTRATION OF THE CONTRACT 4.0 Time of Essence 27 4.1 Work Progress 27 4.2 Schedule of Values 27 4.3 Project Schedule 28 4.4 Submittals 29 - =1,4.5 Requests for Information 31 4.6 Tests, Inspections, and Access to the Work 31 4.7 Correction of Work or Damaged Property 33 4.8 Substitution of Products 34 .4.9 Acceleration 35 ARTICLE 5: CHANGES, TO THE CONTRACT C @NUMBER @C 00700 -i GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1 8 10 27 35 z W w J U: U 0, W= F- Nu_, w0 gQ to _ a Fw z� F- O w1-, 0 :O - :w w, • tlJ CO O • Z 5.0 General 35 5.1 Changes 36 5.2 Limitation on Changes 40 5.3 Contractor Claims 40 5.4 Burden of Proof on Claim 42 5.5 Litigation 43 ARTICLE 6: TIME AND PRICE ADJUSTMENTS -- 1 , , E-01 ;� - .: 43 6.0 Change in the Contract Time 6.1 Change in the Contract Price 47 6.2 Method to Calculate Adjustments to Contract Price 48 ARTICLE 7: PAYMENT AND COMPLETION 7.0 Applications for Payment 53 7.1 Payments 54 7.2 Payment Withheld 55 • 7.3 Title 56 7.4 Retainage • . 56 7.5 . Substantial Completion Procedure 56 7.6 Final Inspection and Final Punch List Procedure 57 7.7 Requirements for Final Payment 58 7.8 Final Acceptance 58 7.9 Warranty and Guaranty 59 7.10 Prior Occupation 60 ARTICLE 8: TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF THE WORK 60 8.0 County's Right to Terminate Contract 60 8.1 Suspension of Work 63 8.2 County's Right to Stop the Work for Cause 64 ARTICLE 9: MISCELLANEOUS 9.0 Contractor's Payment and Performance Bond 64 9.1 Indemnification/Hold Harmless 64 9.2 Compensation, Wages, Benefits and Taxes 65 9.3 Successors and Assigns 65 9.4 Third Party Agreements 66 9.5 Nonwaiver of Breach 66 9.6 Notice to the County of Labor Disputes 66. 9.7 Liquidated Damages against Contractor 66 9.8 Headings 67 9.9 Choice of Law 67 9.10 Severability 67 43 53 64 C@NUMBER@C 00700 -ii tY W 6 J U: 00 o' W= W 0; g Q. g2 d I--W _. 1- O Z 0 t]F-.. 'WW LL E:i Ll l Z O Z a result of actions, omissions, fault or negligence caused, in whole or in part, by the Contractor or any of its Subcontractors. 8.2 County's Right to Stop the Work for Cause A. If Contractor fails or refuses to perform its obligations in accordance with the Contract, County may order Contractor, in writing, to stop the Work, or any portion thereof, until satisfactory corrective action has been taken. I.- w cc JU B. Contractor shall not be entitled to any adjustment in the Contract Time and/or v o Contract Price for any increased cost or time of performance attributable to N w Contractor's failure or refusal to perform its obligations under the Contract. w i U) u_ ARTICLE 9:1VIISCELLANEOUS w 0 9.0 Contractor's Payment and Performance Bond • a co No later than ten days after notice of selection, the Contractor shall execute and I d Ill deliver to the County a payment and performance bond for 100% of the Contract z i Price, on a form acceptable to the County with an approved surety company and in z o compliance with Chapter 39.08 RCW. The Contractor shall promptly furnish additional bond security to protect County and persons supplying labor or materials v • o required by the Contract if: o W' 1. County has a reasonable objection to any surety; F v 2. Any surety fails to furnish reports on its financial condition pursuant to County's Cu z request; or, _• ` O I- 3. The Contract Price increases beyond the bond amount. Z 9.1 Indemnification /Hold Harmless A. The Contractor shall protect, defend, indemnify, and save harmless the County, its officers, officials, employees, and agents, from any and all claims, demands, suits, penalties, losses, damages, judgments, or costs of any kind whatsoever (hereinafter "claims "), arising out of or in any way resulting from the Contractor's officers, employees, agents, and/or subcontractors of all tiers, acts or omissions, performance or failure to perform this Contract, to the maximum extent permitted by law or as defined by RCW 4.24.1.15, now enacted or as hereinafter amended. B. The Contractor's obligations under this section shall include, but not be limited to, 1. The duty to promptly accept tender of defense and provide defense to the County at the Contractor's own expense. C @NUMBER @C 00700 -64 GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 9.1 Indemification/Hold Harmless A. The Contractor shall protect, defend, indemnify, and save harmless the County and the City of Tukwila, and their respective officers, officials, employees, and agents, from any and all claims, demands, suits, penalties, losses, damages, judgements, or costs of any kind whatsoever (hereinafter "claims "), arising out of or in any way resulting from the Contractor's officers, employees, agents, and/or subcontractors of all tiers, acts or omissions, performance or failure to perform this Contract, to the maximum extent permitted by law or as defined by RCW 4.24.115, now enacted or as hereinafter amended. B. The Contractor's obligations under this section shall include, but not be limited to, 1. The duty to promptly accept tender of defense and provide defense to the County and the City of Tukwila at the Contractor's own expense. 2. The duty to indemnify and defend the County and the City of Tukwila from any claim, demand, and/or cause of action brought by or on behalf of any of its employees, or agents. The foregoing duty is specifically and expressly intended to constitute a waiver of the Contractor's immunity under Washington's Industrial Insurance Act, RCW Title 51, as respects the County with a full and complete indemnity and defense of claims made by the Contractor's employees. The parties acknowledge that these provisions were mutually negotiated upon by them. 3. To the maximum extent permitted by law, the Contractor shall indemnify and defend the County and the City of Tukwila from and be liable for all damages and injury which shall be caused to owners of property on or in the vicinity of the work or which shall occur to any person or persons or property whatsoever arising out of the performance of the Contract, whether or not such injury or damage is caused by negligence of the Contractor or caused by the inherent nature of the work specified. C. King County may, in its sole discretion, (1) withhold amounts sufficient to pay the amount of any claim for injury, and/or (2) pay any claim for injury of which King County may have knowledge, regardless of the formalities of notice of such claim, arising out of the performance of this Contract. D. Any amount withheld will be held until the Contractor secures a written release from the claimant, obtains a court decision that such claim is without merit, or satisfies any judgement on such claim. In addition, the Contractor shall reimburse and otherwise by liable for claims costs incurred by King County, including, without limitation, costs for claims adjusting services, attorneys, engineering, and administration. E. In the event the County or the City of Tukwila incurs any judgment, award, and/or costs arising therefrom, including attorneys' fees, to enforce the provisions of this article, all such fees, expenses, and costs shall be recoverable form the Contractor. - - Loy22 a Ritter - Re: Cal Moses - From: "Robert Noe" <bobgital @attbi.com> To: "Jill Mosqueda" <josqueda @ci.tukwila.wa.us >, "Deborah Ritter" <dritter@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 1/29/02 4:13PM Subject: Re: Cecil Moses Jill - Thanks for providing me with a copy of your message. We had a small snafu with the Recorder's Office. They did not want to accept an "oversized" item for recording, the attachment. We worked it out with them eventually - its going to cost us about $65.00 to record. It is, however, set to be recorded any day now. I'll keep you advised or you can talk with Sheryl in my office at 425 - 392 -7090. Talk to you later. Bob Noe Original Message - - -- From: "Jill Mosqueda" <josqueda @ci.tukwila.wa.us> To: "Deborah Ritter" <dritter @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Cc: "Bob Baker" <bbaker @ci.tukwila.wa.us >; "Bob Noe" <bnoe @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 2:45 PM Subject: Cecil Moses Did you receive a conformed copy of the Agreement for Indemnification per your Dec. 13, 2001 letter to Bob Noe? CC: "Bob Baker" <bbaker @ci.tukwila.wa.us >, "Bob Noe" <bnoe @ci.tukwila.wa.us> z z. ccw aa j0: 00 wi' i- wO gQ =• d �w z �.. ▪ O. z �- w w U0 O 0 I-' w w - U U� z ek MEMO TO: Bob Noe FROM: Deb Ritter DATE: December 13, 2001 RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park (Wind Weir) Agreement for Indemnification The attached Agreement for Indemnification has been signed and notarized by King County and by the City of Tukwila. Per our earlier conversation, please do the following: 1. Attach an Exhibit "A" (legal description). This was omitted from your original document. A copy of the legal description is referenced on the attached 11 x 17 plan sheet. Record the original and conformed copy of the Agreement. Provide me with the conformed copy. We appreciate your handling this by the end of December. Please contact me if you have any questions (x 1663). cc: Jack Pace Jill Mosqueda '. z Z: re w. .J U; .0 'O ' CO W W =; J �. LL: wO LL ¢. =a w z �. 1- O z�- D. -0 U w w ,2 U; O U'. O ~` :z AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Robert F. Noe Kenyon Dornay Marshall, PLLC 11 Front Street South Issaquah, WA 98027 AGREEMENT FOR INDEMNIFICATION This agreement is entered between King County (hereinafter "County") and the City of Tukwila (hereinafter "City") on the date below indicated. Recitals. 1. County is the owner of certain real property located within the City commonly referred to as Cecil Moses Memorial Park (North Wind Weir Park) (hereinafter "Park ") and legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 2. County wishes to engage in development activities related to the aforementioned property: 3. County's proposed development activities for the property include cutting away a portion of the riverbank on the Duwamish River adjacent to the Park to establish an estuary. Agreement. 1. County agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless against any and all claims, demands, damages, losses, liens, liabilities, penalties, fines, lawsuits or other proceedings and costs and expenses (including attorneys fees) which accrue, arise or are incurred as a result of County's action in cutting away portions of the Duwamish River riverbank for its estuary project associated with the property described in Exhibit "A ". The County's liability under this Indemnification Agreement shall be limited to the County's negligence. 2. This agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties, their respective heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns. 3. This agreement shall be, governed under the laws of the State of Washington. In any suit, action or appeal therefrom to enforce or interpret this agreement, the prevailing party 1 oF3 z • z. 6 J 0. O O; W o. W w w O_ g a` a w Z' F- O Z t- ww;. O ,„ O N' f-; III w: 1-.0 z' LL▪ I O shall be entitled to recover its expenses incurred therein including reasonable attorneys fees and costs. CITY OF TUKWILA Steve Lancaster Director of Community Development Dated: 12.- 13 - v APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ro : ert Noe, tu • ila City Attorney STATE OF WASHINGTON COTJNTY OF KING ss. KING COUNTY 'fit Ke n Owens erim Division Manager, Department of Constriction and Facilities Nana ement Dated: �( Zit b APPROVED AS Tk., King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Steve Lancaster is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Director of the Department of Community Development for the City of Tukwila to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. Dated: December 13 zoo/ — Gs A. D�h% Q,' `sg1ON e.. , I i ra r10TAR ' 9D" / : 0 --- c ' i PUBLIC a. X3-2a -(1. Name Printed: Aiic_e A. Deacy NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State of Washington. residing at: Rento i, Washington My commission expires: b -16 - o h 2 of 3 z Z cc w 0 0' W 0; Q, =W _- 1- 0'. w F- 0 en 0 ~' =0 U. 0:. ui z 0 1' z STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Kevin Owens is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Interim Division Manager of the Department of Construction and Facilities Management for King County to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. Dated: /zOo N.f.6•4 OOTARY zs -r s; oueot, gN`o°�� Name Printed: D NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State of Washington, residing at: 5c2. 147-A C My commission expires: "/15 /04 3of3 I-Z no. LLI 6 U O O: t UU' w I: CD s. W O gQ Via' _ z �. t- O Z ~` U • 0 'O -` ,0 = V;, V: 0 O I-i ,z King County Division of Capital Planning & Development Department of Construction & Facilities Management 320 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue' Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 296 -0648 FAX (206) 296 -0186 December 12, 2001 Jill Mosqueda Public Works Department City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Estuary �L — — D 1 C� r( T. LtC f 7001 1 i.r1<i PUBLIC; WORKS 0_,,yod Dear Jill: Please find attached the complete permit submittal package for the referenced project. The submittal includes: 1. Four (4) sets of plans 2. Letter from Seattle City Light representative stating an easement is not required 3. Indemnification Agreement 4. SPU easement signed by County with letter from SPU real property agent stating that the easement is acceptable. — N07-- Sr5 i, ‘-( d . Also, City Light has completed all underground electrical work on site. Qwest is scheduled, and committed, to remove telephone equipment (located on the power poles) and poles within the next 7 -10 days. We opened bids last week and I expect to award a contract the first of the year. If the City permit process and the contract award period can be accomplished within the same time period, the contractor will have sufficient time to complete the work as conditioned by the Corps and Fisheries permits. Also, for future reference, King County Procurement is not involved with, nor concerned with permitting status /issues. I am a bit surprised by your reaction to me advertising this project for bids Is it a requirement of the City that I request, and receive, permission prior to dvertising for bids? : z �w re 00 W = LL. w O. 2 �Q =a _ z� 1-0 Z 0 52 U�. 0I ww _ O; .z w 0I- 0 z If you have any questions related to the project or permit submittal packet, please call my consultant, Connie Reckord with MacLeod Reckord at (206) 323 -7919. merely, Mic► ozano, Project Manager cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Attachments ▪ w 6 -1 C.) O 0 w =. J F.-' w0 L a, wa �-w' Z f- O Z f-: LU uj o wW 1--- V I . - Cl OA z City of Seattle Paul Schell, Mayor Seattle Public Utilities Diana Gale, Director December 10, 2001 Ms. Jill Mosqueda City of Tukwila Dept. of Public Works 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 RECEPVED DEC 1 2001 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS RE: King County's request for street vacation in Gordon's Addition No. 2 (Cecil Moses Park) Dear Ms. Mosqueda: King County has told us that the City of Tukwila will not proceed with the permitting process for King County's Cecil Moses Park Estuary project until the City of Tukwila has received adequate assurance that the Easement Agreement has been fully executed and recorded. Accordingly, at King County's request, we are writing to inform you that The City of Seattle, by and through its Seattle Public Utilities Department ( "SPU ") has received a signed Easement Agreement that is satisfactory for its pipeline and electrical power needs from King County. SPU has not yet executed this document because the City of Seattle's Charter requires that all such agreements be ratified by Ordinance before being signed by the appropriate City official. Although every effort will be made to complete this process as soon as possible, it may take until the end of February 2002, or longer. Despite this delay, we wish to inform you that this process generally occurs without controversy and we are not aware of any circumstance that would negatively effect the execution of this Easement Agreement. If SPU can provide any other information, please contact Bob Gambill, Sr. Real Property Agent for SPU by email at bob.gambillna.ci.seattle.wa.us or by phone at 206- 684 -5969. Best regards, Mike Laz'ano, King County Parks Judith - Noble, SPU Pat Herbig, SPU Charlie Madden, SPU Dexter Horton Building, 10th Floor, 710 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 Tel: (206) 684 -5851, TTY/TDD: (206) 233 -7241, Fax: (206) 684 -4631 An equal employment opportunity, affirmative action employer. Accommodations for people with disabilities provided upon request. , Y�ENY vN DORNAY MARSHALL, 2 MICHAEL R. KENYON MARGITA A. DORNAY LISA M. MARSHALL ROBERT F. NOE BRUCE L. DISEND SANDRA S. MEADOWCROFT THE MUNICIPAL LAW FIRM 11 FRONT STREET SOUTH ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON 98027 -3820 (425) 392 -7090 (206) 628 -9059 FAX (425) 392 -7071 October 25, 2001 Mr. Michael G. Lozano Project Manager King County Department of Construction & Facilities Management 500 - Fourth Avenue, #320 Seattle, Washington 98104 -2337 ELIZABETH A. ABBOTT AARON J. WOLFF STEVE C. KARIMI STEPHEN R. KING HEIDI L. BROSIUS DAVID B. ST.PIERRE RECEIVEDDARIN H. SPANG OCT 2 6 2001 DEVELOPMENT Re: Cecil Moses Memorial Park - Agreement for Indemnification Dear Mr. Lozano: ' Thank you for your phone call and fax this afternoon regarding your request for the ;.ti :insertion of a final sentence to paragraph B(1) of the Agreement for Indemnification. Pursuant fa:your request, enclosed is a revised original Agreement for Indemnification. As you can see, we :have added the requested sentence to paragraph B(1), as well as corrected the name of the park in the recitals section of the agreement. • As before, please obtain the necessary signatures for King County, including notarization, and return the original to our office. Upon final execution of the Agreement, we will provide you with a fully executed copy and record the same with the Recorder's Office. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to call. Very truly yours, KENYON DORNAY MARSHALL, PLLC «\0vCcD Margaret C. tarkey Paralegal to Robert F. Noe Enclosure F:\ APPS\ MUNI \MCS \LT08663.mcs /mcs /102501//d1 SERVING WASHINGTON CITIES SINCE 1993 • z w J 0 O' f .N °` w= J fA u„'. w� 2 ga =a w z �' �- 0 z w ON 0 l- in w'.. z' ui z AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Robert F. Noe Kenyon Dornay Marshall, PLLC 11 Front Street South Issaquah, WA 98027 AGREEMENT FOR INDEMNIFICATION This agreement is entered between King County (hereinafter "County ") and the City of Tukwila (hereinafter "City ") on the date below indicated. A. Recitals. 1. County is the owner of certain real property located within the City commonly referred to as Cecil Moses Memorial Park (North Wind Weir Park) (hereinafter "Park ") and legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 2. County wishes to engage in development activities related to the aforementioned property. 3. County's proposed development activities for the property include cutting away a portion of the riverbank on the Duwamish River adjacent to the Park to establish an estuary. Agreement. 1. County agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless against any and all claims, demands, damages, losses, liens, liabilities, penalties, fines, lawsuits or other proceedings and costs and expenses (including attorneys fees) which accrue, arise or are incurred as a result of County's action in cutting away portions of the Duwamish River riverbank for its estuary project associated with the property described in Exhibit "A ". The County's liability under this Indemnification Agreement shall be limited to the County's negligence. 2. This agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties, their respective heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns. 3. This agreement shall be governed under the laws of the State of Washington. In any suit, action or appeal therefrom to enforce or interpret this agreement, the prevailing party 1 of 3 : shall be entitled to recover its expenses incurred therein including reasonable attorneys fees and costs. CITY OF TUKWILA Steve Lancaster Director of Community Development Dated: KING COUNTY Kevin Owens Interim Division Manager, Department of Construction and Facilities Management Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM: R ert Noe, Ttjvila City Attorney King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. AUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Steve Lancaster is the person who :appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated .ttiaf he was authorized to execute the. instrument and acknowledged it as the Director of the Department of Community Development for the City of Tukwila to be the free and voluntary act of • such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. • Dated: Name Printed: NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State of Washington, residing at: My commission expires: 2 of 3 ...,;..' . z .f- • w. 6 00 0 fn w; w =: JI--' w 0 gQ z ci w z�. 1-0 z 1— uj co pF- LU im o; ui z U =; o F- z STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Kevin appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged Manager of the Department of Construction and Facilities Management free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned Dated: Owens is the person who instrument, on oath stated it as the Interim Division for King County to be the in this instrument. Name Printed: NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State of Washington, residing at: My commission expires: 3 of 3 October 25, 2001 City of Tukwila Department of Public Works Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA. 98104 -2337 Subject: Cecil Moses (North Wind Weir) Park 11013 West Marginal Place South Relocation or Removal of Seattle City Light Facilities Dear Mr. Lozano: Steven M. Mullet, Mayor James E Morrow, P.E., Director I am following up on our recent conversation concerning the Cecil Moses Park, and I am responding to your letter of October 16, 2001. Unfortunately, your request to include "electrical work, relocation of existing overhead power underground," as part of the estuary construction contract can not be granted. This is a Seattle City Light condition for its approval of the vacation and appears as Condition 2 in Ordinance 1899, passed by the City Council, on. February 22, 2000. Since the relocation or removal of the electrical power is a condition of the street vacation, this work must be performed before the City can vacate the street, and the street vacation must occur before the lots can be consolidated. Once this has been accomplished, the City can issue a permit for the estuary construction. I regret that you did not receive my two previous voice mail messages that were left in response to your July 16, 2001, letter. Thank you for contacting me regarding this matter. Please contact me at 206- 433 -0179 if you have other Public Works questions or concerns regarding this project. Sincerely, Eh�lT'Ci1C�t�J Jim Morrow Public Works Director JM:Iw cc: Jill Mosqueda, PW Development Deb Ritter, Department of Community Development Connie Reckord, Macleod Reckord Real Property Agent, Seattle City Light (P: Laurie /Jim /Itrloza no 102501) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 433 -0179 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 � KEN N DORNAY MARSHALL, PLLC MICHAEL R. KENYON MARGITA A. DORNAY LISA M. MARSHALL ROBERT F. NOE BRUCE L. DISEND SANDRA S. MEADOWCROFF THE MUNICIPAL LAW FIRM 11 FRONT STREET SOUTH ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON 98027-3820 (425) 392 -7090 (206) 628 -9059 FAX (425) 392 -7071 October 23, 2001 Mr. Michael G. Lozano Project Manager King County Department of Construction & Facilities Management 500 - Fourth Avenue, #320 Seattle, Washington 98104 -2337 OCT 2 4 2001 0 F ELO PM EN 7 Re: Cecil Moses Park - Agreement for Indemnification Dear Mr. Lozano: ELIZABETH A. ABBOTT AARON J. WOLFF STEVE C. KARIMI STEPHEN R. KING HEIDI L. BROSIUS DAVID B. ST.PIERRE DARIN H. SPANG Enclosed is an original Agreement for Indemnification relating to Cecil Moses Park. Please obtain the necessary signatures for King County, including notarization, and return the original to our office. Upon final execution of the Agreement, we will provide you with a fully executed copy and record the same with the Recorder's Office. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to call. Thanks. Very truly yours, KENYON DORNAY MARSHALL, PLLC RFN:mcs Enclosure F:\ APPS\ MUNI \RFN \LT08647.rfn /mcs /102301//d1 SERVING WASHINGTON CITIES SINCE 1993 1 AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Robert F. Noe Kenyon Dornay Marshall, PLLC 11 Front Street South Issaquah, WA 98027 AGREEMENT FOR INDEMNIFICATION This agreement is entered between King County (hereinafter "County ") and the City of Tukwila (hereinafter "City ") on the date below indicated. A. Recitals. 1. County is the owner of certain real property located within the City commonly referred to as Cecil Moses Park (North Wind Weir Park) (hereinafter "Park ") and legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto: 2. County wishes to engage in development activities related to the aforementioned property. 3. County's proposed development activities for the property include cutting away a portion of the riverbank on the Duwamish River adjacent to the Park to establish an estuary. Agreement. 1. County agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless against any and all claims, demands, damages, losses, liens, liabilities, penalties, fines, lawsuits or other proceedings and costs and expenses (including attorneys fees) which accrue, arise or are incurred as a result of County's action in cutting away portions of the Duwamish River riverbank for its estuary project associated with the property described in Exhibit "A ". 2. This agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties, their respective heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns. 3. This agreement shall be governed under the laws of the State of Washington. In any suit, action or appeal therefrom to enforce or interpret this agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its expenses incurred therein including reasonable attorneys fees and costs. 1 of 3 z • r-Z J 0' 1.) • W. • W =: 1— fn LL W0 2 • LL Q, a • = F- w _; z� 1-0:. Z w; of :2 V' 0. 1-- : ui Uco •H • O z_ CITY OF TUKWILA Steve Lancaster Director of Community Development Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ro6-ert No KING COUNTY Kevin Owens Interim Division Manager, Department of Construction and Facilities Management Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ukwila City Attorney King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) ss. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Steve Lancaster is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Director of the Department of Community Development for the City of Tukwila to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. Dated: Name Printed: NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State of Washington, residing at: My commission expires: z z 00 w = CO wo u-Q g-) a z� I-- o Z E- In La 0 en 0 F--' U! `i z. STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ss. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Kevin appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged Manager of the Department of Construction and Facilities Management free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned Dated: Owens is the person who instrument, on oath stated it as the Interim Division for King County to be the in this instrument. Name Printed: NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State of Washington, residing at: My commission expires: 3 of 3 King County Division of Capital Planning & Development Department of Construction & Facilities Management 320 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue' Scuttle, Washington 98104 (206) 296 -0648 FAX (206) 296 -0186 October 16, 2001 Deborah Ritter Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Estuary Dear Deborah: I received the letter from the Director of Community Development waiving the requirement for the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the referenced project. Thank you for faxing it to me. One of the final items remaining is the Indemnification Agreement required of the City for this project. I received signing authority information from the City attorney and gave names /titles of those to sign on behalf of the County. To date I have not received the Agreement. As stated before, because this is a requirement of the City, shouldn't I expect the City to produce the final Agreement? Also, for your information, I have received the Corps of Engineers required project Nationwide Permits. Thank you. incerely, Mic1 Lozano, Project Manager Cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Pat Herbig, Seattle Public Utilites Tom Eksten, King County Parks Bud Parker, Parks CIP Supervisor, DCFM ? October 11, 2001 City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, Washington 98104 -2337 VIA FAX 206 - 296 -0186 RE: Request for Waiver of Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Cecil Moses Memorial Park (aka North Wind Weir Park) at 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 Dear Mr. Lozano: We are in receipt of your July 3, 2001 request for exemption from a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (attached). Due to its location, the project is subject to King County's Shoreline Management Program. The project design (originally submitted on September 16, 1998) included park amenities such as parking, picnic tables, benches, canoe access and interpretive display) in association with the creation of an intertidal estuary. Per your July 3rd letter, it is our understanding that the development of the park amenities has now been deferred. The present scope of work has been limited to the creation of an intertidal estuary. The Department of Fish & Wildlife indicates that this public project has been designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat and fish passage (per their July 3, 2001 letter, attached). A Hydraulic Project Approval was issued by the Department of Fish & Wildlife on October 4th (copy attached). The City of Tukwila finds that the project is consistent King County's Shoreline Management Program. We hereby waive the requirement for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for this project under WAC 173- 27- 040(2)(p). At such time as funds are available to develop the park amenities described above, please submit an application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Per our June 18, 2001 letter to you, the following items must be approved and finalized prior to the issuance of land altering permits for the estuary construction: 1. Execution of Indemnification Agreement by King County and the City of Tukwila. 2. King County completes the street vacation process (please contact Jill Mosqueda regarding any outstanding items). 3. King County submits an application for lot consolidation (please coordinate with Deborah Ritter regarding application requirements). 4. King County submits an application for the removal and replacement of significant trees under a tree permit (please coordinate with Deborah Ritter regarding Tukwila Sensitive Area Ordinance requirements). 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Michael G. Lozano October 11, 2001 Page 2 If you should have any questions, please contact Deborah Ritter at 206 -431 -3663 or Jill Mosqueda at 206- 433 -0179. Sincerely, Steve Lancaster Director, Community Development Attachments cc: Washington Department of Ecology, Shorelands Division Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Deborah Ritter, Associate Planner, DCD Jill Mosqueda, Associate Engineer, Public Works Ryan Partee, Fisheries Biologist, Public Works Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Public Works James F. Morrow, P.E., Director October 10, 2001 Ms. Linda Hanson Water and Land Resources King Street Center 201 S. Jackson St., Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104 R OCT 1 1 2001 DEVELOPP 1ENT Subject: Cecil Moses (North Wind Weir) Park Dear Ms. Hanson: I received a copy of your October 2, 2001, fax transmittal to Ryan Larson, Senior Surface Water Engineer, requesting comment on a letter from Mike Lozano to me dated July 18, 2001. In that letter, Mr. Lozano is requesting the City allow "electrical work, relocation of existing overhead power underground, as part of the estuary construction." The work Mr. Lozano refers to in his letter is a condition of the street vacation, spelled out in Ordinance 1899, passed by the City Council, on February 22, 2000. This is a Seattle City Light condition for its approval of the vacation. Before the City can issue a permit to construct the estuary, the existing lots at the site must be consolidated. In order for the lot consolidation to proceed, the County must own all the property. In order for the County to own the property, the vacation of West Marginal Place South must be completed. Therefore, the work Mr. Lozano refers to cannot be included in the estuary scope of work. Mr. Lozano has been informed of these requirements several times. I am hoping this clarifies the sequence of events that must be completed before the estuary construction can begin. If you have any questions, please contact me at 206 - 433 -0179. Sincerely, Jim Morrow Public Works Director 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 -433 -0179 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 z Z NU-1;. UO co 0 co Lu J =. CD II- w0 2 ga co z� �O z t- LU 0 0; 0 wW LL F- - O. ii • z: O �- z Ms. Linda Hanson October 10, 2001 Page 2 cc: Jill Mosqueda, PW Development Deb Ritter, Department of Community Development Ryan Larson, PW Senior Engineer, Surface Water Mike Lozano, King County Project Manager Tom Eksten, King County Parks Bud Parker, DCFM Lynn Lewicki, DCFM SEPA Coordinator Connie Reckord, Macleod Reckord Curtis Tanner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Real Property Agent, Seattle City Light (P: /Laurie /Jill/Letter October 2001 to Linda Hanson) w. 6 JU; UO (0 o W =, Lu O Q'. = Ci H=, Z Z 0'. W LLI O 52' , 0 I- = U LL hr — Z. w— r_-. H' Z Phshigton ci FISH WILDLIFE I: DRAULIC PROJECT APPRO' 1 RCW 77.55.100 - appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW DATE OF ISSUE: October 4, 2001 State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Office 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard Mill Creek, Washington 98012 LOG NUMBER: 00- F1912 -02 PERMITTEE King County Division of Capital Planning and Development . ATTENTION: Mike Lozano King County Administrative Building, 500 4th Avenue, Room 230 Seattle, Washington 98104 -2337 (206) 296 -4240 Fax: (206) 296 -0186 AUTHORIZED AGENT OR CONTRACTOR URS Corporation ATTENTION: Don Benson 1501 4th Avenue, Suite 1400 Seattle, Washington 98101 -1616 (206) 438 -2027 Fax: (206) 438 -2699 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Remove Fill; Create Intertidal Estuary PROJECT LOCATION: 11013 West Marginal Place South, Seattle # WRIA WATER BODY 01 09.MARI Duwamish Waterway 02 09.MARI Duwamish Waterway TRIBUTARY TO Puget Sound Puget Sound 1/4 SEC. SEC. TOWNSHIP RANGE COUNTY SE 04 23 North 04 East King NE 09 23 North 04 East King NOTE: The recent listing of chinook salmon and bull trout as threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) may affect future construction projects in or near marine waters of Puget Sound and freshwater streams. Future work may require consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. PROVISIONS 1. TIMING LIMITATIONS: The project may begin Immediately and shall be completed by October 4, 2006, provided: a. Work below the ordinary high water line shall not occur from February 15 through August 31 of any year for the protection of migrating juvenile salmonids. b. Work landward of the temporary berm may occur year -round provided the work site is completely contained in such a manner that no sediments or soils enter the Duwamish Waterway. 2. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT: The permittee or contractor shall notify the Area Habitat Biologist (AHB) listed below of the project start date. Notification shall be received by the AHB at least three working days prior to the start of construction activities. The notification shall include the permittee's name, project location, starting date for work, and the control number for this Hydraulic Project Approval. 3. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT: The permittee or contractor shall notify WDFW Enforcement Officer Mike Frame at (425) 775 -1311 at least three working days prior to the start of construction activities. Notification shall include the permittee's name, project location, starting date for work, and the control number for this Hydraulic Project Approval. Page 1 of 4 ibhigton Departmatt FISHaa WILDLIFE H ..3RAULIC PROJECT APPRO% ..L RCW 77.55.100 - appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW DATE OF ISSUE: October 4, 2001 State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Office 16018 ,Mill Creek Boulevard Mill Creek, Washington 98012 LOG NUMBER: 00- F1912 -02 4. Work shall be accomplished per plans and specifications entitled, "Cecil Moses Memorial Park Estuary", dated August 24, 2001, and "Biological Assessment for Listed and Proposed Threatened and Endangered Species" dated September 2000 and submitted to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, except as modified by this Hydraulic Project Approval. These plans reflect design criteria per Chapter 220 -110 WAC. These plans reflect mitigation procedures to significantly reduce or eliminate impacts to fish resources. A copy of these plans shall be available on site during construction. 5. Excavated material shall not be stockpiled below the ordinary high water line. 6. Excavated materials shall be disposed upland such that they do not re -enter surface waters of the state. 7. The work area shall be isolated from the Duwamish Waterway during construction of the pond. 8. The temporary berm shall be constructed no lower than the +13 Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) mark and shall incorporate measures to reduce siltation into the Duwamish Waterway to the greatest extent possible. 9. If a fish kill occurs or fish are observed in distress, the project activity shall immediately cease and WDFW Habitat Program shall be notified immediately. 10. All debris or deleterious material resulting from construction shall be removed from the beach area and bed and prevented from entering waters of the state. 11. No petroleum products or other deleterious materials shall enter surface waters. 12. Project activities shall not degrade water quality to the detriment of fish life. 13. Aquatic vegetation shall not be adversely impacted due to any project activities (e.g., barge shall not ground, equipment shall not operate, and other project activities shall not occur in eelgrass and kelp). 14. Intertidal wetland vascular plants shall not be adversely impacted due to project activities (e.g., barge shall not ground, equipment shall not operate, and other activities shall not occur in intertidal wetland vascular plants). If such vegetation is adversely impacted, it shall be replaced using proven methodology. 15. Ponds shall be constructed so the temperature is not harmful to fish life. Additional Monitoring Requirements 16. In addition to the monitoring requirements outlined in the Biological Assessment for Listed and Proposed Threatened and Endangered Species dated September 2000 (Project Success Criteria, Monitoring Tasks, and Contingency Measures), the project proponent shall monitor the weir and pond temperatures and salinities from March through September. This shall be done using three thermographs - one floating thermograph placed at the weir and two in the pond (one floating and one anchored at the bottom). A report containing the temperature and salinity information must be forwarded to WDFW no later than two months after sampling information is collected. z ~ w 6 IY� JU 00 tow J CO u_ w O. H O _. 0 1- Ili w Iii z = Off' z 1 linhtatton Dt Arland of FI� F 'DRAULIC PROJECT APPRO.' RCW 77.55.100 - appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Office 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard Mill Creek, Washington 98012 DATE OF ISSUE: October 4, 2001 LOG NUMBER: 00- F1912 -02 17. If WDFW determines that pond temperatures exceed 18° centigrade too frequently or for long durations that may result in fish stress or mortality, an action will need to be taken by the project proponent to attempt to lower pond temperatures. SEPA: DNS issued by King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management, on July 10, 2001. APPLICATION ACCEPTED: October 1, 2001 ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: Frame 124 [P2] Pamela Erstad (425) 379 -2306 a �� for Director Area Habitat Biologist aiiudVVDFW cc: Deborah Cornett, WDFW Tony Oppermann, WDFW Curt Kraemer, WDFW Phil Jensen, WDFW Cheryl Fambles, Department of Construction and Facilities Management, King County Administration Building Deborah Ritter, City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development Roderick Malcolm, Muckleshoot Tribe Jack Gossett, COE GENERAL PROVISIONS This Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) pertains only to the provisions of the Fisheries Code (RCW 77.55 - formerly RCW 75.20). Additional authorization from other public agencies may be necessary for this project. This HPA shall be available on the job site at all times and all its provisions followed by the permittee and operator(s) performing the work. This HPA does not authorize trespass. The person(s) to whom this HPA is issued may be held liable for any loss or damage to fish life or fish habitat which results from failure to comply with the provisions of this HPA. Failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval could result in a civil penalty of up to one hundred dollars per day or a gross misdemeanor charge, possiblipunishable by fine and/or imprisonment. All HPAs issued pursuant to RCW 77.55.100 or 77.55.200 are subject to additional restrictions, conditions or revocation if the Department of Fish and Wildlife determines that new biological or physical information indicates the need for such action. The permittee has the right pursuant to Chapter 34.04 RCW to appeal such decisions. All HPAs issued pursuant to RCW 77.55.110 may be modified by the Department of Fish and Wildlife due to changed conditions after consultation with the permittee: PROVIDED HOWEVER, that such modifications shall be subject to appeal to the Hydraulic Appeals Board established in RCW 77.55.170. Page 3 of 4 * Dryartewst FISH God WILDLIFE Ii ,)RAULIC PROJECT APPRO'' RCW 77.55.100 - appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW DATE OF ISSUE: October 4, 2001 State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Office 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard Mill Creek, Washington 98012 LOG NUMBER: 00- F1912 -02 APPEALS - GENERAL INFORMATION IF YOU WISH TO APPEAL A DENIAL OF OR CONDITIONS PROVIDED IN A HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL, THERE ARE INFORMAL AND FORMAL APPEAL PROCESSES AVAILABLE. A. INFORMAL APPEALS (WAC 220 -110 -340) OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.100, 77.55.110, 77.55.140, 77.55.190, 77.55.200, and 77.55.290: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department actions may request an informal review of: (A) The denial or issuance of a HPA, or the conditions or provisions made part of a HPA; or (B) An order imposing civil penalties. It is recommended that an aggrieved party contact the Area Habitat Biologist and discuss the concerns. Most problems are resolved at this level, but if not, you may elevate your concerns to his/her supervisor. A request for an INFORMAL REVIEW shall be in WRITING to the Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501 -1091 and shall be RECEIVED by the Department within 30 -days of the denial or issuance of a HPA or receipt of an order imposing civil penalties. The 30 -day time requirement may be stayed by the Department if negotiations are occurring between the aggrieved party and the Area Habitat Biologist and/or his/her supervisor. The Habitat Protection Services Division Manager or his/her designee shall conduct a review and recommend a decision to the Director or its designee. If you are not satisfied with the results of this informal appeal, a formal appeal may be filed. z w re 2 i0 O 0 co• w J H U) u_ w0 2 u_ ?. tna =w I— _ z� H O zI- w • w U� O 5 0H wW B. FORMAL APPEALS (WAC 220 - 110 -350) OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW i 77.55.100 OR 77.55.140: - z A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department actions may request an formal review v P (A) The denial or issuance of a HPA, or the conditions or provisions made part of a HPA; z (B) An order imposing civil penalties; or (C) Any other "agency action" for which an adjudicative proceeding is required under the Administrative Procedure Act, Chapter 34.05 RCW. A request for a FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501 -1091, shall he plainly labeled as "REQUEST FOR FORMAL APPEAL" and shall be RECEIVED DURING OFFICE HOURS by the Department within 30 -days of the Department action that is being challenged. The time period for requesting a formal appeal is suspended during consideration of a timely informal appeal. If there has been an informal appeal, the deadline for requesting a formal appeal shall be within 30- days of the date of the Department's written decision in response to the informal appeal. of: C. FORMAL APPEALS OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.110, 77.55.200, 77.55.230, or 77.55.290: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the denial or issuance of a HPA, or the conditions or provisions made part of a HPA may request a formal appeal. The request for FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Hydraulic Appeals Board per WAC 259 -04 at Environmental Hearings Office, 4224 Sixth Avenue SE, Building Two - Rowe Six, Lacey, Washington 98504; telephone 360/459 -6327. D. FAILURE TO APPEAL WITHIN THE REQUIRED TIME PERIODS RESULTS IN FORFEITURE OF ALL APPEAL RIGHTS. IF THERE IS NO TIMELY REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL, THE DEPARTMENT ACTION SHALL BE FINAL AND UNAPPEALABLE. Page 4 of 4 F — .DRAULIC PROJECT APPRC�``�.L RCW 77.55.100 - appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW DATE OF ISSUE: October A. 2001 State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Office 16013 N111I Creek Boulevard Mill Creek. Washington 98012 LOG NUMBER: 00- F1912 -02 PERIVIITTEE King County Division of Capital Planning and Development ATTENTION: Mike Lozano t. King County Administrative Building, 500 4th Avenue, Room 230 Seattle, Washington 98104 -2337 (206) 296 -4240 Fax: (206) 296 -0186 AUTHORIZED AGENT OR CONTRACTOR URS Corporation ATTENTION: Don Benson 1501 4th Avenue, Suite 1400 Seattle, Washington 98101 -1616 (206) 438 -2027 Fax: (206) 438 -2699 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Remove Fill; Create Intertidal Estuary PROJECT LOCATION: 11013 West Marginal Place South, Seattle WRIA WATER BODY 01 09.MARI Duwamish Waterway 02 09:MARI Duwamish Waterway TRIBUTARY TO Puget Sound Puget Sound 1/4 SEC. SEC. TOWNSHIP RANGE SE 04 23 North 04 East NE 09 23 North 04 East COUNTY King King NOTE: The recent listing of chinook salmon and bull trout as threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) may affect future construction projects in or near marine waters of Puget Sound and freshwater streams. Future work may require consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. PROVISIONS TIMING LIMITATIONS: The project may begin Immediately and shall be completed by October 4, 2006, provided: Work below the ordinary high water line shall not occur from February 15 through August 31 of any year for the protection of migrating juvenile salmonids. Work landward of the temporary berm may occur year -round provided the work site is completely contained in such a manner that no sediments or soils enter the Duwamish Waterway. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT: The permittee or contractor shall notify the Area Habitat Biologist (AHB) listed below of the project start date. Notification shall be received by the AHB at least three working days prior to the start of construction activities. The notification shall include the permittee's name, project location, starting date for work, and the control number for this Hydraulic Project Approval. 3. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT: The permittee or contractor shall notify WDFW Enforcement Officer Mike Frame at (425) 775 -1311 at least three working days prior to the start of construction activities. Notification shall include the permittee's name, project location, starting date for work, and the control number for this Hydraulic Project Approval. Page 1 of 4 z Q �. Z. re 2 00 N o' W W Z" J CO U. W0. 2 ga Dd �W Z �. 1- 0 ZI- �o 0 I—. `W W. 0 ~O • Z. w— O~ Z , h DRAULIC PROJECT APPRG , AL Dapanmaid d RCW 77.55.100 - appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW FJSHoad WILDLIFE DATE OF ISSUE: October 4. 2001 State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Office 16018 Ntiil Creek Boulevard Mill Creek. Washington 98012 LOG NUMBER: 00- F1912 -02 4. Work shall be accomplished per plans and specifications entitled, "Cecil Moses Memorial Park Estuary ", dated August 24, 2001, and `Biological Assessment for Listed and Proposed Threatened and Endangered Species" dated September 2000 and submitted to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, except as modified by this Hydraulic Project Approval. These plans reflect design criteria per Chapter 220 -110 WAC. These plans reflect mitigation procedures to significantly reduce or eliminate impacts to tish resources. A copy of these plans shall be available on site during construction. 5. Excavated material shall not be stockpiled below the ordinary high water line. 6. Excavated materials shall be disposed upland such that they do not re -enter surface waters of the state. 7. The work area shall be isolated from the Duwamish Waterway during construction of the pond. 3. The temporary berm shall be constructed no lower than the +13 Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) mark and shall incorporate measures to reduce siltation into the Duwamish Waterway to the greatest extent possible. 9. If a fish kill occurs or fish are observed in distress, the project activity shall immediately cease and WDFW Habitat Program shall be notified immediately. 10. All debris or deleterious material resulting from construction shall be removed from the beach area and bed and prevented from entering waters of the state. 11. No petroleum products or other deleterious materials shall enter surface waters. 12. Project activities shall not degrade water quality to the detriment of fish life. 13. Aquatic vegetation shall not be adversely impacted due to any project activities (e.g., barge shall not ground, equipment shall not operate, and other project activities shall not occur in eelgrass and kelp). 14. Intertidal .wetland vascular plants shall not be adversely impacted due to project activities (e.g., barge shall not ground, equipment shall not operate, and other activities shall not occur in intertidal wetland vascular plants). If such vegetation is adversely impacted, it shall be replaced using proven methodology. 15. Ponds shall be constructed so the temperature is not harmful to tish life. Additional Monitoring Requirements 16. In addition to the monitoring requirements outlined in the Biological Assessment for Listed and Proposed Threatened and Endangered Species dated September 2000 (Project Success Criteria, Monitoring Tasks, and Contingency Measures), the project proponent shall monitor the weir and pond temperatures and salinities from March through September. This shall be done using three thermographs one floating thermograph placed at the weir and two in the pond (one tloating and one anchored at the bottom). A report containing the temperature and salinity information must be forwarded to WDFW no later than two months after sampling information is collected. Page 2 of.4 2 0 O O' cn o WI E— U) w w 0 LL =a w Z O • ❑'. O in CI I—, =w • 1— V Z' O r. 0 DParuieag d FISHaad i9MLDLIFE H )RAULIC PROJECT APPRC'`�.L RCW 77.55.100 - appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Office 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard Mill Creek Washington 98012 DATE OF ISSUE: October 4. 2001 LOG NUMBER: 00- F1912 -02 17. If WDFW determines that pond temperatures exceed 18° centigrade too frequently or for long durations that may result in fish stress or mortality, an action will need to be taken by the project proponent to attempt to lower pond temperatures. SEPA: DNS issued by King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management, on July 10, 2001. APPLICATION ACCEPTED: October 1, 2001 ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: Frame 124 [P2] Pamela Erstad (425) 379 -2306 � Area Habitat Biologist p ri c`f �'u� for Director WDFW cc: Deborah Cornett, WDFW Tony Oppermann, WDFW Curt Kraemer, WDFW Phil Jensen, WDFW Cheryl Fambles, Department of Construction and Facilities Management, King County Administration Building Deborah. Ritter, City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development Roderick Malcolm, Muckleshoot Tribe Jack Gossett, COE GENERAL PROVISIONS This Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) pertains only to the provisions of the Fisheries Code (RCW 77.55 - formerly RCW 7520). Additional authorization from other public agencies may be necessary for this project. This HPA shall be available on, the job site at all times and all its provisions followed the permittee and operator(s) performing the work. This HPA does not authorize trespass. The person(s) to whom this HPA is issued may be held liable for any loss or damage to fish life or fish habitat which results from failure to comply with the provisions of this HPA. Failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval could result in a civil penalty of up to one hundred dollars per day or a gross misdemeanor charge, possibly punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. All HPAs issued pursuant to RCW 77.55.100 or 77.55.200 are subject to additional restrictions, conditions or revocation if the Department of Fish and Wildlife determines that new biological or physical information indicates the need for such action. The permittee has the right pursuant to Chapter 34.04 RCW to appeal such decisions. All HPAs issued pursuant to RCW 77.55.110 may be modified by the Department of Fish and Wildlife due to changed conditions after consultation with the permittee: PROVIDED HOWEVER, that such modifications shall be subject to appeal to the Hydraulic Appeals Board established in RCW 77.55.170. Page 3 of 4 ILI J 0 0. W 0 W2 F- WO gQ D.a z1._ 1- O' z LIJ Ca 0 0 1—` = V, .z off. z Desonal d FISH and WILDLIFE h DRAULIC PROJECT APPRG AL RCW 77.55.100 - appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW DATE OF ISSUE: October 4. 2001 State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Office 16013 MiII Creek Boulevard Mill Creek. Washington 98012 LOG NUMBER: 00- F1912 -02 APPEALS - GENERAL INFORMATIONi IF YOU WISH TO APPEAL A DENIAL OF OR CONDITIONS PROVIDED IN A HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL, THERE ARE INFORMAL AND FORMAL APPEAL PROCESSES AVAILABLE. ABLE. A. INFORMAL APPEALS (WIC 220-110-340) OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.100, 77.55.110, 77.55.140, 77.55.190, 77.55 200, and 77.55.290: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department actions may request an informal review of: (A) The denial or issuance of a HPA, or the conditions or provisions made part of a HPA; or (B) An order imposing civil penalties. It is recommended that an aggrieved party contact the Area Habitat Biologist and discuss the concerns. Most problems are resolved at this level, but if not, you may elevate your concerns to his/her supervisor. A request for an IlJFORVIAL REVIEW shall be in WRITING to the Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501 -1091 and shall be RECEIVED by the Department within 30 -days of the denial or issuance of a HPA or receipt of an order imposing civil penalties. The 30 -day time requirement may be stayed by the Department if negotiations are occurring between the aggrieved party and the Area Habitat Biologist and/or his/her supervisor. The Habitat Protection Services Division Manager or his /her designee shall conduct a review and recommend a decision to the Director or its designee. If you are not satisfied with the results of this informal appeal, a formal appeal may be filed. B. FORMAL APPEALS (WAC 220-110-350) OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.100 OR 77.55.140: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department actions may request an formal review of (A) The denial or issuance of a;HPA, or the conditions or provisions made part of a }IPA; (B) An order imposing civil penalties; or (C) Any other "agency action" for which an adjudicative proceeding is required under the Administrative Procedure Act, Chapter 34.05 RCW. A request for a FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501 -1091, shall be plainly labeled as "REQt.TEST FOR FORMAL APPEAL" and shall be RECEIVED DURING OFFICE HOURS by the Department within 30 -days of the Department action that is being challenged. The time period for requesting a formal appeal is suspended during consideration of a timely informal appeal. If there has been an informal appeal, the deadline for requesting a formal appeal shall be within 30- days of the date of the Department's written decision in response to the informal appeal. C. FORMAL APPEALS OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.110, 77.55 200, 77.55.230, or 77.55.290: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the denial or issuance of a HPA, or the conditions or provisions made part of a HPA may request a formal appeal. The request for FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Hydraulic Appeals Board per. WAC 259 -04 at Environmental Hearings Office, 4224 Sixth Avenue SE, Building Two - Rowe Six, Lacey, Washington 98504; telephone 360/459 -6327. D. FAILURE TO APPEAL WITHIN TEE REQUIRED TIME PERIODS RESULTS Iii I FORFEITURE OF ALL APPEAL RIGHTS. IF THERE IS NO TIMELY REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL, THE DEPARTMENT ACTION . SHALL BE FINAL AND UNAPPEALABLE. Page 4 of 4 z =Z w Q J U 00: 'Ma ? 'fn uj: U.1= w0. H• ' 0 ===: o f- = 0. z` • Iii Z SO City of Seattle Paul Schell. Mayor Paul Schell, Mayor Seattle Public Utilities Diana Gale, Director September 21, 2001 RECEIVED SEP 2 5 2001 CMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Michael G. Lozano King County Division of Capital Planning and Development Department of Construction and Facilities Management King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Subject: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Project Dear Mr. Lozano: Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) staff have reviewed the 95% plans and specifications (DATED August 24, 2001) for King County. Please see the following comments and attachments, I would also like to meet and discuss the coordination and sequencing of work by SPU staff before final plans and specifications are developed. Comments are as follows: Plans: 1. Sheet Gl: Will there be an attached soils report showing details of the stone columns, and will this show the minimum distance that stone columns will be located from the SPU water main? If not, SPU would like to see this added. 2 Sheet D 1: If the sewer lift station has a potable water supply, the supply must be protected with a Washington State approved reduced pressure backflow assembly. All SPU water systems shall only be operated by SPU crews, this includes connecting and disconnecting to the SPU water system. Please see the marked up plan. 3. Sheet C4: Please show 2- details of 2 -inch and 6 -inch water connecting to 20 -inch water. One detail should show the testing configuration as outlined in the attached City of Seattle Std. Plan #300c and the other detail should show the final pipe configuration (I will be happy to help you or your consultant with this). 4 Sheet El: Please show the dimension between the existing 20 -inch water main and the proposed 2" conduit as 5' from inside edge to inside edge. 5. Sheet L1: Please show the irrigation piping connecting to the domestic water piping. The irrigation piping should cross the existing 48 -inch water main at a right angle (see notes on drawing). King County will need to obtain a permit from SPU to have irrigation piping on the SPU 48 -inch water main right -of -way. 6. Sheet L3: Double check valve assembly will need to be inspected by SPU inspection services. At the time of inspection a satisfactory test report must be at the job site. This assembly will require annual testing by SPU. Inspections can be scheduled by calling Karen Lanning at 233 -2633. Dexter Horton Building, 10th Floor, 710 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104. Tel: (206) 684 -5851, TTY/TDD: (206) 233 -7241, Fax: (206) 684 -4631 An equal employment opportunity, affirmative action employer. Accommodations for people with disabilities provided upon request. •h `GCN -.011 Mr. Mike Lozano Page 2 September 21, 2001 Specifications: 1. Page 02665 -1, 1.04, A. should read "Comply with the requirements of the City of Seattle Standard Plans and Specifications ". 2. Page 02665 -3, 1.07 SEQUENCING AND SCHEDULING should have a section for the contractor to coordinate all water connections, bacteriological tests and, pressure tests with SPU Water Engineering, SPU Water Operations, and SPU Water Quality. All of these groups should be included in the pre - construction meeting with the selected contractor. Another sentence should be added to the section ensuring that nobody operates the SPU water system with the exception of SPU crews. 3. Page 02665 -7, 3.10 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL, the attached SPU specifications for installing, connecting, and testing water mains & hydrants should be inserted in this section or referenced. I hope that SPU and King County can continue working together to construct the intertidal estuary while not compromising the integrity of SPU's water system. Please call me at 206 - 684 -4629 with any questions or concerns. Sincerely i ' J /91 Patrick S. Herbig Assistant Civil Engineer Enclosures cc: SPU City of Tukwila Terri Kanyer, Major Services Team Charlie Madden, Water and Wastewater Engineering Bob Gambill, Property Management Doug Goett, Water Operations Henry Haselton, Materials Lab Aziz Alfi, Water and Wastewater Engineering Karen Lanning, Water Quality Judith Noble, Watershed ESA Coordinator Green/Duwamish Watersheds Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord L. A. (Lorne) Balanko, HWA GEOSCIENCES, INC. Pat Broden, Operations Manager Jill Mosqueda, Public Works Development Deb Ritter, Department of Community Development ZQQ CL 2 6_ UO 0. W= J W O. to =d u I- O` Z I- LL) uj U 0: 0c` 0H W W" II V_ O .Z. U =; O Z. King County Department of Construction & Facilities Management Cheryl B. Fambles, Director 320 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 296 -0648 TDD (206) 296 -0100 FAX (206) 296 -0186 August 27,2001 Deborah Ritter, Associate Planner City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 RECEIVED AUG 2 9 2001 COMY DEVEL OPMEN T RE: Threshold Determination for Cecil Moses Park Intertidal Estuary, #S01- 316003 The Department of Construction and Facilities Management asserted lead agency status for SEPA Review for the Cecil Moses Park Intertidal Estuary project. This is to inform you that a Determination of NonSignificance was issued for this project on July 17, 2001, with closure of the comment period on July 31, 2001. One comment was received for this project and the issue, resolved (see attached document). Thus, the DNS is considered complete. Respectfully, Cheryl Fambles Director, Department of Construction and Facilities Management Cc: Mike Lozano, Project Manager, DCFM Lynn Lewicki, SEPA Coordinator, DCFM Enclosure King County Office of Cultural Resources Arts Commission Landmarks and Heritage Prograrn Public Art Program 506 Second Avenue, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone (206) 296 -7580 V/TDD Fax (206) 296 -8629 www.metrokc.gov August 23, 2001 TO: Lynn Lewicki, SEPA Coordinator, Capital Planning and Development Mike Lozano, Project Manager, Capital Planning and Development FR: Charlie Sundberg, Preservation Planner RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Estuary/North Wind Weir Cultural Resources Thank you for the opportunity to review information on the above - referenced project and site. From the materials you have supplied, I understand that the current project is limited to estuarine enhancement and does not physically affect the North Wind Weir. The Weir appears to be a traditional cultural place of interest to the tribes with which you have been consulting over the past five years and is likely to be eligible for National Register listing. Tribal interest and support for the enhancement work is clear in the correspondence you sent. The only concerns raised are related to the wording of potential interpretive displays that are not part of this enhancement project. Archaeological testing of the area that would be affected has been negative, according to BOAS, the archaeological subconsultant. Given the overall positive nature of the current project in terms of salmon habitat and natural system functions, the small but positive improvement of the historic setting of the Weir, and the extent of positive communication and consultation with the affected tribes, I see no potential for significant adverse effects due to this project. Please call me at 296 -8673 if you have any questions regarding these comments. cc: [by electronic mail] Greg Griffith, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Rob Whitlam, State Archaeologist, Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation :� �. King County Division of Capital Planning & Development Department of Construction & Facilities Management 320 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 296 -0648 FAX (206) 296 -0186 JUL 1 7 20U1 NOTICE ISSUANCE OF DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE After review of the environmental checklist and related environmental documents, the King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management has determined that Cecil Moses Memorial Park Intertidal Estuary project will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. Therefore, under State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) rules the Department of Construction and Facilities Management has issued a Determination of NonSignificance (DNS) on Tuesday, July 17, 2001. Copies of the DNS are available at no charge from Mike Lozano, Project Manager, King County Division of Capital Planning and Development, at the address listed above. The public is invited to comment on this DNS by submitting written comments no later than 4:30 P.M., Tuesday, July 31, 2001, to the address listed in the upper left corner of this notice, attention Cheryl Fambles, or by e -mail to dcfm.sepacomments@metrokc.gov. metrokc.gov. NAME OF PROPOSAL: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Intertidal Estuary DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: : The Cecil Moses Memorial Park (formerly North Wind Weir Park) Intertidal Estuary proposal involves development of an approximately one -acre intertidal habitat on a three -acre King County park site in Tukwila, Washington. Existing elements on the park site include a restroom and the Green River Trail, which runs along the western boundary of the site. The intertidal estuary is designed to provide an off - channel pool as a retreat for migrating salmon and other fish. Native tree and shrub plantings will provide shade for fish and improve habitat for bird and animal species. A wood post -and- rail fence will be installed along the perimeter of the estuary. in addition, a City of Seattle water main near the estuary will be reinforced, and overhead power poles will be relocated underground on site. The proposed estuary is being developed with funding from METRO West Point Treatment Plant mitigation process, which focuses on restoration/enhancement along the Duwamish River. Construction of the estuary will be accomplished through a partnership between King County and Elliott Bay /Duwamish Restoration Program, which will require the estuary to be monitored up to ten years to ensure its physical and biological success. During construction, archaeological monitoring and continued coordination with the tribes and the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation will occur. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Cecil Moses Memorial Park (formerly North Wind Weir Park), 1 1013 West Marginal Place South, Tukwila, Washington. PROPONENT / LEAD AGENCY: King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Cheryl Fambles, Director, Department of Construction and Facilities Management FILE NUMBER: SO1- 316003 COMMENTS ON THIS PROPOSAL ARE WELCOME. You also have the right to appeal this decision during the 14 -day comment period. Your appeal must include a letter clearly stating why this decision is not complete and specifically how this decision should be changed. You should be ready to represent your position in a hearing. Any comment or appeal for this DNS must be received no later than 4:30 P.M. on Tuesday, July 31, 2001, at King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management, 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320, Seattle 98104, ATTN. Cheryl Fambles. Comments may also be sent by e-mail to: dcfm.sepacommentsemetrokc.gov . APPEALS MUST INCLUDE A $125.00 NON - REFUNDABLE FILING FEE. PLEASE REFERENCE THE FILE NUMBER AND NAME WHEN WRITING OR CALLING. NOTICE: If you require a sign language interpreter for a hearing, please call 322 -4996 four (4) days prior to the hearing. The County will provide an interpreter for you. WARNING: Do not remove, mutilate, or conceal this poster until after the last day of comment. King County Division of Capital Planning & Development Department of. Construction & Facilities Management 320 King County Administration Building 500 -4th Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 Cecil Moses Memorial Park Intertidal Estuary King County Division of Capital Planning & Development Department of Construction & Facilities Management 320 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue' Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 296 -0648 FAX (206) 296 -0186 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE fTIV Er; " L• /;�,� JUL 17 ?A PERMIT CENTER NAME OF PROPOSAL: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Intertidal Estuary DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The Cecil Moses Memorial Park (formerly North Wind Weir Park) Intertidal Estuary proposal involves development of an approximately one -acre intertidal habitat on a three -acre King County park site in Tukwila, Washington. Existing elements on the park site include a restroom and the Green River Trail, which runs along the western boundary of the site. The intertidal estuary is designed to provide an off - channel pool as a retreat for migrating salmon and other fish. Native tree and shrub plantings will provide shade for fish and improve habitat for bird and animal species. A wood post- and -rail fence will be installed along the perimeter of the estuary. In addition, a City of Seattle water main will be reinforced near the estuary, and overhead power poles will be relocated underground on site. The proposed estuary is being developed with funding from METRO West Point Treatment Plant mitigation process, which focuses on restoration /enhancement along the Duwamish River. Construction of the estuary will be accomplished through a partnership between King County and Elliott Bay /Duwamish Restoration Program, which will require the estuary to be monitored up to ten years to ensure its physical and biological success. During construction, archaeological monitoring and continued coordination with the tribes and the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation will occur. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: PROPONENT & LEAD AGENCY: Cecil Moses Memorial Park (formerly North Wind Weir Park), 11013 West Marginal Place South, Tukwila, Washington. King County Department of Constntction and Facilities Management The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). In making this Threshold Determination, the responsible official has reviewed the completed environmental checklist and other environmental information on file with the lead agency. This information is available for review upon request (and copying for a nominal photocopying charge) of File Number SO1- 316003. This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under WAC 197 -11- 340(2). The lead agency will not act on this proposal until after Tuesday, July 31, 2001. The public comment period is fourteen (14) days from the date of issuance of the DNS pursuant to WAC 197 -11 -500. Any comments must be submitted in writing or by e-mail to dcfm.sepacomments a,metrokc.gov by 4:30 P.M., Tuesday, July 31, 2001. If you wish to file an appeal of this project, written notification and a filing fee of $125.00 must be submitted by 4:30 P.M., Tuesday, July 31, 2001. Additional information regarding the appeal process is discussed on page two of this document. If you have any questions, concerns, or require additional information, please contact Mike Lozano at (206) 296 -4240. Responsible Official: Position / Title: Phone / Fax: Address: Signature: Cheryl Fambles Director, Department of Construction and Facilities Management (206) 296 -0648 / (206) 296 -0186 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 .-- -. __ .......* Date: -7// 0 A / THE APPEAL PROCESS You may appeal this determination (during the I4 -day comment period) to the Department of Construction and Facilities Management by filing a Notice of Appeal with the responsible official of the lead agency given above. A Notice of Appeal is a letter stating: 1. The name of the proposal. 2. The action to which you object (in this case the County's Determination of Nonsignificance). 3. The agency taking the action (in this case the King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management). 4. The basis for the objection (that is, why the proposal would likely have a significant adverse impact on the environment). 5. That you are appealing the County's determination to the Zoning and Subdivision Examiner. 6. Your name and how you can be reached. Your notice of appeal should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Any Notice of Appeal for this Determination of Nonsignificance must be received no later than 4:30 P.M. on Tuesday, July 31, 2001, at the office of King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management, 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320, Seattle, WA 98104, ATTN: Cheryl Fambles. Notices of appeal must be accompanied by $125.00 filing fee. Checks should be made payable to King County Office of Finance. Notices of appeal that are not accompanied by the filing fee will be determined to be invalid. Contact the Zoning and Subdivision Examiner at (206) 296 -4660 to ask about the hearing procedures for SEPA appeals. For all other questions relating to this project, please call Mike Lozano at (206) 296 -4240. 2 ! Z H • 00 u)) W WI (oW W O: gQ =W Z1._ H O W~ W U0 O= 0 i- 2 W. lL �, — O. Z. W — =, O� Z DISTRIBUTION LIST CECIL MOSES MEMORIAL PARK INTERTIDAL ESTUARY DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section Post Office Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504 -7703 Deborah Ritter, Associate Planner City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Karen Wolfe Office of Regional Policy and Programs King County Courthouse, Room 402 516 Third Avenue, M.S. KCC -EX -0402 Seattle, WA 98104 Craig Larsen, Director Department of Parks and Recreation 2040 84th Avenue SE, M.S. LBP -PR -0100 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Barbara Wright, Administrator Program Development and Land Management Department of Parks and Recreation 2040 84th Avenue SE, M.S. LBP -PR -0100 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Ted Muller Program Supervisor Priority Habitat and Species Section Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 16018 Mill Creek Blvd. Mill Creek, WA 98012 Bob Hansen Seattle City Light 700 Fifth Avenue, #3300 Seattle, WA 98104 -5031 Pat Herbig Seattle Water Department Seattle Public Utilities Engineering Services Branch 710 Second Avenue, 6th Floor Seattle, WA 98104 CITY OF TU WILA JUL 1 7 2001 PERMIT CENTER ... '. z z JU 00 u) o w =' J 1- w0 u-¢ = d. I- Ill 2 Z �0 Z t- O • � 0 H w uj F 0 O: z w i =. O H z Charles Madden Seattle Water Department Seattle Public Utilities Engineering Services Branch 710 Second Avenue, 6'h Floor Seattle, WA 98104 E- w Rod Malcolm, Habitat Specialist c..) O' Muckleshoot Tribe ❑. 39015 — 172 "d Ave. SE ' w = Auburn, WA 98092 , F-. co w w0 Tom Mueller, Chief 2 Regulatory Functions Branch g U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 3755 a Seattle, WA 98124 _ z� Charlie Sundberg, Preservation Planner z O Cultural Resources Division, Mail Stop STR -CR -0200 2 506 Second Avenue, Rm. 200 U ❑ Seattle, WA 98104 0 - Dr. Robert Whitlam Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation P. 0 Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504 -8343 Pam Erstad WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife 16018 Mill Creek Blvd. Mill Creek, WA 98012 (425) 379 -2306 Donna Darin Acting Regional Administrator National Marine Fisheries 7600 Sand Point Way NE Seattle, WA 98115 -0070 John E. Mikesell, Chief Bridge Section U.S. Coast Guard, 13th District 915 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98174 (800) 982 -8813 / (206) 220 -7000 2 G.I. James King County Tribal Liaison King County Courthouse 516 Third Avenue, Suite 402 M.S. KCC -EX -0402 Seattle, WA 98104 John Daniels, Jr., Chairman Muckleshoot Tribe 39015 — 172 "d Ave. SE Auburn, WA 98092 Isabel Tinoco, Natural Resource Director Muckleshoot Tribe 39015 — 172nd Ave. SE Auburn, WA 98092 Donna Hogerhuis, Cultural Resource Director Muckleshoot Tribe 39015 —172 "d Ave. SE Auburn, WA 98092 James Rasmussen Duwamish Tribe, Cultural Resources Committee 14235 Ambaum Blvd. SW, Front A Burien, WA 98166 Curtis Tanner Fish and Wildlife Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 510 Desmond Drive SE, #102 Lacey, WA 98503 Robert Clark NOAA Restoration Center Northwest 7600 Sand Point Way NE Seattle, WA 98115-0070 Margaret Duncan Suquamish Tribe P.O. Box 498 Suquamish, WA 98392 Linda Hanson King County Department of Natural Resources M.S.: KSC -NR -0600 3 NOV 2 9 2000 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDL11- E SERVICE Western Washington Office 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102 Lacey, Washington 98503 Phone: (360) 753 -9440 Fax: (360) 753 -9008 Sandy Gurkewitz, Program Analyst ESA Policy Coordination Office King County Executive M.S. KSC -EX -0705 201 South Jackson Street Seattle,Washington 98104 -3488 FWS Referen DEC1 :::y.•, icing County, DCFM Capita! P1`aninrr X. [t?•11 -:i } e , C{T :.,u1 V11i� JUL 1 7 2001 PERMIT CENTER Eounty Department of Construction and Facilities Manage ► nt, Cecil Moses Memorial Park, Tukwila, Washington (PN 1998 -2- 02018) Dear Ms. Gurkewitz: This letter is in response to your cover letter and attached Biological Assessment for the proposed Cecil Moses Memorial Park Project in Tukwila, Washington. The project is proposed by the King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management and includes intertidal habitat restoration elements being completed under the Elliott Bay/Duwamish Restoration Program, as well as recreational amenities. The letter was dated October 19, 2000, and received in this office on October 21, 2000. Your letter states that the Biological Assessment has been reviewed by the King County Biological Review Panel, which has concurred its conclusions. The proposed action is being undertaken to restore intertidal and riparian habitat and provide additional recreational access to the Duwamish River and the Green River Trail. Proposed activities include: • construction of a parking lot • construction of interpretive signs and kiosks construction of an intertidal habitat area installation of benches and picnic tables • development of walking paths • • dedicated canoe /kayak access • installation of irrigation and drainage systems The project is one of four intertidal habitat restoration projects being completed under the auspices of the Elliott Bay/Duwamish Restoration Program which includes involvement by the Mukleshoot and Suquamish Indian Tribes, City of Seattle, King County, Washington Department � of Ecology, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The project proponent has determined that the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), and may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service believes that sufficient information has been provided on project effects to listed species for the lead Federal agency to conclude a determination of effect. This concurrence is based on our understanding of the following issues as described in the Biological Assessment and subsequent discussions: 1. • Sediment and erosion control measures described in Section 6.3 of the Biological Assessment and further detailed in Appendix 2, Sheet D3 will be followed. 2. Native trees removed to allow for excavation of the intertidal embayment will be used for habitat development in the project area, for example as snags for perching or large woody debris. In order to expedite the environmental review process, if the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers concurs with your effect determinations for listed species, then you may consider this action to be in compliance with requirements of 50 CFR 402.13, thereby concluding the consultation process. This project should be re- analyzed if new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed/proposed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not considered in this consultation/conference; if the action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the listed species or critical habitat that was not considered in this consultation/conference; and/or, if a new species is listed or critical habitat is designated that may be affected by this project. If you have further questions about this letter or your responsibilities under the Act, please contact John Grettenberger at (360) 753 -6044 or Curtis Tanner at (360) 753 -4326. Sincerely, Gerry A. Jackson, Manager Western Washington Office c: King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management (M. Lozano) 2 . " FINAL REPORT are' ) /� C F OF TUKWILA JUL 1i -2001 PERMIT CENTER BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR LISTED AND PROPOSED THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES CECIL MOSES MEMORIAL PARK TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Prepared for King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management September 2000 URS 1501 4th Avenue, Suite 1500 Seattle, WA 98101 -1662 (206) 343 -7933 5300071916.09 z i-- Z U; O 0 U) W' J 1' W O' g a. =d W Z� Z O, U 0 O 0 I-- Wu H V O; Z. =,. O z TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Project Location and Affected Environment 1 3.0 Project Description 2 4.0 Action Area 3 5.0 Planting Plan 3 6.0 General Impacts of the Proposed Action 4 6.1 Increased Impervious Surface 4 6.2 Construction Sequencing, Timing, and Schedule 5 6.2.1 Sequencing 5 6.2.2 Timing and Schedule 5 6.2.3 Protective Measures for Unanticipated Conditions 6 6.3 Sediment and Erosion Control 6 6.3.1 Initial Installation of Facilities 7 6.3.2 Schedule for Checking, Repair and Cleaning of Facilities 7 6.3.3 Protective Measures for Unanticipated Conditions 7 6.4 Estuary Pooling at Low Tide 8 7.0 Methods 9 8.0 Results 10 8.1 Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus Leucocephalus) 10 8.1.1 Life History and Use of the Site 10 8.1.2 Determination of Effects 10 8.2 Puget Sound Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus Tshawytscha) 11 8.2.1 Life History and Use of the Site 11 8.2.2 Determination of Effects 12 8.3 Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus Kisutch) 15 8.3.1 Life History and Use of the Site 15 8.3.2 Determination of Effects 16 8.4 Bull Trout (Salvelinus Confluentus) 16 8.4.1 Life History and Use of the Site 16 8.4.2 Determination of Effects 17 8.5 Plants 21 9.0 Conservation Measures 21 10.0 References 22 Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Appendix 4 Appendix 5 Letters to NMFS, USFWS; Letter from USFWS Figures NMFS Biological Assessment Matrix for Salmon, and USFWS Biological Assessment Matrix for Bull Trout King County Section 7 Assessment Form — Part I Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program • O: \WCIA \71916 \GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINALDOC\15•AUG•00%\ 1 z �• z w 6 = - 0 O 0 co 0: U1 • CD I- L: w 0 g Q. co =d Iw 2 z� z �. w '0 E• ll 0 'w - 0 ui z' • =' O H z 1.0 INTRODUCTION Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, requires federal agencies to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize endangered or threatened species or their critical habitats. In a letter dated October 7, 1999, the US Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) provided a list of listed, proposed, candidate, or species of concern that occur or may occur in the vicinity of the Cecil Moses Memorial Park project site. In a telephone confirmation on November 5, 1999, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) confirmed that Puget Sound Chinook and Coho Salmon needed to be addressed in the B.A. The USFWS letter is provided in Appendix 1. This Biological Assessment (BA) was developed to examine how the proposed development at Cecil Moses Memorial Park may affect the species listed below. This BA evaluates potential impacts to these species from project implementation based upon existing information on the site's existing habitat conditions and suitability for providing the life history requirements of these species. The USFWS and NMFS identified the following listed, proposed, and candidate species. Listed Species Birds: Bald eagle (Threatened) Fish: Puget Sound Chinook Salmon (Threatened) Fish: Bull Trout Puget Sound/Coastal DPS (Threatened) Candidate Species Fish: Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia Coho Salmon 2.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Cecil Moses Memorial Park (the Park) is located adjacent to the Duwamish River and West Marginal Place S. (Highway 99) in Tukwila, Washington (see legal description and figures in Appendix 2). The 3 -acre Park is currently mostly undeveloped (a restroom and bike path are present) and was previously a residential area. The Park is situated along the west bank of the Duwamish River and lies on the historic 0: \WCIA \71916 \GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINALDOC\15- AUG•001\ 1 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is illustrated in figures provided in Appendix 2. The Cecil Moses Memorial Park project involves development of a park by King County on an approximately 3 -acre parcel of undeveloped land along the Duwamish River in Tukwila, Washington. The Green River Trail extends along the western boundary of the park (see figures in Appendix 2). The park will include a parking lot, benches, picnic tables, and paths as well as canoe/kayak river access. A restroom has already been constructed. A small area in the park near the Duwamish River will be developed as intertidal habitat and a site will be developed and dedicated for a Native American interpretive display. An irrigation system will be installed in the new park and new landscaping added. On -site drainage (parking lot and restroom roof drains) will be treated in a bioswale with Type I catch basins in the parking lot and on the downstream end of the bioswale prior to drainage outflow to the Duwamish River. Plans for the park have been submitted to the Corps of Engineers, the State Departments of Ecology and Fish and Wildlife, and the City of Tukwila as part of the permitting process. The project consists of excavation of a portion of the Park to create an area of intertidal high marsh similar to an area that already exists across the Duwamish River in the same vicinity. Construction of the estuarine embayment will involve removal of approximately 6,000 to 6,500 cy of excavated material. Approximately 1,250 to 1,350 cy of material will be imported as primarily structural fill under the pathways and the parking lot. The equipment to be used will probably include a track - mounted excavator, a front end loader, dump trucks, and an angle dozer. The proposed estuarine area will be surrounded by a wood (post and rail) fence to limit physical access but allow visual access. Plantings will include deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs, and groundcovers, as well as shrubs and grasses for the intertidal estuarine embayment as noted below (Chapter 5.0). The purpose of the proposed action is to aid in local efforts to restore fish habitat and provide additional limited recreational access in the form of a dedicated canoe/kayak access to the Duwamish River. The project is also designed to provide interpretive information on the cultural and historic significance of this part of the Duwamish River. This proposed project has the support of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and other agencies or organizations with an interest in rehabilitating the Duwamish. URS O:\WCIA \71916\GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINAL.DOC \15•AUG•001\ 2 4.0 ACTION AREA The Action Area for all three listed species noted above includes the Park and extends across the Duwamish River to the opposite shore (see Figures in Appendix 2). This includes the area directly impacted by construction at the Park and the adjacent shoreline and the stream reach of the Duwamish River indirectly or potentially affected by construction or construction- related stormwater runoff, turbidity and sedimentation. This stream reach would extend from the project area to as far downstream as any short-term construction related increases in turbidity occur (approximately 200 -300 feet). The project area is in a high turbidity, tidally influenced, low energy environment with considerable deposition. Any increase in turbidity is most likely to be of short duration and occur when a channel to the proposed estuarine area is opened in mid - December, when no upstream or downstream migrations of listed salmonids will be affected. The channel will be opened during a period of minimal tidal flow to minimize the velocity of water entering the newly constructed estuary basin. This will eliminate or reduce the potential for a short-term release of fine sediments into the Green River when the new estuary is first filled. With the exception of this brief period when there is a potential for increased turbidity downstream from the site, the action area will be confined to the area directly impacted by construction at the Park (site) and the adjacent shoreline. The project site is not a foraging area for wintering bald eagles. There are no large mature roost trees near the project site for foraging bald eagles, and resident birds nesting in the south Seattle area primarily forage in marine areas downstream and salmon spawning areas upstream, a few miles from the project site. Resident bald eagles in the Seattle area have adapted to disturbances associated with residential and industrial land uses. Noise resulting from construction activity (limited number of vehicles and equipment) will be periodic and may extend a few hundred feet (approximately 200 -300 feet) from the site, travelling a bit further along the streambank than the upland area. Construction activity could possibly but is not expected to limit the number of foraging eagles in the vicinity. Increased human use of the site over the long term may discourage foraging near the site, although increased utilization of the new estuary habitat by waterbirds may also encourage future foraging behavior in the project vicinity by bald eagles. The action area also includes the area (same area) affected by construction noise and the area affected by long term human activity (see Figures in Appendix 2). Any potential disturbances to bald eagle foraging will be limited to short term impacts during active construction at the project site. Based on the above, the action area would be limited to the site and the adjacent shoreline. 5.0 PLANTING PLAN The plant type selection for the estuary was based on observation of plant varieties that exist in similar conditions in the local area, on research into salt- and inundation- tolerant species, as well as the preference by the Elliott Bay Duwamish Restoration Panel to have native, or nearly native, species within the estuary. The lower and upper limits of sedge planting (elevation 2.6 to 4.24 Mean High Water (MHW)), and the variety of sedge were determined by field verification of similar conditions on the opposite bank of the river. Plantings above the sedge, from 4.24 HW to 5.2 Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) include salt - tolerant groundcover with jute netting to provide erosion control until the plants get established. Plantings on the slope above, from 5.2 MHHW to 8.9 Highest Tide include a variety of shrubs and groundcover that are native, or MRS 0: \WCIA \71916 \GREEN RIVER TRAIL APT FINAL,DOC \14•SEP•00\\ 3 ; nearly native, and have some level of tolerance for salt water inundation (the lower the elevation, the more tolerant the plant variety). Above the Highest Tide level, the plantings include native, or nearly native, trees, shrubs and groundcover that is appropriate to a native riparian corridor. It is anticipated that some plant replacement may be required in the early years of monitoring the site, and that is provided for in the Monitoring Plan (Appendix 5). The plantings will be irrigated for a period of two years to increase survival rates overall. However, the desired result z is that over time the estuary, and its plantings, will transform into a natural environment that will C g not require maintenance or intervention to develop into valuable habitat. 00 6.0 GENERAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The anticipated impacts of the proposed project include the possibility of erosion and N w0 sedimentation occurring during project construction and dewatering. A temporary erosion N control and sedimentation plan and other Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be in place a prior to and during construction (see Appendix 2, Sheet D3), and dewatering will be controlled u_ in accordance with Washington Department of Ecology approved measures for the appropriate w water quality permit. z = 1- 0 Z I- 6.1 Increased Impervious Surface U The original use of this property was residential development and the existing street system with o cn a cul -de -sac remains. Because the existing street will be removed to accommodate park 0'- improvements, the net increase of impervious surface will be minimal, approximately 13 %. H v. • Total Area of Existing Asphalt to be removed: -1200 SY z • New Asphalt Parking Lot + 615 SY di co I- • New Asphalt Trails + 540 SY 0 • New Concrete Paving + 205 SY • Net Increase in Impervious Surface + 160 SY (13.3% increase over existing) The existing street system drains to a catch basin and culvert and is piped to the river without benefit of water - quality improvement facilities, such as a biofiltration swale. The new parking lot (approximately half the size of the area of asphalt to be removed) shall have an oil -water separator and will be routed through a biofiltration swale before it enters the river. This will result in significantly less runoff, with fewer contaminants, entering the river through a single point discharge. The paved trails are pitched to drain to the lawn and shrub beds, thereby increasing percolation and decreasing runoff. Therefore, even with the minimal increase in actual impervious surface, the end result will be a reduction of single point discharge directly to the river. The direct and indirect effects to all listed species from this increase in impervious surface will be insignificant and discountable because the existing untreated runoff will be replaced with water - quality treatment facilities, such as a biofiltration swale and an oil -water separator. These treatment facilities combined with the design of paved trails to increase UPS 0: \WCIA \71916\GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINALDOC\15 -AUG -001\ 4 percolation of runoff from impervious surfaces will result in a reduction of the existing single point discharge into the river. 6.2 Construction Sequencing, Timing, And Schedule 6.2.1 Sequencing Although the project includes construction of a new intertidal estuary directly connected to the river, the duration of work actually in the water is very short. This is due to the fact that the riverbank will be left undisturbed and construction of the estuary will take place behind the existing top of the bank. The elevation at the top of the bank ranges from approximately 10 to 17 feet (NGVD '29 datum). Although this portion of the river has not been engineered as a dike, the effective height is such that it has functioned as a dike for the residential homes that once existed behind and above the bank. The ordinary high water elevation is 4.4, MHHW is 5.2, 100 -year flood elevation is 8.8, and highest tide is 8.9. Excavation and grading of the estuary, importation of rock, impervious soils, silts, sand and gravel will all take place with no disturbance riverward of the top of the bank, so there will be no danger of overtopping from high tides during this phase of construction. Once the estuary construction is completed, and the banks are planted, work will focus on forming the lower reaches of the channel. The exact timing of this work will be approved by the engineer based on weather conditions and tidal extremes (see Section 6.2.2). This work shall start with reducing the height of the protective dike to "Temporary Berm" elevation (the elevation shown on the drawings is 12" above MHHW 5.2, but based on field conditions at the time of construction, may be higher). The top of the temporary berm will be high enough to prevent overtopping into the estuary for the remaining duration of work, which will be 3 to 5 days. At this time, the lower reaches of the channel shall be formed, sedge shall be planted, and the sedge protective fencing shall be installed. When this work is complete, and at a low tide, the temporary berm shall be removed and the remainder of the channel and gravel weir shall be formed and constructed. This sequence of construction will assure the construction takes place behind a protective berm, and not actually in moving water, thus reducing the chance for sediments to enter the river. 6.2.2 Timing and Schedule The construction window for this reach of the Duwamish is October 15 through March 15. During this time, there is minimal activity by the listed species in the river system. Effects on the listed species are discussed in Chapter 8.0. The Draft Construction Schedule (Appendix 2) assumes work will start at the opening of the construction window, on or about October 15th. The construction activities listed correlate with the sequence described above. The work behind the existing riverbank will continue until the first week in December, at which time the riverbank height will be reduced to temporary berm elevation. During the second week of December, and at low tide, the channel will be opened to the river. Based on the low level of activity in the river by the listed species during mid- December to mid - January, this is the ideal schedule for construction. Adult chinook salmon have finished their O:\WCIA\719161GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINAL.DOC \15•AUG•OCA1 5 migration and spawning activities by this time and adult coho salmon have migrated to their spawning grounds and tributaries and are not present in the project area. Migrating and foraging bull trout are most likely to be present during the spawning migration of adult salmon or when salmonid smolts are migrating downstream (mid - February through the end of June). Listed juvenile salmonids do not migrate downstream to rear in the vicinity of the project area until mid- February. The utilization of the Green River in the project vicinity by listed salmonids is at its lowest ebb between mid- December and mid- February. By opening the channel to the river during the period of lowest habitat utilization, possible behavioral effects to salmonids from any short-term increase in turbidity will be minimized. The Draft Construction Schedule is included in Appendix 2. The contractor's actual construction schedule shall be approved and adjusted at four points in the process. Initially, prior to the Notice to Proceed, again just before importation of materials into the estuary, a third time when the temporary berm elevation is to be established, and lastly, when the channel is to be opened to the river at low tide. This will assure that unforeseen circumstances that may result from fluctuating weather and river conditions are accounted for, and construction procedures can be modified before the next critical stage of work begins. 6.2.3 Protective Measures for Unanticipated Conditions In the event that the river level is significantly higher than anticipated (due to above average rainfall or atypical adjustments to the dam) the contractor shall be required to have materials and equipment on site to protect the work area and minimize siltation into the river (see Section 6.3, Sediment and Erosion Control). As part of the erosion control measures, the contractor shall construct a settling pond in the location of the proposed biofiltration swale. At the low end of the pond a catch basin and pipe shall provide an outlet to the river. The settling pond shall have straw bales staked along its length to intercept silt and the catch basin will be covered with silt fence fabric to capture any remaining silt before it enters the pipe and the river. If, during construction, it is apparent that water levels will rise to overtop the temporary berm, sand bags shall be placed atop the berm to increase the effective height. Once waters recede and the threat of overtopping is gone, the water remaining in the estuary shall be pumped into the settling pond where it will be filtered through straw bales and silt fence before entering the river. Excess silt in the estuary or the settling pond shall be excavated and disposed of off -site. Even without the prospect of water overtopping the berm there may be periods during construction when groundwater will seep into the excavation. This same procedure of pumping water into the settling basin shall be employed in order to keep the estuary `dry' and workable. 6.3 Sediment and Erosion Control Before construction starts the contractor is required to (1) install specified sediment and erosion control facilities, (2) identify in the construction schedule a minimum schedule for checking, repairing and cleaning out facilities, and (3) place on site specified materials and equipment that are available for emergency situations. UR. � ..,...... .. If the estuary were graded to drain completely at low tide, the zone that sedge would flourish in would be significantly smaller, the habitat value would be minimal, and there would be a greater likelihood of invasive plant material filling in the area just above the sedge. If the estuary were graded flat, at the correct levels for sedge growth, there would be a greater possibility of more, smaller and shallower pools forming on the estuary floor. This scenario would increase the likelihood of fish kill from thermal extremes. The pool, as designed, will be approximately 3 -4' deep and will be separated from the river for a period of 4 to 6 hours twice a day on average. One of the diurnal tides, under extreme conditions may cause separation up to 10 hours. There will be a regular exchange of water with incoming tides, so there is little likelihood of stranding juvenile chinook and coho salmon fish in the pool for a period of time that would be detrimental to their health. There will be protective cover (large woody debris) in the estuary that will provide shade and hiding places for juvenile salmon. Because most of the large wood debris will be positioned in the deepest portion of the estuary, juvenile salmonids present in the estuary during low tides will concentrate in the deepest water where water quality conditions (temperature and dissolved oxygen) will be adequate to sustain them until the estuary refills. Concentrating large woody debris in the deepest water of the estuary will also provide the cover essential to prevent or minimize bird predation of juvenile salmonids during low tides. Observations on Vancouver Island estuaries and the Fraser River estuary showed that as tides recede, juvenile chinook salmon retreat into tidal channels and creeks that retain water at low tide. Chinook salmon were among the last fish to vacate tidal channels when the channels dried up at low tide (Levy and Northcote 1981 and 82). Juvenile chinook salmon move away from tidal channel where temperatures exceed 20°-21°C (Healey 1980). For Spring chinook juveniles acclimated to 20 and 24 °C, the upper incipient lethal temperature is 25.1° (Brett 1952). The most recent Six Year Water Quality Summary for the Washington Department of Ecology station 09A080 on the Duwamish River near Tukwila, Washington indicates that maximum water temperatures during the summer months of July and August range from 15.2° to 22.4 °C and that dissolved oxygen can reach a minimum level of 7.5 mg/L (minimum recorded oxygen saturation is 81 percent). Because the adequacy of temperature and dissolved oxygen conditions in residual estuary pools has been poorly documented, it is difficult to directly compare conditions in the estuary pool to similar situations. There is no temperature data available to estimate the initial temperature of tidal water that will remain in the pool during low tides and it would be difficult to estimate the increase in water temperature likely to occur when a low tide coincides with the maximum solar heating period of a warm summer day. However, off - channel estuarine habitat of this depth, with adequate shade and cover from large woody debris and tree canopy cover, is unlikely to experience salmonid mortalities due to any elevated water temperature and low dissolved oxygen conditions that occur during period of low tide. Water temperature and dissolved oxygen. will be monitored during the summer months for a period of time after construction is completed to confirm there are no deleterious effects to fish. 7.0 METHODS No new studies were conducted in preparation of this Biological Assessment. Information used to determine potential use of the project site by the species listed above include a search of URS existing literature and consultation with resource agency personnel and private biologists who have knowledge of the area. The site was visited by a biologist/ecologist in early November of 1999, who recorded the plant and animal species observed at the site and characterized the habitat present. The NMFS report entitled "A Guide to Biological Assessments" (1999) and the King County Section 7 Assessment Form — Part 1 (1999) procedures were followed. These items are included in Appendices 3 and 4, respectively of this document. Also included as Appendix 5 is the Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program prepared by the USFWS for the Elliott Bay/Duwamish Restoration Program. 8.0 RESULTS 8.1 Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus Ieucocephalus) 8.1.1 Life History and Use of The Site The bald eagle is listed as Threatened by the USFWS and is currently being considered for delisting through most of its range. Bald eagles may winter in the vicinity of the Park, and may be present between October 31 and March 31 (USFWS letter dated September 27, 1999). Wintering bald eagles forage on fish and waterfowl / waterbird carcasses, and may also actively hunt fish and waterfowl/waterbirds on local waterways. Bald eagles will forage up to 20 miles from their roost or nest site (Isaacs, pers. com. 1999). Typically, wintering bald eagles associate with large concentrations of waterfowl, feeding on injured or dead geese (Griffin et al. 1982), or areas where salmon spawn (Stalmaster 1987). The nearest known bald eagle nest is over 1 mile from the Park. Eagles do forage along the Green River and the Duwamish (Nagri 1999). Foraging eagles typically roost in trees adjacent to rivers looking for fish and/or waterbirds. There are no existing trees adjacent to the Duwamish River within the Park that are suitable for eagle roosting. Such roost trees are typically large cottonwoods, bigleaf maples, or Douglas -firs with open structure and bare limbs that can be accessed by eagles. 8.1.2 Determination of Effects Suitable nesting sites are lacking within the project site. The trees on the project site lack the size and placement for preferred nest sites. No known bald eagle nesting sites have been identified within the project site or in the near vicinity. Foraging opportunities are provided by wintering concentrations of waterfowl on the Duwamish River, within open water or ponded wetlands near (but not within) the project site, although the level of human disturbance is moderate due to the presence of the Green River Trail and Bridge within and adjacent to the Park. Because of the lack of large mature trees for roosting or perching while foraging, it is unlikely that bald eagles will be present on or near the site during construction. The presence of construction equipment and personnel during construction, and the presence of some human UPS •; � activity in the immediate site vicinity (such as the Green River Trail and sports fishing) could result in a short-term disturbance or displacement of occasional individual foraging bald eagles. An increase in the use of the park by various park users after the completion of construction could have a minimal long term impact due to the increased level of disturbance inhibiting the future adoption of the site as a bald eagle foraging location. However, increased waterbird utilization of the new estuary habitat could encourage future bald eagle foraging activity in the project vicinity. Project implementation may result in some short-term disturbance or displacement of individual foraging bald eagles within the project site and immediate vicinity during construction. Construction of the proposed estuarine embayment would provide additional potential foraging habitat for bald eagles, as the embayment is expected to attract waterbirds and fish. The use that would be made of this habitat, however, may be limited by increased human use of the Park. No negative long -term impacts would result to the Puget Sound and Duwamish River wintering or nesting populations of bald eagles. It appears that minor positive and no negative long -term effects are likely to occur to bald eagles from this project. Therefore, we conclude that this project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect bald eagles. 8.2 Puget Sound Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) 8.2.1 Life History and Use of The Site The chinook salmon that migrate upstream and downstream in the Duwamish River, past the Park, belong to the Puget Sound Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) of the species. The Puget Sound ESU comprises coastal basins of the eastern part of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Hood Canal, and Puget Sound. This ESU includes spring, summer, and fall run fish. Puget Sound fish tend to mature at 3 to 4 years of age and are not recovered from Alaskan waters to the same extent as those from the Washington Coast ESU. Marine recoveries of fish from the Green River were made only in Canadian and Puget Sound waters. Puget Sound chinook remain relatively abundant; however, much of the production is from hatcheries. The overall trend in abundance is predominantly downward. Several populations are showing severe short-term declines. Spring -run chinook in this ESU are depressed. There is concern that the high level of hatchery production is masking severe declines in wild fish. Spawning and rearing habitat in many areas are severely degraded, and access to many areas of habitat is restricted or blocked. NMFS concluded that this ESU is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future (Myers et al. 1998). Myers et al. (1998) provide a summary of run and spawning timing, based on Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) et al. (1993) data for the Green River, which lies upstream of the Duwamish River. According to Myers et al. (1998), adult fall -run fish migrate upstream during the latter part of August and the early part of September, and spawn from early September through the end of November with peaks in September /October. WDF (1975) indicates that chinook spawn over approximately 33 miles of river, from the City of Tacoma water diversion downstream to the vicinity of Kent, with the most intensive spawning below Green River Gorge URS near Flaming Geyser Park and downstream 19 miles to the Auburn area. Adults do not feed during migration. The WDF (1975) describe the chinook runs in the Duwamish/Green River system as comprised principally of fall -run fish, with only very limited numbers of spring and summer run fish present and spawning mostly in the upper gorge area of the Green River. Juveniles rear throughout the accessible part of the Green River and tributaries utilized by spawning adults. Early rearing also occurs in the lower Duwamish and Elliot Bay, and was identified by WDF (1975) as an extremely important and critical area. The WDF (1975) report that summer -fall chinook runs enter the lower river as early as June, and remain in the system through early November, with spawning occurring between mid September and early November. The juvenile rearing period is late January through mid -July, and outmigration early April through mid-July. Juvenile chinook are present in the Duwamish estuary from mid - February through early September with the peak in mid to late May (Warner and Fritz 1995). Adults do not feed during migration. Hatchery rearing of fall -run chinook is common in Puget Sound and these hatchery fish were derived from a variety of watersheds within and outside the Puget Sound Region. There are currently three hatcheries operating on the Green River. WDFW operates the Icy Creek Pond and Green River Hatcheries and the Muckleshoot Tribe operates the Keta Creek Hatchery. The Green River fall -run chinook salmon stock has been the dominant hatchery stock in the Puget Sound ESU since the hatchery was opened in the early 1900s. This hatchery stock has been widely released into other watersheds in Puget Sound. A fairly large proportion of natural spawners in the system are hatchery -reared fish (WDF et al. 1993). Myers et al. (1998) indicate that most of the Puget Sound ESU chinook migrate to the ocean as subyearlings. WDF (1975) also states that juvenile fall chinook remain in the river for about three months before migrating to the sea, but in contrast, state that spring chinook juveniles remain for a year prior to migrating to sea, usually between early April and mid -July. The estuaries associated with local rivers are important rearing areas for these smolt. Smolt feed on a variety of invertebrates and small fish during their downstream migration. 8.2.2 Determination of Effects Indicators for documented environmental baseline and project effects are evaluated using the criteria in the NMFS (1998) matrix framework. The summary matrix is provided in Appendix 3. Diagnostic: Water Quality Indicator: Temperature Not Properly Functioning. High water temperatures in the Green River below RM 30 are cited by Bishop and Morgan (1996). The proposed project will not have a measurable effect on the temperatures of the Duwamish at or in the vicinity of the project site, and therefore is not expected to have an adverse effect on chinook salmon. Indicator: Sediment Not properly functioning. The high density of roads throughout the watershed, and high proportion of private timberlands in the upper basin continue to generate high sediment loads in UES 0: \WCIA1719161GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINAL.DOC \15•AUG•0011 12 the Duwamish/Green River system (Bishop and Morgan 1996). The proposed project will be excavated and planted before it is connected to the Duwamish River, and standard erosion control methods will be employed. Minor short-term impacts to water quality from construction could result, although impacts would be minimal because appropriate erosion control methods will be employed (see Appendix 2, Sheet D3). The project may cause slight, temporary increases locally in sediment when the barrier between the River and embayment is removed, but this is not expected to have an adverse effect on chinook salmon. Indicator: Chemical contamination/nutrients Not properly functioning. There are high levels of contamination originating from industrial sources upstream. There is a CWA 303(d) designated reach adjacent to the project site, and over 30 other reaches elsewhere in the basin, including areas upstream and downstream of the project site according to the Washington Department of Ecology 303(d) list published on the DOE website. The proposed project would not affect this indicator. Diagnostic: Habitat Access Indicator: Physical Barriers Not properly functioning. The Duwamish/Green River formerly drained 1,642 sq mi. It now drains only 483 sq mi due to human actions. The Tacoma water diversion and Howard Hanson dams block access to approx. 107 miles of historic habitat (Bishop and Morgan 1996). The proposed project will not affect physical barriers. Diagnostic: Habitat Elements Indicator: Substrate Embeddedness in Rearing Areas Not properly functioning. The Lower Duwamish likely has a silt substrate that has over 30 percent embeddedness. The proposed project will not affect this characteristic. Indicator: Large Woody Debris Not properly functioning. The lower Duwamish has been subject to channelization, rip -rap- hardened banks and loss of riparian vegetation which has caused a lack of Large Woody Debris (LWD). Timber harvest in the upper basin has removed much of the large conifer logs in the riparian zone that would otherwise be recruited into the system. The proposed project will not affect LWD, except that possibly the new embayment may trap some logs during floods, and enhance habitat as a result. Indicator: Pool Frequency and Quality Not properly functioning. The Lower Duwamish historically was comprised of rapidly shifting meanders, and is now almost completely within dikes. Pools in lower reaches were eliminated (Bishop and Morgan 1996), and this reach does not meet the values in "functioning appropriately" in the matrix. The proposed project will not have an effect on pool frequency and quality in the Duwamish. Indicator: Large Pools Same as above under Pool Frequency and Quality URS O: \WCIA \71916\GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINAL.DOC\15•AUG•001\ 13 Indicator: Off - channel Habitat Not properly functioning. The Lower Duwamish estuary has lost all of its original tidal swamp, and most of its mudflats and tidal marsh (99% reduction). Most of the estuary shoreline is bulkheads, riprap, or pilings (Warner and Fritz 1995, Bishop and Morgan 1996) at present. The proposed project would restore a small area of tidal marsh and therefore provide additional off- = t= channel habitat for chinook salmon to use. w Indicator: Refugia 6 0 U0 Not properly functioning. Adequate habitat refugia do not exist in the Duwamish/Green system. o The proposed project would not affect this indicator. w = F- Diagnostic: Channel Condition & Dynamics j w 0. Indicator: Average Wetted Width/Maximum Depth Ratio Not properly functioning. The Duwamish has been so severely altered from its original condition given its urban environment that it is very unlikely to have a natural ratio of this = W indicator. The proposed project will not affect the Duwamish channel condition. z Indicator: Streambank Condition z o Not properly functioning. Most of the estuary shoreline is bulkheads, riprap, or pilings (Warner w and Fritz 1995, Bishop and Morgan 1996) at present. Although this shoreline may be stable, it 8 does not seem to be consistent with the intent of the definitions given in the matrix. Bishop and 0 �- Morgan (1996) indicate intense timber harvest and high road density in the upper watershed, = which is likely to have <80 % in stable banks. The proposed project will not affect streambank H P 0 conditions, except for the natural vegetation that will be planted around the shoreline of the z proposed embayment. v F- Indicator: Floodplain Connectivity I- 0 Not properly functioning. The lower Duwamish has severely reduced hydrologic connectivity according to Bishop and Morgan (1996), mostly as a result of urban development, which has included extensive encroachment, filling, and development in the floodplain, and elimination of nearly all natural estuary areas. The proposed project would provide a slight increase in flood storage as a result of the excavation, and reconnect a small area of floodplain to the River. Diagnostic: Flow /Hydrology Indicator: Change in Peak/Base Flows Not properly functioning. There are reduced mainstem instream flows year round and in the spring due to Corps and City of Tacoma reservoir operation (Bishop and Morgan 1996). The proposed project would have no effect on flows. Indicator: Increase in Drainage Network Not properly functioning. There has been a significant increase in drainage network density due to roads (Bishop and Morgan 1996). This will not be affected by the proposed project. Diagnostic: Watershed Conditions TARS O:\WCIA \71916\GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINAL.DOC\15•AUG•001\ 14 ....; Indicator: Road Density & Location Not properly functioning. There are many valley bottom roads in this urbanized area of the River. The proposed project will not affect road density. Indicator: Disturbance History Not properly functioning. For the entire watershed, there is >15% Equivalent Clearcut Acres w (ECA), and disturbance throughout. The Late Successional Old Growth (LSOG) retention 6 = percentage is unknown. The proposed project will not affect this indicator. v p Indicator: Riparian Conservation Areas w Not properly functioning. The riparian reserve system is severely impacted (Bishop and Morgan w 1996). The proposed project will not affect this indicator. w Indicator: Disturbance Regime Not properly functioning. The urbanization of the lower river system, and private timber harvest = d in the upper system mean that natural processes are unstable. Land use changes and removal of w forest cover in developed areas produce variations in flows characteristic of urban watersheds in Z =. Puget Sound. The proposed project will provide a small benefit to chinook salmon by restoring a - w o ui small amount of estuary. 2 The dichotomous key for making ESA determination of effects (USFWS 1998a) is followed 0 cn, below: ❑ w. • There are proposed/listed species ▪ v tL O • The proposed action would have an effect Cu Z. • The proposed action does not have the potential to hinder attainment of relevant F. _. "functioning appropriately" indicators O ~ • There is a negligible probability of take or destruction/adverse modification of critical habitat • Therefore, it is concluded that this project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect chinook salmon. 8.3 Puget Sound /Strait of Georgia Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) 8.3.1 Life History and Use of The Site The Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU includes Coho from Puget Sound drainages, including the Duwamish/Green River system. Fish from this ESU are considered to be Candidates by the NMFS, meaning that there is concern that if present trends continue, Coho in this ESU are likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future. This is the NMFS position even though current population is near historic levels and the overall trend in abundance is not downward. There is substantial uncertainty about several risk factors, including widespread hatchery production, high harvests, habitat degradation, a recent decline in adult size, and unfavorable ocean conditions (Weitkamp et al. 1995). URS 0: \WCIA \71916\GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINAL.DOC\15•AUG•001\ 15 ' � Most Coho adults in the Puget Sound area return as 3 -year -olds, having spent approximately half of their lives in fresh water and half in salt water. Smolt from the Green River migrate downstream in February through June, with peak numbers occurring between late April and early May. This February —June period would therefore be the time when smolt would be present in the vicinity of Cecil Moses Memorial Park. Most smolt are between 90 to 115 mm in length at the time of outmigration. Smolt do feed on their journey out to sea. Returning adults enter the Green River system in late September through early November. Returning adults would be unlikely to be present for long in the Park vicinity, and also do not tend to feed during their upstream migration. Recoveries of Coho released from hatcheries in the Puget Sound area are almost all either from the Washington and British Columbia Coast. Much of the hatchery stock still raised in Puget Sound was derived from the Green River Coho stock, as is also the case for Chinook salmon. There are naturally spawning Coho in the Green River. Approximately half of these spawning fish are of first- generation hatchery stock (Cropp pers. comm. 1999), which were originally derived from Green River stock. 8.3.2 Determination of Effects Much of the original estuarine habitat that existed along the lower Duwamish River has been filled since European settlement. There may be minor short-term impacts from sediment released from the construction of the proposed estuarine marsh, although these should be minimal if appropriate erosion control methods will be employed (see Appendix 2, Sheet D3). Coho salmon are very unlikely to be adversely affected by the short-term construction impacts of the proposed project. The in -water construction could be scheduled to take place in July and August to avoid the times when coho are likely to be present in the system. Outmigrating smolts would benefit over the long term from the additional habitat that will become available as a result of this project. This habitat could be used by smolt for feeding and adapting to salt water conditions during their outmigration. Therefore we conclude that this project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect coho salmon. 8.4 Bull Trout (Saivelinus confluentus) 8.4.1 Life History and Use of The Site Bull trout (Coastal -Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment) were listed as Threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on November 1, 1999. This proposed listing includes populations in the Coastal -Puget Sound area of northwestern Washington, which would include the Green/Duwamish River system. According to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife [WDFW] (1992, 1996), anadromous, fluvial, lacustrine, and stream resident populations of bull trout are found in drainages extending from the Chehalis River to the Canadian Border. Distinguishing between Bull Trout and Dolly Vanden in the field is difficult, and they are managed as a single native char species by WDFW. Bull trout require very cold, clean water and are currently restricted in range to the upper portions of the tributaries of Puget Sound. They are therefore vulnerable to any activities that cause warming of waters used for spawning and 0: \WCIA \719161GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINAL.DOC \15- AUG•0011 16 rearing. Population declines have been attributed to habitat degradation from land use practices such as logging, grazing, urbanization, industrial development, roads, agricultural diversions, other dams and diversions, competition, and predation by non - native fish (McIntosh et al. 1994, Wissmar et al. 1994). Competition and hybridization with brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and other introduced species threaten some populations. The migratory populations leave tributary streams and move to lakes, rivers, or salt water. Migratory corridors used by bull trout are threatened by flood control structures, dams, and water diversions. Bull trout in the Duwamish system are likely migrants or strays. According to Cropp (pers. comm. 1999), there is no suitable habitat available for spawning and rearing of bull trout in the upper Green River system, and any fish found in the system are likely migrants passing through from other areas. Small bull trout eat terrestrial and aquatic insects. As they grow, bull trout feed on other fish, including whitefish, sculpins, other trout, and salmon eggs,. Bull trout therefore appear to be very uncommon and may occur only as transients in the vicinity of the proposed project. 8.4.2 Determination of Effects Indicators for documented environmental baseline and project effects are evaluated using the criteria in the USFWS' (1998) matrix framework. The summary matrix is provided in Appendix 4. Diagnostic: Subpopulation Characteristics Indicator: Subpopulation Size It is probable that the subpopulation is functioning at unacceptable risk. The proposed project will not affect any of the factors affecting bull trout spawning, rearing, or survival as adults. Since less than a dozen fish identified as bull trout have been reported in the Duwamish/Green River system in the last 50 years, the population size appears to be very small, probably less than 50 adults. In addition, it is questionable as to whether suitable spawning and rearing habitat now exists in the system, and fish in the Duwamish/Green River system may have originated from other streams tributary to Puget Sound. Spawning and rearing habitat, if it exists, would be in the upper, coldest reaches of the system, and will not be affected by the proposed project. The construction of an embayment, which will attract prey for adult bull trout, might provide additional foraging opportunities for any bull trout that are present. Indicator: Growth and Survival Probably functioning at risk or may be functioning at unacceptable risk; this is difficult to assess due to the lack of records of the species. The proposed project is considered to have no adverse effect on growth and survival of bull trout that may be present; the proposed embayment may provide additional foraging habitat for bull trout. The status of the current population of bull trout is unknown but apparently very low. It is questionable as to whether suitable spawning and rearing habitat is either present or accessible to bull trout in the Green/Duwamish system. Since so few bull trout have been recorded in the system, and surveys for the Plum Creek Timber Company HCP found no bull trout, if there is a population present is appears to be very small, and possibly comprised of migrants from other streams draining into Puget Sound. Such a 0: \WCIA \71916 \GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINALDOC \15•AUG•001\ 17 •.:� population would be considered at least unlikely to recover from disturbance in 5 years, and may be undergoing rapid declines; however, there is very little data available. Indicator: Life History Diversity and Isolation This population is probably functioning at risk, and probably comprised of only migratory forms from other watersheds. The proposed project will not affect life history diversity and isolation. Given the questions regarding the presence and quality of spawning and rearing habitat, and the fact that fish from other streams draining into Puget Sound could easily enter the Duwamish/Green River system and remain there; the migratory form is probably the only one present. The correlation between this subpopulation and others is unknown. The proposed project will not have any impacts on this aspect of the species. Indicator: Persistence and Genetic Integrity Probably functioning at risk. The proposed project would not affect this indicator. Fish originating from other stream systems would have access to the Green/Duwamish system; source populations have not been identified, and displacement by competitors is possible. Creation of the proposed embayment would not have an effect, except possibly to enhance potential food supply. Diagnostic: Water Quality Indicator: Temperature Probably functioning at unacceptable risk. High water temperatures in the Green River below RM 30 are cited by Bishop and Morgan (1996). The proposed project will not have a measurable effect on the temperatures of the Duwamish at or in the vicinity of the project site, and therefore is not expected to have an adverse effect on bull trout. Indicator: Sediment Functioning at unacceptable risk. The high density of roads throughout the watershed, and high proportion of private timberlands in the upper basin continue to generate high sediment loads in the Duwamish/Green River system (Bishop and Morgan 1996). The proposed project will be excavated and planted before it is connected to the Duwamish River, and standard erosion control methods will be employed. Minor short-term impacts to water quality from construction could result, although impacts would be minimal because appropriate erosion control methods will be employed (see Appendix 2, Sheet D3). The project may cause slight, temporary increases locally in sediment when the barrier between the River and embayment is removed, but this is not expected to have an adverse effect on bull trout, since they are so rarely encountered in the system. Indicator: Chemical contamination/nutrients Functioning at unacceptable risk. There are probably high levels of contamination originating from industrial sources upstream. There is a CWA 303(d) designated reach adjacent to the project site, and over 30 other reaches elsewhere in the basin, including areas upstream and downstream of the project site according to the Washington Department of Ecology 303(d) list published on the DOE website. The proposed project would not affect this indicator. Diagnostic: Habitat Access URS Indicator: Physical Barriers Functioning at unacceptable risk. The Duwamish/Green River formerly drained 1,642 sq mi. It now drains only 483 sq mi due to human actions. The Tacoma water diversion and Howard Hanson dams block access to approx. 107 miles of historic habitat (Bishop and Morgan 1996). The proposed project will not affect physical barriers. Diagnostic: Habitat Elements Indicator: Substrate Embeddedness in Rearing Areas Functioning at unacceptable risk. The Lower Duwamish likely has a silt substrate that has over 30 percent embeddedness. The proposed project will not affect this characteristic. Indicator: Large Woody Debris Functioning at unacceptable risk. The lower Duwamish has been subject to channelization, rip - rap- hardened banks and loss of riparian vegetation which has caused a lack of LWD. Timber harvest in the upper basin has removed much of the large conifer logs in the riparian zone that would otherwise be recruited into the system. The proposed project will not affect LWD, except that possibly the new embayment may trap some logs during floods, and enhance habitat as a result. Indicator: Pool Frequency and Quality Functioning at unacceptable risk. The Lower Duwamish historically was comprised of rapidly shifting meanders, and is now almost completely within dikes. Pools in lower reaches were eliminated (Bishop and Morgan 1996), and this reach does not meet the values in "functioning appropriately" in the matrix. The proposed project will not have an effect on pool frequency and quality in the Duwamish. Indicator: Large Pools Same as above under Pool Frequency and Quality Indicator: Off - channel Habitat Functioning at unacceptable risk. The Lower Duwamish estuary has lost all of its original tidal swamp, and most of its mudflats and tidal marsh (99% reduction). Most of the estuary shoreline is bulkheads, riprap, or pilings (Warner and Fritz 1995, Bishop and Morgan 1996) at present. The proposed project would restore a small area of tidal marsh and therefore provide additional off - channel habitat for bull trout to use. Indicator: Refugia Functioning at unacceptable risk. Adequate habitat refugia do not exist in the Duwamish/Green system. The proposed project would not affect this indicator. Diagnostic: Channel Condition & Dynamics Indicator: Average Wetted Width/Maximum Depth Ratio Functioning at unacceptable risk. The Duwamish has been so severely altered from its original condition given its urban environment that it is very unlikely to have a natural ratio of this indicator. The proposed project will not affect the Duwamish channel condition. URS O: \WCIA \719161GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT PINALDOC \15•AUG•oo\\ 19 • Indicator: Streambank Condition Functioning at unacceptable risk. Most of the estuary shoreline is bulkheads, riprap, or pilings (Warner and Fritz 1995, Bishop and Morgan 1996) at present. Although this shoreline may be stable, it does not seem to be consistent with the intent of the definitions given in the matrix. Bishop and Morgan (1996) indicate intense timber harvest and high road density in the upper watershed, which is likely to have <80 % in stable banks. The proposed project will not affect streambank conditions, except for the natural vegetation that will be planted around the shoreline of the proposed embayment. Indicator: Floodplain Connectivity Functioning at unacceptable.risk. The lower Duwamish has severely reduced hydrologic connectivity according to Bishop and Morgan (1996), mostly as a result of urban development, which has included extensive encroachment, filling, and development in the floodplain, and elimination of nearly all natural estuary areas. The proposed project would provide a slight increase in flood storage as a result of the excavation, and reconnect a small area of floodplain to the River. Diagnostic: Flow /Hydrology Indicator: Change in Peak/Base Flows Functioning at unacceptable risk. There are reduced mainstem instream flows year round and in the spring due to Corps and City of Tacoma reservoir operation (Bishop and Morgan 1996). The proposed project would have no effect on flows. Indicator: Increase in Drainage Network Functioning at unacceptable risk. There has been a significant increase in drainage network density due to roads (Bishop and Morgan 1996). This will not be affected by the proposed project. Diagnostic: Watershed Conditions Indicator: Road Density & Location Functioning at unacceptable risk. There are many valley bottom roads in this urbanized area of the River. The proposed project will not affect road density. Indicator: Disturbance History Functioning at unacceptable risk. For the entire watershed, there is >15% ECA, and disturbance throughout. The LSOG retention percentage is unknown. The proposed project will not affect this indicator. Indicator: Riparian Conservation Areas Functioning at unacceptable risk. The riparian reserve system is severely impacted (Bishop and Morgan 1996). The proposed project will not affect this indicator. Indicator: Disturbance Regime Functioning at unacceptable risk. The urbanization of the lower river system, and private timber harvest in the upper system mean that natural processes are unstable. Land use changes and URS � removal of forest cover in developed areas produce variations in flows characteristic of urban watersheds in Puget Sound. The proposed project will provide a small benefit to bull trout by restoring a small amount of estuary. Diagnostic: Species and Habitat Z Indicator: Integration of Species and Habitat Conditions. z cc w. Functioning at unacceptable risk. This is assumed, given the degraded nature of the lower D Duwamish. There is so little information available on bull trout in the system that this condition 0 0 is assumed by default. , (0 o co w The dichotomous key for making ESA determination of effects (USFWS 1998a) is followed F- N V_ below: w 0 • There are proposed/listed species • The proposed action would have an effect D (.2a • The proposed action does not have the potential to hinder attainment of relevant t-= "functioning appropriately" indicators z F- 1- 0 • There is a negligible probability of take or destruction/adverse modification of critical LU habitat U • Therefore, it is concluded that this project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect o �. bull trout. w w tL o 8.5 Plants ui co The Natural Heritage Database had no records of listed plants within a 5 -mile radius of the P: ~' proposed project site. Two Federally - listed species have been recorded in King County: swamp sandwort (Arenaria paludicola, Endangered), and golden paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta, Threatened). Both species are known only from historic records and have not been observed in King County in recent times. The habitat for swamp sandwort is described by Hitchcock and Cronquist (1973) as swampy places, mostly along the coast, from the Tacoma "prairies" south to California. There is no such habitat present in the Park. The habitat for golden paintbrush is described by Meinke (undated) as gravelly prairies at low elevations, generally where damp in the winter but not with standing water. There is also no such habitat present in the Park. The possibility that either of these two plant species occur at the Park is extremely small, given its disturbed condition and history of use. We therefore conclude that this project would have no effect on listed plants. 9.0 CONSERVATION MEASURES The project will be designed to meet water and air quality standards established by the local, state, and federal permitting agencies. Some of the required permits include the federal U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) Section 404 permit and Department of Ecology Section 401 Water Quality Certification, Shorelines, and Hydraulic Approvals, as well as other City of Tukwila permits. Appendix 5 includes an Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program. URS 0: \WCIA\71916\GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINALDOC\15•AUG•00\\ 21 � 10.0 ' EFERENCES Bishop, S. and Morgan, A. 1996. Critical Habitat Issues by Basin for Natural Chinook Stocks in the Coa tal and Puget Sound areas of Washington State. Brett, J. . 1052. Temperature tolerance in young Pacific salmon, genus Oncorhynchus. Can. J. Fish • quat. Sci. 9:265 -323. Cropp, homas, Fishery Biologist, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Personal Commu ication. Telephone conversation with Lynn Sharp December 1, 1999. Garrett, .G., J.W. Watson, and R.G. Anthony. 1993. Bald eagle home range and habitat use in the Colu bia River estuary. Journal of Wild. Mgmt. Vol.57(1):1993. 8 pp. 2 figures, 4 tables. Griffin, .R., T.S. Baskett, and R.D. Sparrowe. 1982 Ecology of bald eagles wintering near a waterfo 1 concentration. US Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report- Wildlife No. 247. Washington, D.C. 12 pp. Healey, .C. 1980. Utilization of the Nanaimo River estuary by juvenile chinook salmon, Oncorhy chus rshawytscha. Fish. Bull. (U.S.) 88:653 -668. Hitchco , C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest, An Illustrated Manual. Univ. of ashington Press, Seattle. 730 p. Isaacs, .B. and R.G. Anthony. 1992. Bald eagle nest locations and history of use in Oregon 1971 thr ugh 1992. Oreg. Coop. Res. Unit, Oregon State University, Corvallis. 14 pp. 5 tables, 1 figure. Levy, D. . and T.G. Northcote 1981. The distribution and abundance of juvenile salmon in marsh ha itats of the Fraser River estuary. Westwater Res. Cont. Univ. Br. Col. Tech. Rep. 25: 17. Levy, D.A. and T.G. Northcote 1982. Juvenile salmon residency in marsh habitats of the Fraser River est>'lary. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 39:270 -276. McIntosh, B.A., J.R. Sedel, J.E. Smith, R.C. Wissmar, S.E. Clarke, G.H. Reeves, and L.A. Brown. 1994. Historic changes in fish habitat for select river basins of eastern Oregon and Washingtoon. Northwest Science, Vol. 68, No. special, p. 36 -53. Meinke, }2.J. undated. Threatened and Endangered Vascular Plants of Oregon: An Illustrated Guide. 3 2 p. Myers, J. ., R.G. Kope, G.J. Bryant, D. Teel, L.J. Lierheimer, T.C. Wainwright, W.S. Grant, F.W. W nitz, K. Neely, S.T. Lindley, and R.S. Waples. 1998. Status Review of Chinook Salmon f om Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and California. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service. 443 p. Nagri, Stephen, Eagle Biologist, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Personal Communication. Telephone conversation with Lynn Sharp on December 6, 1999. National Marine Fisheries Service. 1998. A Framework to Assist in Making Endangered Species Act Dete 'nations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Bull Trout Subpopulation Watershe Scale. NMFS, Olympia, WA.. URNS O, \WCIA \71916\GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINAL.DOC\15•AUG -001\ 22 �,^ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998a. A Framework to Assist in Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Bull Trout Subpopulation Watershed Scale. 45 p. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998b. Bull Trout Interim Conservation Guidance. U.S. Fish Z and Wildlife Service, Lacey, Washington. 37 p. z U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999. USFWS Region 1 web site information c (www.rl.fws.gov) on the bull trout. Warner, E.J. and Fritz, R.L. 1995. The Distribution and Growth of Green River Chinook co o Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and Chum Salmon (0. keta) Outmigrants in the Duwamish J UJ Estuary as a Function of Water Quality and Substrate. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries cn u. Report. Auburn, WA. w o 2 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1992. Draft bull trout/Dolly Varden management g and recovery plan. WDFW, Olympia, WA. 125 p. d Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1996. Draft Washington state salmonid stock _ inventory: Bull trout/Dolly Varden. WDFW, Olympia, WA. ? F. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Priority Habitats and Species Program. Database w w information dated 10/21/99 on the Cecil Moses Memorial Park vicinity. n o Washington Department of Fisheries. 1975. A catalog of Washington streams and salmon o utilization, Volume 1, Puget Sound Region. Washington Department of Fisheries. w w Washington Department of Fisheries, Washington Department of Wildlife, and Western 1- LI o'. Washington Treaty Tribes. 1993. 1992 Washington State Salmon and Steelhead Stock Inventory. WDF, Olympia, WA. i I Washington Department of Natural Resources, Washington Natural Heritage Information System I- information dated October 22, 1999 on the Cecil Moses Memorial Park vicinity. Wissmar, R.C. 1994. A history of resource use and disturbance in riverine basins of eastern Oregon and Washington (early 1800s- 1900s). Northwest Science, Vol. 68, No. special, p 1 -35. Weitkamp, L.A., T.C. Wainwright, G.J. Bryant, G.B. Milner, D.J. Teel, R.G. Kope, and R.S. Waples. 1995. Status Review of Coho Salmon from Washington, Oregon, and California. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS - NWFSC -24. 0: \WCIA\719161GREEN RIVER TRAIL RPT FINALDOC\15•AUG•001\ 23 . .,...... »,.....„,,.....,....... Appendix 1 (Letters to NMFS, USFWS; Letter from USFWS) URS Greiner Woodward Clyde A Division of URS Corporation September 8, 1999 5300071916.06 Bobbi Barrera U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 510 Desmond Drive, S.E., Suite 102 Olympia, WA 98503 -1263 Subject: Information Request Dear Ms. Barrera: 111 SW Columbia, Suite 900 Portland, OR 97201.4014 Tel: 503.222.7200 Fax: 503.222.4292 Offices Worldwide We will be preparing a biological assessment that addresses endangered and threatened species in the vicinity of North Wind Weir Park. The project is located within township 23N, range 4E, and section 4. Copies of the vicinity map and site plans are enclosed. This project will involve federal permitting. Please send us information on listed and proposed listed species that may be present in the project area. Sincerely, URS GREINER WOODWARD CLYDE Kate Wolfe %TOR IPSHAREDWroJ99W. Wind WeiArtquestltr.doc 09 418.99 z Ce uJ 00 tnw. UJ F— w 0 2 g• a = a. �w z� 1— o z�- UJ D U� O 1--.: = w' U: —0 uiz. o !A, h =' O I—, URS Greiner Woodward Clyde . A Division of URS Corporation September 8, 1999 5300071916.06 Donna Darm Assistant Regional Administrator of the Protected Resources National Marine Fisheries Service 7600 Sand Point Way, N.E. Seattle, WA 98115 -0070 Subject: Information Request Dear Ms. Darm: 111 SW Columbia, Suite 900 Portland, OR 97201 -4014 Tel: 503.222.7200 Fax: 503.222.4292 Offices Worldwide We will be preparing a biological assessment that addresses endangered and threatened species in the . vicinity of North Wind Weir Park. The project is located within township 23N, range 4E, and section 4. Copies of the vicinity map and site plans are enclosed.. Please send us information on listed and proposed listed species that may be present in the project area. Sincerely, URS GREINER WOODWARD CLYDE Xdzif Kate Wolfe 11 PORIlSHARED\Proj99 N. Wind WelAequestkr.doc 09.08.99 • ~ w` CL 2 U: U O' ■ U) o: w W t-- w o: ga w' z z�.: �o z I- LI, al U � O (22: 01-- -' W _. t— ui Z U N F 0 OCT 0 7 1999 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE North Pacific Coast Ecoregion Western Washington Office 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102 Lacey, Washington 98503 Phone: (360) 753 -9440 Fax: (360) 753 -9518 Dear Species List Requester: You have requested a list of listed and proposed threatened and endangered species, candidate species, and species of concern (Attachment A) that may be present within the area ofyourproposed project. This response fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We have also enclosed a copy of the requirements for Federal agency compliance under the Act (Attachment B). Should the Federal agency determine that a listed species is likely to be affected (adversely or beneficially) by the project, you should request section 7 consultation through this office. If the Federal agency determines that the proposed action is "not likely to adversely affect" a listed species, you should request Service concurrence with that determination through the informal consultation process. Even if there is a "no effect" situation, we would appreciate receiving a copy for our information. Both listed and proposed species may occur in the vicinity of the project. Therefore, pursuant to the regulations implementing the Act, impacts to both listed and proposed species must be considered by the Federal agency in a Biological Assessment (BA) (Attachment B for more information on preparing BAs). Formal conference with the Service is required by the Act if the federal agency determines that the proposed action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a proposed species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. The results of the BA will determine if conferencing is required. If the species is ultimately listed, your agency may be required to reinitiate consultation. Species of concern are those species whose conservation standing is of concern to the Service, but for which further status information is still needed. Conservation measures for species of concern are voluntary, but recommended. Protection provided to these species now may preclude possible listing in the future. There may be other Federally listed species that may occur in the vicinity of your project which are under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Please contact NMFS at (360) 753 -9530 to request a species list. In addition, please be advised that Federal and state regulations may require permits in areas where wetlands are identified. You should contact the Seattle District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ... ATTACHMENT A September 27,1999 LISTED AND PROPOSED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES, CANDIDATE SPECIES AND SPECIES OF CONCERN WHICH MAY OCCUR WITHIN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPOSED NORTH WIND WEIR PARK PROJECT IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (T23N RO4E SO4) FWS REF: 1- 3 -99 -SP -1371 LISTED Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) - Wintering bald eagles may occur in the vicinity of the project. Wintering activities occur from October 31 through March 31. Major concerns that should be addressed in your biological assessment of the project impacts to listed species are: 1. Level of use of the project area by listed species. 2. Effect of the project on listed species' primary food stocks, prey species, and foraging areas in all areas influenced by the project. 3. Impacts from project construction (i.e., habitat loss, increased noise levels, increased human activity) which may result in disturbance to listed species and/or their avoidance of the project area. PROPOSED Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) - Coastal/Puget Sound population occur in the vicinity of the project. CANDIDATE None. ,} ATTACHMENT B FEDERAL AGENCIES' RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER SECTIONS 7(a) AND 7(c) OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OF 1973, AS AMENDED SECTION 7(a) - Consultation/Conference z Requires: 1. Federal agencies to utilize their authorities to carry out programs to conserve F- w endangered and threatened species; ce g JU 2. Consultation with FWS when a federal action may affect a listed endangered or U o threatened species to ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by a = federal agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or —' result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. The process is w 0 initiated by the federal agency after it has determined if its action may affect (adversely 2 or beneficially) a listed species; and u • a 3. Conference with FWS when a federal action is likely to jeopardize the continued _ existence of a proposed species or result in destruction or an adverse modification of ? proposed critical habitat. Z o w SECTION 7(c) - Biological Assessment for Construction Projects * O -• (12 o ff Requires federal agencies or their designees to prepare a Biological Assessment (BA) for construction w • w projects only. The purpose of the BA is to identify any proposed and/or listed species which is /are likely to be affected by a construction project. The process is initiated by a federal agency in requesting a list of o proposed and listed threatened and endangered species (list attached). The BA should be completed within v uzi 180 days after its initiation (or within such a time period as is mutually agreeable). If the BA is not initiated o within 90 days of receipt of the species list, please verify the accuracy of the list with the Service. No z irreversible commitment of resources is to be made during the BA process which would result in violation of the requirements under Section 7(a) of the Act. Planning, design, and administrative actions may be taken; however, no construction may begin. To complete the BA, your agency or its designee should: (1) conduct an onsite inspection of the area to be affected by the proposal, which may include a detailed survey of the area to determine if the species is present and whether suitable habitat exists for either expanding the existing population or potential reintroduction of the species; (2) review literature and scientific data to determine species distribution, habitat needs, and other biological requirements; (3) interview experts including those within the FWS, National Marine Fisheries Service, state conservation department, universities, and others who may have data not yet published in scientific literature; (4) review and analyze the effects of the proposal on the species in terms of individuals and populations, including consideration of cumulative effects of the proposal on the species and its habitat; (5) analyze alternative actions that may provide conservation measures; and (6) prepare a report documenting the results, including a discussion of study methods used, any problems encountered, and other relevant information. Upon completion, the report should be forwarded to our Endangered Species Division, 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102, Lacey, WA 98503 -1273. * "Construction project" means any major federal action which significantly affects the quality of the human environment (requiring an EIS), designed primarily to result in the building or erection of human- made structures such as dams, buildings, roads, pipelines, channels, and the like. This includes federal action such as permits, grants, licenses, or other forms of federal authorization or approval which may result j SEATAC VICINITY MAP TUKWILA N NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 0 r m N NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 1 _ I Leans erotec rocs privrQf [OW [MOW/GMT RS MOWRY/ FM POILAKT COMPOMTIN. OMPFTE. OZWOUTICH 1051LOWL ON sflwirf I�tTM.I.STERTIM ALMA MAWR, OP TX Cr SW MOW YO% Trr ..;.__..t....___,.. ::- i ,..., ,...........„-__.......„-\\, \\ i .---"r \II \„.. • , ..... ........ •11 II ,‘ .\, ii --- • \ . , 1 , 1) 711 ,c, . 1 ii .I if I I (( k- . ,... i • . ....../ I 1 / // // 1 \ „....----- --3.-- —" — ,---1-___=... .... 1 v,-111 • I li f . k \\\\>,..--. -----....---;...,..../....."/ ... .-..,--. .-.... --___-.........„ ,.. ....- \....--.._ --__--:-------,--'' /)• ,--.7"*---<-- -2-- - - --- \._.......-'i • ,...;.?"---. ..7 i • - ( • viosioN1 ouvimasH RTP Mit POTS Tool INTLI EOPO v a ca. . ... OOPTPOO er10121 !CMS TM. • :••••• • I •-• • •'•:•" 1A1t X MI.. PAP f . ; . • --i.•,' •17...*1.}...7..-•.1. ri.y.r-•1'');:t3:1'41. T • ; . • ; 1 • . • • - — • Vt."-- • •- . At s-7-j t.::_r•_t .4- .•"_ - ... . ..... :41. -, - -7.;-,-.::: . ........ .. .4- ... .... : ! • .`;V:11":" "7.1 ..: .14.-:.7. ••• " ....,: ..............,....i.:,..1,t..v.v .:,..,x.,......07f. r::.;.,,......„...,..f.i....!?......•...::.,:,7,$:-..t.: • ' vas 5°‘11'' paoasnimireit-eztE wawa TO SOUTH 112TH STREET Rie414, • • • ••••••..... - comma &tom 443. • • - 1 • • • - • ' " • i ' • 1 .1 1101t L TSB PROTECT IS OUT OF 11* PIAADATION MIT OF TM GREEN RIVER 2. PROJECT IS LOCATED MO MOS 11117EASI OF THE 14711 MOOT REA04 AM MT TAM ursnium OF ILP L 3. MOW MO MITPLI OR PROPOSED LEM ON TIM REACH Of THE 11M31.1murontI0t.M10 cA3234PONT OF MEI • Sframl. a M. HAMM MICE AS FROMM SY CONTRACTOR NO APPROVED BY OTTRIM COIVON11311 PER TIM %CUM 1300 CT; 2:211111T 2 WM. L CUT 111171MAL CONIMITION PER SOTS MAORI; %CUM MO CY; EXTENT 11=. MAMA/ SITE AS ARMED 01111191/1143 CITY OF SEE SHEET 1PERNIT sterrr root STORII COMM ADO MORON CONTYCL OEMS. T. SEE 1MET 1131SIT sear poot COMM! IRMO ONAMIE AID UTIUM !LOA L MIT HAMM. MY SOU!), MD 27121 NIL SOUTH ARE TIC ONLY STREET SMOU10003 MS PROPERTY. SC41, 1' • X/ 1 1 f 1 zr, r .0. VONA SMITS.APA .N.or [[..C.4 5.11 moes. OP4/44 TWIT CLIENT AGENCY: MG COUNTY DEPARMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES ORNIONO al VO aLcm. on MI MG COUNTY FACILMES MANAGEMENT DIVISION -PARKS CM 231 CKIALrotamloM at% 'OMAR CM MONO 2110110 11 MacLeod Reckord woos Achim CECft. MOSES.MEMORIAL PARK 1••.• 1Jr JD ME PLAN lT 4 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. ' II 1Oaplw ,h ttP Arms DOM. MS PROJECT IS OUT Cf THE NANOATION UNIT OF 11E GREEN IDYFA. PRO.LCT IS LOCATED 1500 TAROS UPSIREAN Cs. TN[ 14TN AVE BODGE REACH AND 200 TAROS UPS -MEAN Cf SUP 6. TICK IS NO COSTNO d1 PROPOSED LEVEE 01 DR REA01 OF THE RMT . THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH-PORIT OF LEVEE IS SHOW. • ¢J Sena. SHOWN roe MOAT AGENCY IROI01ATR71 COLT AND NOT FOR » 0 20 a NSTRUCTION. REFER TO AGENCY ISSUED L -^ PEROTS FOR PRO,ECT CONSTRICTION CON01110151r 1a1[ 10 rtt1 ZEB o•lt Kr-1 Per -10 11 1 1-1➢•4C .NV-.L•1t .tr-• alr-•mt Rtv-001R 110-aft GUENT AGENCY: KIM COUNTY HTURAL F� OlcS CULTURAL AND I101 S.IIN 10010 %AAl1tJoollour *216 • KING COUNTY FACLRE9 AIANAcE.EM ONISIOt4FPAFKS CP 320 lrno Counts. Ab...Istratlan Ruling S.310.. 0O+n:,9lon 96104 10*011e.. (206) 296-0645 re. (206) 296-0166 `MMOFFAT7&N1CHOL C N O I N C C R= MacLeod Reckord lmbc*0 1/4NIwts Gw ... 01R110o .0.110 If IQ. 11 0.0 • 7. -400 ,ao-•. noon •on .C.0 » o•nr • LEGEND J 1••n 1v .n•ro. l.Nu• Illllllllll ..11u.n ® 010w• 9ALL1 • CrlI•.0 •w l,C• •.• r•trnm w.1n. .. .LOCATIONS *00 •• 11000 •t. IS .11f tat 1112" 2.10 2,00 2a01 11Ar 11.0' ».7 2120 ».r 2C•2 Y•r !Y m rA .0. 0' 11,. 2.00 1.00 2000 2lr .1.0 1147 ,.10 ,tl0 10 ,121 •a•r O11' 2197 132 r 210 r ,102' 2»0 1,1 if 111 r N,r A•• 2120 11.0 ,221' opts. ,t.• CECIL MOSES MEMORIAL PARK MGM, OA. 00 MM. 1 .C1 fl rAaa INTERTIDAL7*06TSUBIRTESTTAL UARY LAYOUT AND GRADING PLAN Cy mbar SHEET 2 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME 1S LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. NCR.a.N w.5L0N.2. M.G.V 0. 29 •Ls1S1O. v CIN 15 10 0 -5 0U11A1M5N T.---- RTTER / V 10114 11.7- e.ce•ot.mphrory berm mhl basin T• El. 5.2, tiers is completed / 10 1 / II- vu~ 3.3 15 10 v Et0!.w . <. 0 -5 15 10 5 aR RM-tau[ 11n-2M1C w••20SM no-so.1c 111•-.0A1[ UURI105N MYER v. NNNw i1:32 Pow L _-_ _.. gE;. 1.6 12' Layer in Cnonnd at Sand end Cram, <' Lore, send and Cram, 12' Ouarry Bbn1e1 12' Tap sal DEVELOPED SECTION A -A KR 1' . 5' IWR.: 1' . 20' E.;at6.9 Crade -8.9 1- - ynest rbe 10 1 Root . wed Wry_fl..•.1! . Pew 1 1,0 Etisting Grade • i i ---- •'Jle. Cott+gs 12' Top SW 2.00 UA[ 25wsU&o .4. Winos Oworry 12' la>s. fine Sala Q f e Sond •/ <IO[ agorwc 12- Ler.• Imp.n oos 2.3 12' Top sot nine 5 Is & nine 50.0 ./ <100 o.9on* 12' Corer .m0enoos Sae Grade DEVELOPED SECTION B-B KR.: 1' - 5' NOR.: 1' • 20' f E•isting kspnol Tree 1 20 12' Layer 2 1/2' minas crushed rock 6' Gem, path Eon.., n 52 DEVELOPED SECTION C-C KR.: 1' • 5' NOR_ 1' . 10' CIICNT AGENCY: KING COUNTY DEPARTMENTREE0F(PJR%CLL'fl AL AMJ NATURAL NW 11210100• 601 TO MAC vu111, 10 4.104 vONw n. < < KING COUNTY FACU1E9 MANAC6,B(T EASON-PARS CP 320 •.,q L.nIT AJn1,I0.*IMn 11u1.d.,q S.wtle, w0MN91m 96104 Tsl.phm. (206) 296-0646 ram (206) 296-0166 914PACT NARO NS SEE RIMS hA MOFFATT&N1CHOL [ N O l N[[ R f casre,cro, 900m00 1. coma .•6ZO A.cwc6mST .> SOTS..._ 12p. l 11.1 WOK ANT 9.0. C.1E1R 4r SI 1*41 00 ui.ala WI �S . %IN M CO.S1sl.:101[ .0. m03 .0O[If 4104 1 .1914*t u 140.4001O COMMA 1.c u0.0 mature YlL 030111,010. T1.1A.K2. .. 043 . LM IIO Rlq.( 1030k no 0110Y104 R/w S1C<••a1 lOwSat S *DA11 A Rw mow( 1.01 w.1L• 41w101 .1 1.t won. 01 IK Do*, All SIOnOn •_. SNtl1 CT. CSCw.1C TM., 10 SU6f1.0C .. MA% 01M.. 1e4119. >. 1C1..1 SIOKS .1u RAQ 10050. RYn w10.S 1w .n:.05(10 80n5 1 RK[ .K••1008 SOSS. • .tltl r.[ SCR a 1.< 5.110 n11• / < 1a. o.V.0 Sots 10. RM R/011Sin[ `0.02 nY.SS .S KS0NC[ •1w Awn Chral� IT. RAW SLOM WSS 11_ .0. KC a• S2 w •1. ul. -ll W. _. TG 100•r. 11000 •Cw "» prw ..ow M0.1u1q. tuff 7r +Cm '2• U1•M 1.dim O.rw . 145 . S0 Kw'21 T.... SECTION D-D NOR: 1- • 20' SECTION E-E NOT TO SCALE URBAN FNVIRONMENT OTT Or Rn1wa,. S9OREUNE UAN.GEIIENT EN4RON9EN1S r4OURE 16-1 MacLeod Reckord 1101400. MSMt0I. OLI CECIL MOSES MEMORIAL PARK MUM, .10o. Al 01N .01 se} .uN - AS .arm ` a1/21� 0413.1. Ta x• Win POW SUBIRRAL INTERTIDAL ESTUARY SECTION AND DETAILS '!.1r' C2 WOW. SWEET 3 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. .i..�•1i•Tbir.Z.0=• ••S ran* Noe IMO. Aikmg N 11111 1111111 MM • MINI . anal u`MP. •..0 ELEVATION OFLIER FABRIC FENCE Mg 7 MM. b. CLDw 71.0. 91114001 MMTYLm 1' A.O.[ 04 94L MI 0.11141101 IT fO 1'OIM10 9A11! ELM TIMBER CHECK DAM T11/ QUARRY SMALL MAT R+ e 1,14 CYa w n.. sop ou wi Mr MI NOR Moe ar RR. Not or oRN OA RR OM MIMI MM. NO be 00112• MST NM= II LW/ FILTER FABRIC PROTECTION TOIL i NM•OCT perms Tr i lMMbar. r0� IV ilINCNIt. Too.. . 1l.MIMS NO p. CATCH BASIN INSERT GENERAL NOTES: %Oacji 1a.A•-T•. acme. iY iI._.0.•1• g1Er1r••.aMEpa+uA�••1 •pc.•tea:. 4 OINTERIM CB PROTECTION rW 101010. OSIOF77RAflON SWALE TYP.CROSS SECTION 111w1902 tA2TO w..wla••..101.•. .M..r..Mani Mmabs✓•1 naxl 112aal111Y.•.M...rl•M•..•.••p pe.s0...• ••. r M •.•...a.4 •s M ••9 •••••• .r 1•••.•1. a 1.1•P+w • ONr w Wi.. rAM reaftmolk NM 3wMe •�•...i am.0 m 7717.w..ourw POUARArrr. .w...a1.M.11..•..161 ...w.w.ONarwr.w o•w••• tw•prw•.•••••..ONrs la.rw.w.ae•.riMe•r.9•aw..••.11wrrrs.. O.ta ..e••1•.r1•r•r.••••.per•r•r.ms• r19NNS M..1e• 1400111rr manor•.• 1r• ON = oe.0•T21• .ii. PVC COROMIE MORN PRO MOt9ul ARTYO.M 101fLa..TTJOIN.ML.ONA IW O. ,4.u11 Mg I ORE ARYGu CIAY ■ IM pM ifR TON 1r ARMON 12Al2 n KO tr SO tr ARM GT CLAY ■PO. it NOulMO1 0acfl0101t I10A21jI CLAM MI COM.OATLO 1.91 DOOM 10LKTMl.OE PPG MSS YOOn. most -TVIS M. CATOOn • 01 A MIbl 110 OR Mk CARS CIG MTN 6T2.1 NO WALL MET M MOr.t Cl. ALLOSVM4222121M 0401.N.EPMATIRATWQTLALIOr INML IMV1 CIAV ■ 1•9 MOMS . OKVAMIIO RTZL C•r RLL NIMEMOIt3Ort20MN10 IMAMS I AIANRA. C•.7lMi 1SET TE 1E01•E•Oa! 0 41900 r 1M TYPE l C•.1r1 M1111 1 4100,111 wo NO 016 IMO40 taNdISrn maximal sea IMSECISZIII Gaa C�9ET VtT192T wOM 11 IT 12 • r le ION ION 1r tr tr x 12 ]r x 12 .r MOT. TTPE OI MA121 W L2 OYO f 1ML Y A/ 10CATIO ON TIE 00011131C393Y OOOAEWT2 O lOMOM•mRORA/0. COOS; YOTT. 1•.......__ drr h. .��11- w_ 1••wswds,`d dw.e.•..riAi.•M.cl peeps.. mow. • Trr••.rrr•M•ONI••. r••.•M ONION ON.•rMr•1.•M d •M•.3 oono w n. .lr•••zON '�•.. •' per .w to e•maw regr.m. maws*.ON.:../.•epe-ed.01 . TM 12C m.•es a.••• ...Tombs peen e... 12C adrp r. r .tr..• a. .ae.r..•a..s.. d 13..4.8 I.+r. s+.•n•..s- Tr[.Cbd•nMO acedle oft Ic mu.m•.sd•..aT• �.21.1..p.woo 1..6ofMoo•• 7 r... Mw.••+..a..ream e....•••••••a.•.•.••.•e.• . 1.••d.11.A wON.•a•., m•M.• e. MINN. C. MowIm.n • TONcur•.•.•a.•r...rr.•...•.1+.a•.•.•...•r.e. va A41m. •e.e.•• 1*.ope•m.m. Csaw•.•1 M r roam. NI No papa •••II•a1••d 12 w•gi1.1.010.....p•.....r11. •.nlm..r•rw•..w•s•...•. n1ON••.rrap.M ON NTT rww.•w••••••M ..a...• • 12 •M••pe•• e_rraw.wt+ ea..r.uW ...••.•ey..Nv_..•n..r.raa Ac• .-- Ina to* Am p. a.1 T1 =��.v r'mdlpmtaMN ay.l.wdr••••d.••••••• R1f11 SM.O.11:1d0111 1. kmr•.s.wr•..ar.•....•.rr.rpes•.rww.... 1•.Lrw•..••r..a•.•s..r•••••.r•.•.•••r••rs•r z Tr1M•ss... •••rirr••••ONw.�•••wpe�TMp..c• sn••a•.1.....�..,r 2 arras•sV11..arrr.411•99•..r.••ws•••. ON r r.srr.•e d s.sr.•.pe•r•••iN.•I3.r•..•. sAMmlr+.d.rr..wel.wb•.•w-_rwr w. I•.4.•na ommil wa.•..P.. pe•yr r•..• 1 TNT •pei.s...e• NTMO w Is Nosant3. . aIPm1.1 sl.•c•i.SO tM..r•.aNon•.e_..m.ed a••p*co.Ira••�rrper. rr . rswra r mom o•r•.•.. Wm top ••T ..•A. MINN NO a..w Pm NMI 1.•..01sr••. • Pima.cay.•rr.wM.^•a.r,rr..a.•r•••mummy r..• r` OFLOATABLE MATERIAL SEPARATOR - 1r PPE L. PLAN RP RAP OUTFALL —COUNTY KING COUNTY ® FACLRIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION -PAWS CIP sI1o�••�.pOrRr�y,A•.21•YY �. • ��� k % r Cy,,,I,,..,,,.,I I crioU I:211':T2:Mf•.t. �.. CECIL MOSES MEMORIAL PARK 'eA'MM• DEPARTMENT OF _ 1Yo.Y A..o.,Y 9.e..1.1Y„1 — PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES ....... /�� llsl AND `� �A1••••7•• TA �""• �M'/�M IM Ism. .STORM 'Iron All — EROSION D3 AMON NON NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. CREAM. MOTES t. Mfl. AIM M.YIsm..gS71 31 • Tbr0N.bw✓ti1._pwwY.Yw.Mw,rmO\r03.3.6 Y.r pn•hM 111. ILLo s _raise wr •3a m.wreb.mm.d.. 3 .m.rrIs.l•. sae.... p. Isom m+.mam.rrwsm mr1d. M i br4 ewier.v.se.i w. ee...aw.m. ✓pa.1 a. Yoe w mens....mm. a.r.l.malrdeln.m..•r•• rm.mo,•11• r.aw .1M..Ma..w•G..m14.m.►w 1.a./r.ralpe0pwwrw.npr.+ew..dw.ds.. wpep.a a Ca.mrrane.o air __ .m Ol did.. Or. ). ..r . w..11Isw.m.m. w.we..Y .air •1am•s......w • I mmm.air.peaimrpm.r•err.w... IMMTr.Y in Mantled SSl a•......m. gown. / ew.s2rY2CJ.2rogue rmm.r..oa AL Mldl awn. air Ybeam r ew.eal.Mamq. 17 Y •...^.I Y... Ong Y Vera wrlm Y. I. tl2 ire./. 1610133 21a1 0e..nwrwprgrsl.e3.3.urriw..ae.3•,..30.•013, TM..• ww.M an nose ..wM /.a 12 DrCe.me wai Y..wrY b..Y4.4.r mq.l.4l r.bL IMIAIMwearrw.e.IAMIII .Is..w....e.rvree.a MIX .lw.er. ..2 .131.r.w.•,S d Iwer.rn...w moor me b.r.a.e.l..wagw tomb r. rb.kr.mt Mmme rose 94200T a.r.a 1we.•••e 1A22. 1.e.Goat. .w.r/. IRSTORATIOM MOTES I. SEED Ui. 03TUROID Ann MOT Ot3101IATED FOR 0214E11 .IROVpI[/1.f. 2. 1RSTOIR AL ARM USED FOR mow AM] MX.SSS TO EA/Y 111E As K01101ED FOR SEEDED Mew. SURVEY MOTES LIMMAL Mb MAT XL UM Mime . w v.m• xirri+ 1 IA Am M. Tin S NM WMMM WI O. X.LW• 1 JAL m.Ami IM• ILL•M Cr • RIM W MAW LAWS a. MAW Manx WM MA WPM. IMMOM ....mine m MSS vwMr r MAX w ave. • DECLARATION: • MILMIMAM 6.��eYI MB iomLINSO I ram. KANT LEDEMO TMts. . . : 0 IMAMS 0— 0- - 0- RRTIM31I TO.e2WA1 I.0121.11[T®o tom nil b+ 4 Arai MI 2 i 9 oo�r....a.• Y 22 r ram. : - . Arai ••• 2 2 Oarm.lr • Aral • • • 2 Yob. Intel Dwalai woo 11 Arai • • • 2 Dlmres LAMM TOM 11m•_er i•11. . rJ W i 2 1 h r SAX . 2 2 11*=11 w Co.r rf W 2 2 1 MULL t,.ewIlea ....u..r a red 1.►...& 2 2 2 .4 V.1wr .w.rr.r.etw L.A.) • air W 2 2 C ••••./ 4 air 41 2 2 2 IN.. Orm•mil air W : IVm.wmib. 1. QTY a0 .I..Mw I<C•14. M1.. Ind Comm/..+ +Dons M 1r.1r. a 2 2 19 2r.lr, MI..a M1w.1,dY� .+y. 2 2 2 O.•r. 1I !.b., YI..A 2 2 ow* Lair. 1I IrJrw MY mom 19•1•4.1..Y..I 2 2 2 Wea 21Yir. W.me a� 2 2 .moo 0....../ MI 1r:. y3... 2 2 1W•••11 4 1r.r. 41.a 2 2 1 Irl sr...rr 21 It 11-:1r m:. SU era Mlle limn 2 2 o..1a... wrr 2 2 2 Is.— 21 11,1r2 W.a 2 2 ...fin 2r..rv..w A .T1r2 41.a 2 2 C••aIs..l -M ir.1r. W.a V.••••..om/ 1 2 2 1+em1l.e.ww 14 10 141 1..a.+r 2 2 1 1 1.1.f/.air V, / A NI NMI 44 SO RIA p.e+o••••• a*T se Mass 1., . mg amain .01 aOl CM ]M ..T. .34 rose r.. 1 egos .rose••? w1-m 1 =a`... - 2..= 111i1 am.pll.w.m i 2 2 1 i 1 .ioairin pwLr ..q 2 2 : i M••••• tamrma.e ...MO*, r .... 2 2 tNL. •41 (li. fr...I W 1.1s ... a- 2 1 ADD ALTERNATE #1 Of E M 1.ae v A/C.E dID12OCd1a. MRI03Anlrl2a U2Ue1 24Sf4O1 2D Ir as. MAIM. foams.111M. COrtf. 1U9•L OIYNIRY .a4.t/.1ltf s. r LS,CaTURftLAND RESOURCES tR2Lm KIND COUNTY O FFACIESMNAGNTDMSPARKSCIP >i�j a(� - ��� 80 !!t ,V tA•l lJlJ ad ei• C4O�ES ORIALFRK . 1M "` LEGENDS & NOTES K 1 & ram DM Doge a.. ti MI2..0111 t3TePalbc� f M. 1• NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. CUENTAGENCY: MO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES „9nmie.w eseonau 4947112.144 enw 0 KING COUNTY FAC4RIES MANAGEMENT DMSIDN PARKS CIP 320 kw. ena 941/994 canmcen is poi)=ee MacLeod F dodrrAt a wine PLANTING PLAN NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. ,>o-.* f 1 LL ILL ►._-.__. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Gordon's Addition No. 2 as recorded in Volume 36 of Plats, page 42, in King County, Washington, EXCEPT that portion conveyed to the State of Washington for highway p npones: Together with that portion of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarfez of Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.i4 in King County Wuhington, lying westerly of the Duwamish River and easterly of said Plat; Together with the Note S1.74 feet of the following described property: • All thatpo3tion of Government Lot 1, Section 9, Township 23 Noah, Range4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington lying east of the W.V. Beck County Road, Westerly of theDuwamish River and northerly of a line bearing N 69'31 11" Efrom a poiaton (he Eutedymargin of said W.W. Beck County Road which point is 775.3 i fed southeasterly u measured along said Easterly ntargnul line from its intersection with the North boundary line of said Section 9; EXCEPT Oust portion thereof conveyed to the State of Washington for highway purposes. NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. DRAFT CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE CECIL MOSES MEMORIAL PARK 30-May-00 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR Notice to Proceed and Mobilize Stake Limits and Grades for Approval Install Sedimentation Controls Clear, Grub, Remove Topsoil Excavate Behind Berm and Haul . Install Irrigation Place Quarry Spalls - Scarify Slopes, Place Topsoil Plant Slopes Above OHW Place Impervious Soils Place Fine Silts and Sand Remove Temporary Berm Form Channel, Place Sand & Gravel - Plant Sedge Below OHW - Open Channel to River (low tide) * WORK IN WATER (low tide) * CONSTRUCTION WINDOW DATE OF HIGHEST TIDE 24 15 14 12 9 10 DATE OF LOWEST TIDE 18 15 12 9 7 7 - SCHEDULE REVIEW & APPROVAL x x x x r NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. . 4 a 1 AD si a� y to y O CO 021 O � C y CO co O 6/p ms mg CaI 'O Cifr' CD 153 Re W O 0,11 C C9 O Imes O CU O C apj 6111 © E NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. PATHWAYS: INDICATORS Water Quality: Temperature Sediment Chemical Contamination and Nutrient Loads Habitat Access: Physical Barriers Habitat Elements: Substrate Large Woody Debris TABLE 3-1 CHECKLIST FOR DOCUMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTIONS) ON RELEVANT INDICATORS FOR CHINOOK SALMON Properly' Functioning ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE At Risk' Not Properly' Functioning High water temperatures in the Green River below RM 30 are cited by Bishop and Morgan (1996) Restore2 EFFECTS OF THE ACTIONS) g. ro/ High proportion of private timberlands in the upper watershed, and high road densities throughout (Bishop and Morgan 1996) Many 303(d) designated sections in the Duwamish/Green system, including one at project site Duwamish/Green River formerly drained 1,642 sq mi, now only 483 sq mi due to human actions; Tacoma water diversion and Howard Hanson dams block access to approx. 107 mi. of historic habitat (Bishop and Morgan 1996) Lower Duwamish likely has silt substrate Channelization, rip -rap - hardened banks and loss of riparian vegetation causes lack of LWD Maintain3 Water temperatures will not be affected by the proposed project; proposed tree plantings will increase riparian shade Degrade4 Sediment/turbidity will not be affected by the proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Q:\WCIA1719161Gnxn River Trail Appx3.JocJ03/2I/00 f NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. PATHWAYS: INDICATORS Pool Frequency Pool Quality Habitat Elements, continued: Off -channel habitat Refugia Channel Condition and Dynamics Width/Depth Ratio Streambank Conditions Floodplain Connectivity 34 TABLE 3-1 CHECKLIST FOR DOCUMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL. BASELINE AND EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION(S) ON RELEVANT INDICATORS FOR CHINOOK SALMON ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE Properly' Functioning At Risk' Not Properly' Functioning Lower Duwamish historically was rapidly shifting meanders; now almost completely within dikes and pools in lower reaches were eliminated (Bishop and Morgan 1996) See above Lower Duwamish estuary has lost all of original tidal swamp, most of mudflats and tidal marsh — 99% reduction; most of estuary shoreline is bulkheads, riprap, or pilings (Warner and Fritz 1995, Bishop and Morgan 1996) See above; refugia nearly lacking on lower Duwamish Unknown, severely altered from original condition EFFECTS OF THE ACTION(S) Restore2 Additional small area of off -channel habitat will be provided by this project Maintain3 Will not be affected by proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Degrade4 Bishop and Morgan (1996) indicate intense timber harvest and high road density, likely to be <80 % stable banks Will not be affected by proposed project Q:IWCIA1719161Grccn Rivcr Trail Appx3.doc/0321RX1 Severely reduced hydrologic connectivity (Bishop and Morgan 1996) 2 Additional small area of off -channel habitat will be provided by this project NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. PATHWAYS: INDICATORS Flow/Hydrology: Peak/Base Flows Drainage Network Increase Watershed Conditions: Road Density and Location Disturbance History Riparian reserves TABLE 3-1 CHECKLIST FOR DOCUMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION(S) ON RELEVANT INDICATORS FOR CHINOOK SALMON ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE Properly' Functioning At Risk' Not Properly' Functioning Restore2 Reduced mainstem instream flows year round and in spring due to Corps and City of Tacoma reservoir operation (Bishop and Morgan 1996) Significant increase in drainage network density due to roads (Bishop and Morgan 1996) EFFECTS OF THE ACTION(S) Maintain3 Will not be affected by proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Degrade4 >15% ECA (entire watershed), disturbance throughout, LSOG retention percentage unknown Riparian reserve system severely impacted (Bishop and Morgan 1996) Will not be affected by proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Watershed Name: Duwamish/Green Location: Project Location is at approximately RM 6.25 2 3 4 These three categories of function ("Properly functioning", "at risk", and "not properly functioning") are defined for each indicator in the "Matrix of Pathways and Indicators" (Table 1 on p. 10). For the purposes of this checklist, "restore" means to change the function of an "at risk" indicator to "properly functioning", or to change the function of a "not properly functioning" indicator to "at risk" or "properly functioning" (i.e., it does not apply to "properly functioning" indicators). For the purposes of this checklist, "maintain" means that the function of an indicator does not change (i.e., it applies to all indicators regardless of functional level). For the purpose of this checklist, "degrade" means to change the function of an indicator for the worse (i.e., it applies to all indicators regardless of functional level). In some cases, a "not properly functioning" indicator may be further worsened, and this should be noted. Q:IWCIA1719161Grccn RivcrTrail Appx3.doc/0321/I10 3 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. TABLE 3-2 CHECKLIST FOR DOCUMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTIONS) ON RELEVANT NDICATORS FOR BULL TROUT PATHWAYS: ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE > EFFECTS OF THE ACTION(S) INDICATORS Subpopulation Characteristics: Subpopulation Size Growth and Survival Functioning Appropriately' Q:IWCIA\719161Gmcn Rivcr Trail Am)* 4.dac I13/21A0 1:29 PM Functioning At Risk' Probably functioning at risk; lack of records makes it difficult to assess; warm water temperatures render spawning habitat less than optimal; status of population unknown but apparently very low, unlikely to recover from disturbance in 5 years Functioning at Unacceptable Risk' Population size is probably less than 50 adults; less than a dozen fish have been reported in the Duwamish/Green River in the last 50 years; presence of suitable spawning habitat questionable; fish reported may originate from other streams Restore2 Maintain3 Project will not affect subpopulation size Degrade4 Project will not affect life history diversity or isolation NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE. TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 710 PATHWAYS: INDICATORS Life History Diversity and Isolation TABLE 3-2 CHECKLIST FOR DOCUMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION(S) ON RELEVANT NDICATORS FOR BULL TROUT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE :__ EFFECTS OF THE ACTION(S) Functioning Appropriately' Functioning At Risk' Probably functioning at risk, fish reared in other streams could easily enter the Duwamish/ Green River system and remain there; migratory form probably the only one present Functioning at Unacceptable Risk' Restore2 Maintain3 Degrade4 Fish originating from other stream systems would have access to the Green/ Duwamish system; source populations have not been identified, displacement by competitors possible This also possibly the case for bull trout in the Duwamish/Green River system Project will not affect persistence and genetic integrity Water Quality: Temperature High water temperatures in the Green River below RM 30 are cited by Bishop and Morgan (1996) Q:\WCIAV I9IG\Grccn RivcrTrail Appx 4.10c 03/21H10 1:29 PM 2 Water tempera- tures will not be affected by the proposed project; proposed tree plantings will increase riparian shade NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. PATHWAYS: INDICATORS Sediment Chemical Contamination and Nutrient Loads Habitat Access: TABLE 3-2 CHECKLIST FOR DOCUMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION(S) ON RELEVANT INDICATORS FOR BULL TROUT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE :. Functioning Appropriately' Functioning At Risk' Functioning at Unacceptable Risk' High proportion of private timberlands in the upper watershed, and high road densities throughout (Bishop and Morgan 1996) Many 303(d) designated sections in the Duwamish/Green system, including one at project site Restore2 EFFECTS OF THE ACTION(S) Maintain3 Sediment/turbidit y will not be affected by the proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Degrade4 Physical Barriers Habitat Elements: Substrate Duwamish/Green River formerly drained 1,642 sq mi, now only 483 sq mi due to human actions; Tacoma water diversion and Howard Hanson dams block access to approx. 107 mi. of historic habitat (Bishop and Morgan 1996) Will not be affected by proposed project Large Woody Debris Lower Duwamish likely has silt substrate Channelization, rip -rap - hardened banks and Toss of riparian vegetation causes lack of LWD Will not be affected by proposed project Will not be affected by proposed project Q:IWCIA 71916\Grccn Rivcr Trail Appx 4.Jux 03/21/00 1:29 PM 3 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. TABLE 3-2 CHECKLIST FOR DOCUMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION(S) ON RELEVANT INDICATORS FOR BULL TROUT PATHWAYS: ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE IN EFFECTS OF THE ACTION(S) Functioning Functioning At Functioning at INDICATORS Appropriately' Risk' Unacceptable Risk' Restore2 Maintain3 Degrade.' Pool Frequency Lower Duwamish Will not be historically was rapidly shifting meanders; now - affected by proposed project . almost completely within ; dikes and pools in lower reaches were eliminated x" ram•: (Bishop and Morgan 1996) Large Pools ita See above Lower Duwamish estuary has lost all of Additional small area of off -channel original tidal swamp, - habitat will be most of mudflats and tidal marsh — 99% '4 provided by this project reduction; most of �. estuary shoreline is bulkheads, riprap, or pilings (Warner and Fritz s- 1995, Bishop and Off -channel habitat A Morgan 1996) A; Refugia See above; refugia nearly lacking on lower Duwamish _ Will not be affected by proposed project Channel Condition and 1 Unknown, severely Will not be Dynamics Width/Depth Ratio altered from originalP condition affected by proposed project Streambank Conditions Bishop and Morgan ;,: Will not be (1996) indicate intense timber harvest and high 9 road density, likely to be 49- . affected by proposed project , <80 % stable banks Q:\WCIA\719I6\Grccn Rivcr Trail Appx 4.dnc t)3/21A00 1:29 PM 4 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. j TABLE 3-2 CHECKLIST FOR DOCUMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION(S) ON RELEVANT INDICATORS FOR BULL TROUT PATHWAYS: a ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE i-'' EFFECTS OF THE ACTION(S) Maintain 3 Degrade4 INDICATORS I Functioning Appropriately' Functioning At Risk' Functioning at Unacceptable Risk' `r'= Restore2 Floodplain Connectivity ': y ). • , Severely reduced hydrologic connectivity (Bishop and Morgan 1996) ' Additional small area of off -channel . habitat will be S provided by this project Flow/Hydrology: Peak/Base Flows ti l - _ Reduced mainstem instream flows year round and in spring due to Corps and City of Tacoma reservoir operation (Bishop and Morgan 1996) . f . " "- = `? Will not be affected by proposed project Drainage Network 9 Increase s ss Significant increase in drainage network density due to roads (Bishop and Morgan 1996) ��-� Will not be affected by proposed project Q:\WCIM719I MGrccn Rivcr Trail Appx 4.duc 03l21/III11:29 PM NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. TABLE 3-2 CHECKLIST FOR DOCUMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION(S) ON RELEVANT INDICATORS FOR BULL TROUT PATHWAYS: sr ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE - EFFECTS OF THE ACTION(S) INDICATORS 0 Properly' Functioning At Risk' Not Properly' Functioning r7 Restore. Maintain' Degrade' Watershed Conditions: Road Density and Location Disturbance History 40 Many valley bottom roads p, •- •_.. Will not be affected by proposed project I >15% ECA (entire watershed), disturbance throughout, LSOG retention percentage unknown T e Will not be affected by proposed project Riparian reserves , Riparian reserve system severely Y impacted (Bishop and Morgan 1996) . nt Will not be affected by proposed project Watershed Name: Duwamish/Green Location: Project Location is at approximately RM 6.25 2 3 4 These three categories of function ("Properly functioning", "at risk", and "not properly functioning") are defined for each indicator in the "Matrix of Pathways and Indicators" (Table 1 on p. 10). For the purposes of this checklist, "restore" means to change the function of an "at risk" indicator to "properly functioning", or to change the function of a "not properly functioning" indicator to "at risk" or "properly functioning" (i.e., it does not apply to "properly functioning" indicators). For the purposes of this checklist, "maintain" means that the function of an indicator does not change (i.e., it applies to all indicators regardless of functional level). For the purpose of this checklist, "degrade" means to change the function of an indicator for the worse (i.e., it applies to all indicators regardless of functional level). In some cases, a "not properly functioning" indicator may be further worsened, and this should be noted. Q:\WCIA\71916\Grccn RivcrTrail Appz 4.d"c 6 U312IAX1 1:29 PM NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. TABLE 1. MATRIX of PATHWAYS AND INDICATORS (Remember, the ran .:. OE criteria presented here are not absolute, they may be adjusted for unique watersheds. See 3) p. PATHWAY INDICATORS PROPERLY FUNCTIONING AT RISK NOT PROPERLY FUNCTIONING Water Quaifty: Temperature • 50-576 Fr 57-60• (spawning) > 60• (spawning) > 64• (migration a rearing? 5744• (ytfyi An' areadng)' Sediment/Turbidity < 12% Mes (<0.85mm) In graveP, turbidity low 12-17% (westrside)', 12-20% (east -side)', turbidity moderate >17% (west -aide)', >2096 (east side)' fines at surface or depth In spawning habftat2, turbidity . • Chemical Contamination/ Nutrients low levels of chemical contamination from agricultural, industrial and other sources, no excess nutrients, no CWA 303d designated reaches moderate levels of chemical contamination from egrtcuttural, industrial and other sources, some a cess nutrients, one CWA 303d designated reach' high levels of chemical contamination from Industrial and other sources. high levels of excess nutrients, more than one CWA 303d designated reach' Habitat Access: Physical Barriers any man-made barriers present in watershed allow upstream and downstream fish passage at all flows any man-made barriers present in watershed do not allow upstream andlordownstream fish passage at basellow flows any man-made barriers present in watershed do not allow upstream and/or downstream fish at a range of flews Habitat dements: Substrate - dominant substrate is gravel or cobble (interstitial spaces clear), or embeddedness <20%' gravel and cobble Is subdominant, or If dominant, embeddedness 20.3096' bedrock. sand, silt or small gravel dominant, or 6 gravel and cobble dominant, embeddedness >30%2 Large Woody Debris Coast: >80 pieces/mile currently meets standards for property functioning, but lacks potential sources from riparian areas of woody debris recruitment to maintain that standard does not meet standards for properly functioning and lads potential huge woody debris recruitment • >24-diameter >50 11. length'; East -side: >20 pieces/ mile >12diameter >35 ft. length'; and adequate sources of woody debris recruitment In riparian areas Pool Frequency• che"nl width II Docrsla+llee meets pool frequency standards geft) and large woody debris recruitment standards for property meets pool frequency standards but large woody debris recruitment inadequate to maintain pools over time does not meet pool frequency standards 5 feet 1a4 to • sa 15 • 70 20 • 5e 25 • 47 50 • 2e 75 • 23 100 • 18 tUnctionfng habitat (above) 10 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. Disturbance History Riparian Reserves • � <15% ECA (entire watershed) with no concentration of disturbance in unstable or potentially unstable areas, and/or refugia, and/or riparian area; and for NWFP area (except AMAs), :15% retention of LSOG In watershed10 <15% ECA (entire watershed) but disturbance concentrated to unstable or potentially unstable areas, and/or refugia, and/or riparian area; and for NWFP area (except AMAs), :15% retention of LSOG In watershedt0 >15% ECA (entire watershed) and disturbance concentrated in unstable or potentially unstable areas, and/or refugia, and/or riparian area; does not meet NWFP standard for LSOG retention the riparian reserve system provides adequate shade, large woody debris recruitment, and habitat protection and connectivity in all subwatersheds, and buffers or includes kndwn refugia for sensitive aquatic species (>80% tntact),and/or for grazing impacts: percent similarity of riparian vegetation to the potential natural community/ composition >50%12 moderate loss of connectivity or function (shade, LWD recruitment, etc.) of riparian reserve system, or incomplete protection of habitats and refugia for sensitive aquatic species (.70-80% intact). and/or for grazing Im�e rcention to siimilarity of riparian potential natural community/composition 25-50% or better" riparian reserve system is fragmented, poorly cormected, provides inadequate protectiond habitats and refugia for sensttte aquatic species (70% intact). and/or for grazing irrrpacts percent similarity of riparian vegetation potential eature 1ty/oa � ltion C25%e B)omn. T.C. end D.W. Reiser,1991. Habitat Requirements of Salmonlds In Streams. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19:83-138. Meehan, W.R., ed. 2 Biological Opinion on Land and Resource Management Plans for the: Boise, Chains, Nez Perce, Payette, Salmon, Sawtooth, Umatilla, and Wallowa -Whitman National Forests. March 1, s Washington Timber/Fish Wildlife Cooperative Monitoring Evaluation and Research Committee,1993. Watershed Analysis Manual (Version 20). Washington Department of Natural 1995. Resources. • Biological Opinion onimplementation of Interim Strategies for Managing Anadromous Fish -producing Watersheds in Eastem Oregon and Washington, Idaho, and Portions of Catfornia (PACFiSH). National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Region, January 23,1995. • A Federal Agency Guide for Pilot Watershed Analysis (Version 1.2), 1994. ▪ USDA Forest Service,1994. Section 7 Fish Habitat Monitoring Protocol for the Upper Columbia River Basin. Frtssetl, CA. Liss, W.J.. and David Bayles,1993. An Integrated Biophysical Strategy for Ecological Restoration of Large Watersheds. Proceedings from the Symposium on C y Roles In Water Resources Management and Policy; June 27-30.1993 (American Water Resources Association), p. 449-458. ▪ Wempte, B.C., 1994. Hydrologic Integration of Forest Roads with Stream Networks in Two Basins, Westem Cascades, Oregon. M.S. Thesis, Geosciences Depa,b.r d. Oregon State University. • e.g., see Elk River Watershed Anaysis Report. 1995. Sisidyou National Forest, Oregon. 10 Northwest Forest Plan, 1994. Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitat for Late -Successional and Old -Growth Forest Related Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl. USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Lend Management " USDA Forest Servfee,1993. Determining the Risk of Ctrmuletive Watershed Effects Resulting from Multiple Activities. "Winward, A.H..1989 Ecological Status of Vegetation as a base for Multiple Product Management Abstaracts 42nd annual meeting, Society for Range Management, Billings MT. Denny CO: Society For Range Managemnt p277. 1., NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. . FIGURE 1. DICHOTOMOUS KEY FOR MAKING ESA DETERMINATION OF EI F'ECTS 1. Are there any proposed/listed anadromous salmonids and/or proposed/designated critical habitat in the watershed or downstream from the watershed? NO No effect YES May affect, go to 2 2. Does the proposed action(s) have the potential to hinder attainment of relevant properly functioning indicators (from table 2)? A. The probability of attaining or maintaining relevant properly.: functioning indicators is not very high nor timely Likely to adversely affect B. The probability of attaining or maintaining relevant properly functioning indicators is very high and timely Go to 3 3. Does the:proposed action(s) have the potential to result in "take" of proposed /listed anadromous salmonids or destruction/adverse modification of proposed/designated critical habitat? 1 A. There is a negligible (extremely low) probability of take of proposed/listed anadromous salmonids or destruction/adverse modification of proposed/designated critical habitat Not likely to adversely affect B. There is more than a negligible probability of take of proposed/listed anadromous salmonids or destruction/adverse modification of proposed/designated critical habitat Likely to adversely affect "Take" - The ESA (Section 3) defines take as "to harass, harm; pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct ". The USFWS (USFWS, 1994) further defines "harm" as "significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering ", and "harass" as "actions that create the likelihood of injury to listed species to such an extent as to significantly . disrupt normal behavior patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding or sheltering". 14 z w 6 O 0 W 1.11 w w 0 N u I-w z� zo w O • - 0 I-- ww wz U= 0 t- z Appendix 4 (King County Section 7 Assessment Form — Part 11 VHS Greiner Woodward Clyde 0: \WCIAV1916V3REEN RIVER TRAIL RPT.000\1O-FEB -00A =Z. W' c4 2 6 1U U O; CO p. U) w >' W 2: J H' W O:. H Uu) O — I- H c) moo;. W Z O z Assessment form - Part I: 2000 Schedule and Workload Forecast Part1 Assessment Form 011400.xls,2/2/00,1:39 PM Form date: August 16, 1999 " 1 2 Assessment form - Part I: 2000 Schedule and Workload Forecast Part I Assessment Form 011400.xls,2/2/00,1:39 PM Form date: August 16, 1999 3 z < • z u.1 j• C) (.) • w LU --I I- uj 0 g u. < a w z o z O S• i2 0 I.— W Lt.! 1- P-- 0 . Z CU co C.) - -±- o B D 62 (310.1DatOP.7::j.ftattAi:,:MU.0':4',.: - .,---, a/9/00 63 P.0.10`,40001PWW,:;,.W.6;-:. -'..-.- October 2000 through February 2001, 64 qtt,t1IP -rifiltIale#00.„:-', Witia161 Aidatarl.-'4API.:-. Fe bIsfativi Z000 65 waii:iiiiii,....: . I. ......i,:f ..:,:r yv , SS! 90. Oa, i 0 .. io.ilr ..41, D i 004' sr'7)':1-'? OF-iit.4'74:...0.'',', .0...N. zoo, fbovuoim 66 13?: ORfiggeiliMiefiggW. 67 knitlifOReffireEtantiMe60.,V 316003 68 Mawratorattimar.=IN: P/A 69 PARW.00.01EM:11033N134%,3.;:i $375,000 Estuary and Park • Part I Assessment Form 011400.xls,2/2/00,1:39 PM Form date: August 16, 1999 3 z < • z u.1 j• C) (.) • w LU --I I- uj 0 g u. < a w z o z O S• i2 0 I.— W Lt.! 1- P-- 0 . Z CU co C.) - -±- o Appendix 5 [Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program) 'mow. 6 J0. 0 fA W W =r J E- CD LL: W Or` gJ. IL < a �w 1- 0 Z i-'- 0 0 -' o f-' =W F- U ,. LL -0. Z 0 -i 0 I- ,Z.I z w Qom. W5, 0 CO p: Intertidal Habitat Projects J w 0 2 =a I-- ill' z� Z0 LIJ Prepared for the o �': Elliott Bay/Duwamish Restoration Program Panel of Managers w'. by F— �' U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Washington Office ` z' ' Panel Publication 22 0 F. Monitoring Program Elliott Bay /Duwmamish Restoration Program • Elliott Bay/Duwamish Restoration Program NOAA Restoration Center Northwest National Marine Fisheries Service 7600 Sandpoint Way NE Seattle, WA 98115-0070 (206) 526-4388 FAX (206 526 -6665 October 1999 Filename: H:'.PSPIEBDRP■monitoring plan report version 3.wpd ii z w� JU oO c w x: • LL. w O 2 ¢' a. = in zF o. z I--. w uj o' w _ O. U Oft; O z Project Sites 9 Monitoring Task 9 Years 9 Contingency Measures 9 Discussion 9 Biological Success Criteria 10 Marsh Vegetation Establishment 10 Biological Success Criterion 1 10 Biological Success Criterion 2 10 Biological Success Criterion 3 10 Project Sites ' 10 Monitoring Tasks 11 Years 11 Contingency Measures 11 Discussion 11 Riparian Vegetation Establishment 12 Biological Success Criterion 4 12 Biological Success Criterion 5 12 Project Sites 12 Monitoring Task 12 Years 12 Contingency Measures 12 Discussion 12 Bird Use 13 Biological Success Criterion 6 13 Project Sites 13 Monitoring Task 13 Years 13 Contingency Measures 13 Discussion 13 Fish Access/Presence 13 Biological Success Criterion 7 13 Biological Success Criterion 8 13 Project Sites 13 Monitoring Tasks 13 Years - 14 Contingency Measures 14 Discussion 14 Monitoring Program Management 15 Monitoring Program Responsibility 15 Monitoring Program Implementation 15 Monitoring Program Reports 15 Scientific Research Activities 16 Modifications of the Monitoring Program 16 Monitoring Program Budget 17 References 19 Appendix A: Program Budget 20 z z �C-) U 0; N w JI l V) u_ w O. 2 J u.Q co. �_ Z� O. z 1•- 11.1 uj U O U' 0 H. = w. 1-H U. • Z: 0_N O Z iv H • • w. JU O 0 ` cconW CU= J CO U. W 0. 2 u. • d zw z� 1— 0. zt- W 2 • o. o== a I- LL tu. � 0 u'0 Z W 0 =, O ~ Z Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 1 ' Development of Habitat Goals The Habitat Development Technical Working Group was established by the Panel to identify potential habitat projects, evaluating them against criteria that meet the goals of the Consent Decree and determining their feasibility. The working group also advises the Panel on the acquisition of any right of access, lease, easement, fee title, or any other real property interest sufficient to permanently secure a site for any habitat development project..." (U.S. vs. City of Seattle & METRO, paragraph 30). A Concept Document (EB/DRP, 1994) developed by the working groups and the Panel outlines the program goals, objectives, and approach to project selection. The following specific goals were developed by the Habitat Development Technical Working Group and approved by the Panel: "Habitat development projects will be undertaken to benefit fish and wildlife species and the habitat attributes on which they depend. The overall goal of the Program will be a net gain of habitat function relative to current conditions in the Elliott Bay and Duwamish River estuarine system. It is recognized that the aquatic ecosystem of Elliott Bay and the Duwamish River estuary cannot be returned to a pristine condition; however, it is possible and desirable to provide increases in habitat quantity and quality. While a general objective of ecosystem recovery will be pursued, priority will be afforded projects or actions that benefit injured trust natural resources" ( EB/DRP, 1994; p. 48). In addition to the ecological goals and objectives identified in this document, the Panel recognizes that the long -term viability of the restoration projects relies at least in part in community understanding and acceptance of these restored natural features in the urban landscape. Accordingly, project designs include provisions for public access where this is consistent with site - specific requirements. As well, and consistent and appropriate with the specific project's primary purposes, the project designs accommodate the related objective of providing education and interpretive displays and opportunities. Habitat Development Approach Property Acquisition and Protection In seeking to meet EB/DRP habitat restoration objectives, the first step has been obtaining "real property interest" in sites for restoration work. The Consent Decree establishes a responsibility on the part of the City of Seattle and King County to provide up to $5 million in property value for this purpose. Following a ranking of potential restoration project sites by the Habitat Developement Technical Work Group, the City and County have worked through several negotiations. To date, the results have been: Seaboard Lumber site, acquired in fee title from a private owner by Seattle Parks and Recreation. Approximately 5 acres of formerly industrial uplands, and nearly 10 acres of adjacent submerged lands were acquired at a value of $2.5 million. This amount includes nearly $1.5 million in funds set aside to complete soil contaminant remediation activities necessary to make the site available for habitat development. Hamm Creek site, made available by permanent conservation easement to King County by Seattle City Light. The County purchased an easement on approximately 7.1 acres of upland, at a cost of $750,000 for the purposes of restoring Hamm Creek to a surface water channel, and creating a new "estuary" Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 2 • at the mouth of Hamm Creek where it enters the Duwamish River. Kenco Marine, purchased from a private owner by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. This site includes 0.7 acres of upland, and an undetermined amount of adjacent tidelands. The tribe purchased this former marine salvage operations site with funds from King County, including $518,000 under EB/DRP. North Wind's Wier, owned by King County Parks and Recreation. Approximately one acre of a three acre parcel is being made available to EB/DRP for intertidal habitat restoration, at a cost to the program of $416,000. In addition to these habitat development sites in the lower Duwamish River, EB/DRP is also providing property acquisition funds for two sites upstream of this area in the Green River. Up to $700,000 is being credited to King County for their acquisition of two areas referred to as Porter Levee and Lones Levee where various riparian and off channel habitat restoration will occur with non- EB/DRP funds. Finally, a nearshore substrate enhancement project was completed with EB/DRP support in the marine environment of Elliott Bay. This project occurred on property managed by the Washington Department of Natural Resources; EB/DRP incurred no property acquisition costs for this project. These projects are outside the scope of the intertidal habitat monitoring plan described in this report. Restoring Habitat Functions Restoring the conditions necessary to provide habitat for fish and wildlife in an urban industrial environment often requires a combination of actions once a site has been made available. Habitat project restoration activities undertaken by the Panel in the lower Duwamish River entail one or a combination of the following actions: remediation and cleanup; source control; fill removal, excavation and regrading; stream daylighting; substrate modification; revegetation; and project follow- through. Monitoring tasks and contingency measures address these actions as required by specific projects. The following is meant as a general description of actions, some or all of which are being applied at each of the four Duwamish River estuary habitat development sites. Remediation and Cleanup Project sites selected for habitat development activities have a varied land use history. At Seaboard Lumber, industrial activities have contributed to soil contamination which requires remediation prior to habitat development. This has included both removal and isolation of site contaminants. At North Wind's Wier and Kenco Marine, required cleanup activities involve demolition and removal of previous residential and commercial infrastructure Fill Removal, Excavation, and Regrading All four intertidal habitat project sites require the removal of historic fill material and regrading to reestablish intertidal elevations. At Seaboard, North Wind's Wier and Hamm Creek, "basins" are being created to provide intertidal habitat area. At the Kenco Marine site, benches or terraces are being excavated to create suitable elevations for mudflat, marsh, and riparian habitat development. Stream Daylighting Hamm Creek currently discharges into a storm drain system, and flows underground Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT { Page 3 . [ • before it's discharge to the Duwamish River. The project at Hamm Creek involves "daylighting" this stream by creating a new surface water channel and mouth. The new channel will include various log and rock features to provide habitat structure and complexity. The new mouth will provide intertidal habitat where the stream meets the Duwamish River. Substrate Modification z Prior to reestablishing riparian and emergent marsh vegetation, the project sites will i z require varying degrees of substrate modification. This ranges from simply amending ce 6 existing upland soils with organic material to promote riparian vegetation growth, to a J v massive import of soil at the Seaboard Lumber site for emergent marsh area 0 0 establishment. u) LL1 J = Revegetation S2 u.. All projects involve efforts to promote native plant community establishment, including W O riparian areas with trees and shrubs, and intertidal emergent marsh areas. Included'may be tasks necessary to promote initial plant growth, such as the installation of irrigation system's in riparian areas, and the protection of plantings from herbivory. = O F- ill Project Follow- through z ~ The EB/DRP Panel has recognized that habitat development does not end with project z o construction. Meeting program goals will necessitate follow- through activities, including site stewardship, monitoring, and implementation of contingency measures. v 0 OD Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program = w U Development of the Monitoring Program 0 With input and assistance from the Habitat Development Technical Working Group w z (HDTWG), the monitoring program was developed by USFWS for EB/DRP. A draft was U w presented to the Technical Working Group after the real property acquisition phase and 0 '- habitat project selection process had been largely concluded. With the exception of the z Elliott Bay Nearshore subtidal habitat development project, this monitoring program will be implementedfor all EB/DRP funded habitat development projects, as follows: • Seaboard Lumber - project management provided by Seattle Department of Parks and Recreation • Hamm Creek Estuary - project management provided by King County DNR in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers • (former)Kenco Marine site at Turning Basin Number 3 - project management provided by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Department • North Wind's Weir - project management provided by King County Parks Department in cooperation with King County DNR Purposes of Monitoring Program The monitoring plan serves the necessary purposes of the Panel by identifying explicit project objectives against which project performance can be measured; providing criteria which indicate success in meeting those objectives, and delineating specific tasks to be Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 4 completed to assess project performance. The monitoring plan also identifies some of the potential problems that can reasonably be anticipated and contingency measures that could be taken in response. The plan is intended to meet applicable requirements under the Clean Water Act ( §404), any permit conditions under WDFW's Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), and other environmental compliance activities. This document is also intended to serve as an outreach tool by providing program and budget information to interested parties, including local stakeholders, schools, and consultants and others in the private sector. It is anticipated that activities undertaken pursuant to this monitoring program will contribute to the growing body of knowledge concerning restoration programs. The monitoring program budget provides a useful tool to others interested in estimating habitat restoration project monitoring costs. Finally, the Panel recognizes the inherent scientific interest in these projects and activities. Hence, landowners of habitat project sites are encouraged to accommodate scientific research activities where the Panel determines that the activities are compatible with the objectives of specific habitat project(s). Research activities that are beyond the scope of this monitoring program and independently supported are encouraged. Towards this end, the Panel will make available all monitoring program data. Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 5 J • Project Success Criteria, Monitoring Tasks, and Contingency Measures Physical Success Criteria The first challenge to be met in restoring intertidal habitat functions involves the establishment of physical conditions necessary for habitat development. The following success criteria provide guidance in determining whether post - construction site characteristics meet these necessary requirements. Intertidal Area Physical Success Criterion 1: The total restored area below an elevation of +12.0 ft. MLLW will be at least 90% of the target intertidal elevation for each site. Project Sites 2.0 acres for Seaboard Lumber and no moorage of vessels within the property boundaries of the site 1.0 acres for Hamm Creek estuary 0.3 acres for Kenco Marine/Turning Basin vicinity and no moorage of vessels within the property boundaries of the site 1.0 acres for North Wind's Weir Monitoring Task Using standard areal calculation techniques, such as geo- referenced aerial photogrametry, GPS or other field survey techniques, estimate the total acreage of the project that is intertidal, ie. below.an elevation of +12.0 f3. MLLW. Years This task is to be completed in post- construction years 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10. Contingency Measures None, unless gross deviations from the criterion are determined to warrant corrective measures by the EB/DRP Panel of Managers. A gross deviation is considered to have occurred if the reduction in area has compromised the desired functions of the site. Discussion While the ultimate goal of the EB/DRP habitat development program is improvement in the quality of habitat conditions for the benefit of fish and wildlife, quantity plays an important role in meeting this objective. This is especially true in an area like the Duwamish River estuary, where trhe amount of intertidal habitat is severely limited. Certain minimum expectations for project size are legitimate success criteria. If some habitat elements are too small, they will provide little benefit and will not be able to maintain themselves. It is however necessary to recognize that this is not a perfect science, and that some variation in the amount of intertidal area is to be expected. Therefore, this criterion is stated as a range of acceptable values. It is also recognized Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 6 ., that one of the benefits of the Kenco Marine/Turning Basin vicinity project was removal of barges and vessels moored over intertidal land at and adjacent to the site. A similar benefit associated with the Seaboard Lumber site was the purchase of adjacent submerged lands that would preempt moorage of barges or vessels over this portion of the site. While these adjacent areas are not included in the calculation of restored intertidal area, the benefits of these intertidal or submerged lands will be considered during the evaluation of whether the sites meet the criterion. F-z Tidal Regime Physical Success Criterion 2 J v Tidal amplitude, as determined by both timing and elevation of high and low tide events, U 0 is equivalent inside and outside of the project area. w = J F Project Sites w This criterion and associated task are to be applied to Seaboard Lumber, Hamm Creek w O estuary, and North Wind's Weir habitat project sites. The criterion will not be applied to g the Kenco Marine/Turning Basin Vicinity project as adequate tidal connection is not a- anticipated to be a problem at this site. = a 1-- w _. Monitoring Task z ~ Tide gauges (water surface elevation vs. time) will be installed in projects with an z O enclosed basin. Data from this gauges will be compared to that from similar instruments W u deployed outside the project area within the Duwamish River estuary. D 0 U - 0 0 H. This task is to be completed in post- construction years 1, 2, and 5. 1— u_ -6" I— Contingency Measures Z Failure to meet this criterion should trigger discussions on the need to increase the size 0 u). of the tidal connection between the project area and the river. p ~: Z Years Discussion The development of adequate tidal connections between the project sites and the Duwamish River estuary is essential. Inadequate connection would lead to a dampened tidal hydrology, which may in turn favor the establishment of invasive plant species over desired native plant communities. Other possible consequences include reduction in fish access to and use of the sites, reduced export of organic material from the site and associated food web support for the estuary, and excessive current velocities within the channels and openings that provide the connection, and associated problems with erosion. Slope Erosion /accretion Physical Success Criterion 3: No evidence of unacceptable erosion is observed after a period of initial site stabilization. .Project Sites This criterion will apply to all sites. Monitoring Task Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT - .�, ,..__...... Page 7 Periodic visual inspections of the project area for signs of excessive erosion will be completed. Areas of concern would be photographed from a stable photo point periodically so that the rate and severity of erosion can be judged. Where available, "as- built" site surveys can be used to monitor changes in site geomorphology, especially where these surveys are repeated on a periodic basis. Years This criterion will be applied in years 1 -10. Contingency Measures The first line of defense against excessive erosion should be non - structural approaches, such as vegetation, fiber mats, or other "soft" approaches. Engineered approaches such as riprap or other shoreline "hardening" should only be utilized as a last resort, and in cases where the property owner, EP/DRP Panel, and relevant permitting authorities agree that a hazardous condition to property exists or to the function and integrity of the site that warrants corrective action. Discussion Given the urban setting of these projects, a balance must be struck between allowing the sites to develop naturally, and protecting the interests of property owners. Furthermore, soil disturbance during construction will leave many of the sites vulnerable to erosion until the planted vegetation has matured and the root mat bound and stabilized the soil. Concern about erosion has been raised, and the need to evaluate the "stability" of newly graded slopes generally agreed to by the EB/DRP Panel. It is difficult to express an entirely objective criterion for this factor; the one proposed will require a fair amount of interpretation by the EB/DRP Panel and the effected land management entity. At the Seaboard Lumber site, evidence of erosion-at areas containing residual soil contamination would trigger sediment sampling nearby. This contingency measure would be a condition of Washington Department of Ecology's approval of cleanup at the site. Sediment Structure Physical Success Criterion 4 • Over time, sites will accumulate fine grained material and organic matter. This would be evidenced by a decrease in mean grain size, and ab increase in organic carbon in surface sediments. Project Sites This criterion will be applied to all sites. Monitoring Task Sediment grain size samples will be collected at each site in areas that will also be sampled for benthic invertebrates. Where appropriate, consideration should be given to stratifying the project sites into two sampling areas, vegetated ( +10 MLLW ft. and above) and unvegetated ( +9 ft. MLLW and below) and a total of 10 samples collected (5 samples @ 2 elevations). Samples will be taken by the use of cores (0.0024 m2) to a depth of 10 cm. Cores will be processed for grain size distribution in the laboratory using nested sieves. Organic content will be analyzed using standard procedures. Samples will be taken from habitat reference sites within both the Turning Basin and Kellogg Island areas and similarly processed. Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 8 .. , Data should be reported as a percent of grain size category (by weight). Percent organic matter should be reported as a proportion of the overall sample. These values should be compared to reference site data, and to comparable data from the same site in previous years (time series). Years The monitoring task is to be completed in all years where benthic invertebrates are sampled; the recommended frequency is years 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10. H z rt w Contingency Measures 6 m None. 0 0 U) C3 U) 111 Discussion J = !- Several intertidal habitat functions are associated with depositional environments. co u_ Specifically, the accumulation of fine grained sediment is indicative of environments that W O support the build up of organic matter and a detritus based food web. Soft sediments and g organic rich areas provide an environment where benthic invertebrate prey resources flourish, and the opportunity for fish and wildlife to forage. Of special interest to = m EB/DRP is the provision of habitat for juvenile salmonids, other estuarine fish, and t- _ shorebirds. zF I- O z I- w W Sediment Quality g D Physical Success Criterion 5 v o No evidence of contamination due to sediment transport or on -site migration of upland o H contaminants to groundwater or aquatic area. uw w '- Project Sites u. ~O This criterion will be applied primarily to Seaboard Lumber, and to other projects only z Cu as needed. c) _, O ~- Monitoring Task z Visual monitoring to ensure that riprap and soil are staying in place, and groundwater monitoring to ensure that contaminants have not mobilized due to construction. Years This criterion should be applied in years 1 -10. Contingency Measures If monitoring results indicate that contaminants may be migrating at the Seaboard Lumber site, sediment monitoring would be required. Discussion Sediments at project sites may become contaminated due to pollution sources and sediment transport from off -site. Sediment monitoring will occur only as a contingency measure to determine cause if selected biological success criteria are not being met. Biological success criterion 8, production of benthic invertebrate prey tax, is expected to be the most sensitive to sediment contamination. The Panel considered whether sediment sampling should be included in this monitoring program, particularly for the Seaboard Lumber site, which was contaminated during the Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 9. time it the site was used as a lumber mill and for wood treatment. As part of the habitat restoration, soils contaminated with mercury, pentachlorophenol and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were excavated and disposed of at an authorized sanitary landfill. Some petroleum contaminated soils were also removed, but it was not feasible to remove some additional low -level petroleum contaminated soils which occur at depths below the groundwater table. The areas of residual petroleum contamination on the upland were capped with clean soil and stabilized with riprap filled with fish rock. Groundwater has Z tested clean, indicating that the petroleum is currently non - mobile. _ ~ ~w The Washington State Department of Ecology did not require cleanup of aquatic a: sediments under the state Sediment Management Standards based on sampling activities -J o and analyses undertaken prior to purchase of the property for habitat purposes. However, . co o visual and groundwater monitoring is required by the Department of Ecology as a w = condition of its approval of the upland cleanup to ensure that upland contamination does CO 1- not migrate into the aquatic system. w O Biological Success Criteria u_ Biological success criteria identified in this monitoring plan generally fall into one of z w two broad categories. First, there are those criteria that provide evidence that "attributes" Z i (see Simenstad et al., 1991, for a discussion of this concept) of functioning intertidal 1 O habitat are developing within the project area. For example, are the prey resources, w 1— essential to the function of foraging by juvenile chinook salmon, present in sufficient 2 D numbers to indicate the habitat is functioning properly? Second, there are criteria that v 0 directly evaluate fish and wildlife presence within the project area. While it may seem o 1-- that this second set of criteria is sufficient to determine the success of the project, this is w w not always the case. Presence or absence of a target species fails to quantify the value of H H the habitat for the species. Failure to observe the target species within the project area �'-- z does not always mean that it has not, or will not in the future, use the area. Finally, it w N could be argued that it is not the responsibility of a project proponent to insure use of a U = habitat site, only to provide the conditions necessary to support that use. z 1— Marsh Vegetation Establishment Biological Success Criterion 1 The areal extent (percent cover) of vegetation is stable or increasing within portions of the project site with elevations suitable to marsh establishment. Biological Success Criterion 2 Species composition of native wetland plant species is comparable to that of appropriate reference sites, and does not contain greater than 1% cover by area by non - native or invasive plant species. Invasive plant species of special concern include Spartina spp. (cordgrass), Lythrum salicaria (purple loosestrife), Phalaris arundinacea (reed canarygrass), Phragmities communis (common reed), and Polygonum cuspidatum (Japanese knotweed): Biological Success Criterion 3 Plant vigor, as measured by stem height and shoot density, is comparable (greater than 80 %) to that of appropriate reference sites and/or improving over time. Project Sites Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 10 These criteria will be applied to all sites. Monitoring Tasks Areal Extent Areal extent of vegetation will be measured fro aerial photographs, if available. Alternatively, given the anticipated size of veget: tion patches, it is feasible to use either GPS or more traditional survey techniques to m p the patch perimeter. Species Composition and Plant Vigor Consulting with a biostatistician to determine th number required for statistical analysis, several permanent transects will be established a each project site perpendicular to the shoreline. The transects will encompass portions of the project area suitable for intertidal vegetation establishment. Transects will also be established within suitable reference sites near the project site. During mid - summer, the transects will be surveyed to determine species composition. Ten (or more, depending on length of transect) 0.25 x 0.25 m quadrats will be randomly distributed along each transect line. All plant species observed within the quadrat will be recorded, and percent cover estimated. Plant vigor will also be assessed using these qua each quadrat, total number shoots of the "target" Scirpus validus) are to be counted. The height o represented target species will also be measured rats, during the same sampling event. In vegetation species (e.g. Carex lyngbei, the three tallest shoots for each o the nearest cm. Data analysis should include an estimate of areal extent of marsh vegetation cover, and any observations in changes over time. Similarly trends in mean shoot density (# shoots/ m2) and mean maximum shoot height should be eported. Finally, species composition of marsh vegetation, and any occurrence of invasiv species that exceeds 1% should be reported. Years The monitoring tasks are to be completed in yea 1, 2, 3, 5,. 7, and 10. Contingency Measures Any occurrence of invasive species that exceeds he threshold established in Criterion 2 should be met with an immediate response of co trol measures. Physical removal will be undertaken prior to consideration of herbicide us Evidence that planted vegetation is not thriving, .r that natural recruitment rates fail to meet expectations also warrant contingency mea ures. Depending on the hypothesized reason for this failure to meet the criteria, respon • e could include additional planting, soil ammendments, herbivore exclusion, or focused stewardship efforts. Assumptions about appropriate plant species, elevations, and other design factors should be reexamined. Discussion An important objective of all EB/DRP intertidal (habitat projects is the establishment of marsh vegetation. Vegetation provides habitat structure, facilitates sediment accretion and build up of the marsh substrate, and serves as a source of organic material to support detritus -based food webs. Periodic examination of the vegetation can also serve to identify potential problems, such as colonization by invasive plant species, excessive Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 11 • herbivory, or trampling by humans. Useful measures of vegetation community condition include plant distribution, species composition, and plant vigor. Riparian Vegetation Establishment Biological Success Criterion 4 Areal extent of riparian vegetation (native trees and shrubs) should be stable or increasing over time, and cover not Tess than 90% of the upland vegetated area of each project site at the end of ten years. Percent coverage of native species at 3 years should be 60% for tree and shrub layers, and 90% for the herbaceous layer. Biological Success Criterion 5 Survival of riparian plantings in each cover class category (herb, shrub, trees) is at least 75% atthe end of three years. Project Sites These criteria will be applied to all sites. Monitoring Task Using aerial photograph analysis or standard survey techniques, map the portion of the project area with riparian vegetation cover. Extend vegetation transects established for marsh vegetation monitoring shoreward, r through the riparian zone, to the limits of the project area. Use visual survey techniques such as point line intercept or quadrats to estimate planting survival along the transect line. Years The first monitoring task (areal extent) is to be completed in years 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10. The second monitoring task (plant survival) is to be completed in years 1, 2, and 3. Data should be reported as percent cover of riparian vegetation, and percent survival of plantings broken down into the herb, shrub, and tree components. Contingency Measures Excessive failure rates for planting survival should be addressed with contingency measures. Potential causes may include improper installation, poor soil structure and/or organic content, inadequate watering, herbivory, trampling or competition. Improved.site stewardship may address many of these problems, but replanting with improved soil preparation may also be necessary. Inadequate riparian vegetation coverage may also be attributed to the same causes. Appropriate response may include additional plantings, soil ammendments, and/or improved stewardship.. Discussion The establishment of healthy riparian plant communities at each habitat site is another essential project element. Native trees and shrubs provide a buffer to adjacent urban and industrial land uses and habitat structure for wildlife. Leaf litter enhances detritus food webs when transported into adjacent intertidal areas. Large organic debris is also important for habitat structure. Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 12 Bird Use Biological Success Criterion 6 Use of the restoration sites and the area within 50 meters of the site by indigenous /native I net or block seine is not practical, a beach seine shall be used at high tide using the protocols describe in Warner and Fritz (1995). At all sites, captured fish will be briefly anesthetized, identified to species and counted. Fork length measurements will be taken from all salmonids. All fish will be released unharmed, unless stomach content analysis on a subset of captured fish is determined necessary by USFWS. Consideration will be given to marking a subset of the captured salmonids to determine residence time. Given the importance placed on juvenile salmonids, the sampling should occur on a bi- weekly basis during the period of juvenile out - migration, ie. from early March through early June. If resources permit, consideration should be given to undertaking fish access monitoring for a longer period, perhaps throughout the year. Invertebrate Prey Taxa Sampling protocols for fallout insects (insects produced on riparian and marsh vegetation that fall or drift into the water column) and benthic invertebrate are well described by Cordell et al., and have been extensively applied and refined at Duwamish River restoration sites previously. To summarize, fallout insects are sampled by use of floating plastic bins distributed throughout a project site. Benthic invertebrates are best sampled with cores taken to a depth of 10 cm. Cordell recommends a minimum of 10 replicates in each "stratum"; strata include mud or sand flats and areas of marsh vegetation. Taxa known to be important to juvenile salmonids are identified to species and enumerated, the remainder are identified to order level. Years The monitoring tasks are to be completed in years 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10. Contingency Measures Failure to meet these criteria would indicate that fundamental EB/DRP goals are not being met. While the specific causes are difficult to project at this point, an examination of the project design, implementation, and site management would be warranted. Outside expert assistance should be obtained in evaluating the monitoring data and project performance. If the benthic community does not appear to be healthy, then sediment quality sampling should be initiated to determine if contamination is responsible for the problem. Discussion An issue of significant importance to EB/DRP is the provision of habitat to support estuarine - dependent fish species. Of special interest are juvenile salmonids, which are known to utilize these areas (Aitkin, 1998), and may be limited in part by lack of high quality intertidal habitat in the Duwamish River estuary. Evaluation of this program goal will rely upon measuring both fish access to the restored sites, and the provision of prey resources, including fallout insects and benthic invertebrates important to juvenile salmonids. Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 14 ^ Monitoring Program Management (NOTE — This chapter presents issues not yet resolved by EB /DRP Panel which will require formal Panel action. This approach to Monitoring Program Management is presented here for discussion purposes.] Monitoring Program Responsibility . By Panel resolution, the USFWS has been given the overall responsibility for implementing this monitoring program. The responsibility includes the design and implementation of monitoring tasks, data management, preparation of monitoring reports, and distribution of products. The services will be provided on a reimbursable basis pursuant to invoices submitted to the Panel for approval of payment. The design and implementation activities are considered separate from the role of USFWS as a Panel member in its capacity as a natural resource trustee. Monitoring Program Implementation To the extent practicable, volunteer stewardship groups and conservation organizations will be used to carry out some of the tasks identified in this monitoring program. This relates in part of controlling monitoring program costs. The greater benefit and motivation, however, rests on the belief that volunteer stewardship and conservation organizations' involvement will foster community support for and stewardship of the completed restoration projects. USFWS will oversee training of the volunteer monitors and retains responsibility for the quality of the data. Where it is not feasible for reasons of data QA/QC, complexity of the monitoring task(s), or safety, USFWS personnel or their contractors will complete monitoring tasks. If contractors are utilized, USFWS will hold the contractors, if utilized responsible for data quality control, and will itself retain responsibility for quality assurance through management of contracts and review of draft reports. Monitoring Program Reports In each year of substantial monitoring activity (years 1,2,3,5,7,and 10), USFWS will prepare a report which presents a summary and evaluation of the monitoring program results. A draft report will be distributed to Panel members for their review and comment. When necessary, a meeting of the Panel of Managers will be called to present monitoring program results and discuss the implications, including need for contingency measures. Responsibility for completion of contingency measures identified as necessary by the Panel would rest with the land owner and/or project manager. A final report incorporating Panel member comments and identified contingency measures will be prepared for distribution. USFWS will distribute monitoring program results, including responding to requests for copies of the reports, to the fullest extent practicable. In order to facilitate widespread distribution while controlling printing costs, USFWS will explore options for distribution through the internet and other means. Feasible options will be discussed with the Panel. Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 15 I ,I Scientific Research Activities The express purpose of this monitoring program is to evaluate progress in achieving EB/DRP goals and objectives. Funds for the habitat development program are limited, and there is much interest in applying as much funding as possible to achieving on the ground results. However, the Panel recognizes its responsibility for project follow through, including monitoring. Necessarily, the monitoring program is therefore limited in scope to addressing the important question of project performance. z F- also recognizes the inherent scientific interest in these W The EB/DRP Panel of Managers g � g projects and activities. There exists some responsibility on the part of the Panel to build 6 v the body of knowledge, and to provide future restoration programs with the benefit of the U - po lessons we have learned. Research activities that are beyond the scope of this monitoring program are encouraged. Towards this end, EB/DRP will make available all monitoring w m program data. Land owners of habitat sites will be encouraged to accommodate scientific u) - u- research activities, where these activities do not interfere with the habitat objectives of u 0 EB/DRP. u.Q Modifications of the Monitoring Program = a F- w An important purpose of this report is to "institutionalize" an approach to project z H monitoring as,agreed upon by the EB/DRP Panel. Given the long -term nature (10 years z O post- construction) of the monitoring program, it seems important to provide a clear w description of the program; something that will persist despite the changes in individual D 0 member representation that can be expected over the next decade. Despite the need for p FP- long-term monitoring program consistency, it is also important to recognize a potential a 1=. need to modify the program. i v F At least three types of changes to the monitoring program can be envisioned at this point. g: Z w o O~ z Changes in monitoring tasks. Over the five year period of monitoring restoration projects completed under the Coastal America program, improvements in field and laboratory techniques have lead to changes in monitoring task protocols. While the current program builds on this experience, it is likely that other opportunities for improvement will be identified, and should be incorporated into the monitoring program. 2. Elimination of monitoring tasks. It is possible that in the future, the EB/DRP Panel might reach consensus that specific success criteria have been met, and that a decision to terminate associated monitoring tasks could be made. Similarly, it could be determined that a monitoring task was not returning useful information, and, therefore not worth the expense of continuation. Modification of project objectives. In describing the application of adaptive management principles to coastal restoration project, Thom (1997) suggests that modifying project objectives during the monitoring period is a reasonable alternative. Unrealistic expectations or inaccurate assumptions can lead to establishment of inappropriate project objectives. While considerable effort has gone into the development of success criteria for this monitoring program, it is possible that a decision to modify might be reached based on program results. Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 16 Therefore, it is recommended that a balance be struck between a monitoring program that provides long -term consistency and comparability and real -word practicability. The potential need to modify this program in the future is recognized by the EB/DRP Panel. Monitoring Program Budget The budget presented in Appendix A provides costs for activities conducted pursuant to physical and biological success criteria and monitoring tasks and report preparation and distribution as discussed in the Monitoring Program. Costs are identified for personnel and supplies by the year, beginning with year 1 of the monitoring program and ending in year 10. The budget assumes a 3% inflation rate. The total cost of monitoring activities identified for the four intertidal habitat restoration projects undertaken by the Panel is $461,974. Figure One shows a breakdown of monitoring program costs by category. Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 17 Reporting 17% Intertidal Area 11% Tidal Regime 4% Slope erosion/accretion r 2% Sediment structure 4% Sediment quality 0% Fish use 47% Marsh vegetation 10% Riparian vegetation 2% \_Bird use 3% Figure One: Breakdown of Monitoring Program Costs by Category. • Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 18 � References Aitkin, J.K. 1998. The importance of estuarine habitats to anadromous salmonids of the' Pacific Northwest: a literature review. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Western Washington Office. Lacey, Washington. Cordell, J.R., L.M. Tear, C.A. Simenstad, and W.G. Hood. 1994. Duwamish River Coastal America restoration and reference sites: results and recommendations from year one pilot and montoring studies. . University of Washington School of Fisheries, Fisheries Research Institute. FRI -UW -9416. Seattle, Washington. Cordell, J.R., L.M. Tear, C.A. Simenstad, and W.G. Hood. 1996 Duwamish River Coastal America restoration and reference sites: results from 1995 montoring studies. University of Washington School of Fisheries, Fisheries Research Institute. FRI -UW -9612. Seattle, Washington. Cordell, J.R., L.M. Tear, K. Jensen, and V. Luiting. 1997. Duwamish River Coastal America restoration and reference sites:results from 1996 montoring studies. University of Washington School of Fisheries, Fisheries Research Institute. FRI- UW -9709. Seattle, Washington. Cordell, J.R., L.M. Tear, K. Jensen, and H.A. Higgins. 1999. Duwamish River Coastal America restoration and reference sites: results from 1997 monitoring studies. University of Washington School of Fisheries, Fisheries Research Institute. FRI- UW -9903. Seattle, Washington.. Elliott Bay Duwamish Restoration Program. 1994. Concept Document. (Panel Publication 7). Seattle, Washington: Elliott Bay/Duwamish Restoration Program, NOAA Restoration Center Northwest, National Marine Fisheries Service. Simenstad, C.A., C.D. Tanner, R.M. Thom, and L.L. Conquest. 1991. Estuarine habitat assessment protocol. Report to U.S. EPA, Region 10, Seattle, Washington. EPA 910/9 -91 -037. Thom, R.M. 1997. System- development matrix for adaptive management of coastal ecosystem restoration projects. Ecological Engineering 8: 219 -232. United States of America v. The City of Seattle and Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, No. C90- 395WD, (W.D. Wash), Consent Decree, September 1991. Warner, E.J. and R.L. Fritz. 1995. The distribution and growth of Green River chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and chum salmon (0. keta) outmigrants in the'Duwamish estuary as a function of water quality and substrate. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Fisheries Department, Water Resources Division. Auburn, Washington. Intertidal Habitat Projects Monitoring Program - DRAFT Page 19 z �• z Xw QQ� JU O 00 CO LU J=. w• 0 `.a =w z� �0 Z I- LL! U• O O D O I-. wW u-O uj z U= O H- z Appendix A: Monitoring Program Budget • w U. 0 C co 0;. W= J I—, W O. Q = W F— O` Z F— LU U 0. Otn; 0 w w; :_ F— U 0' 111 Z, Uw H 1, •O z . AC I In I a ..,.. .0 2 1 = 0 In 4.: 1:- 10 v: in 69 • 0).. ,,t- 114 . In 8 OT . 33 • I 1 1 • • in 0) CIS 49 1. II I 413 1 >,. I ! *4 91.• I • 49 g S 0 69 $1,383 1,383 $1,383, a 2 Ln. - 33 S 2 in 0 49 V- 1- in A NT. 4- in 69 IN a) 1 in , 69 : Ca c0 , rn. g Ca c0 cn.. 4 ; Co to sr- • Cn total year 7 1 R 2 Ca S OS CO co CNA 4 I _$2,9851 8 iN. , U 8 cNi .-7 43 8 os top $1,424 0 fa $1,424 0 40 lel c0 c0 Ca ca .-,.: V) v, 12 1 gl 1 0 ot -.. 69 8 N. ..- 40 ,-. 6. 69 total year 5 I•••• fa Is 69 cr) 1,-; 2 44; en 4.4,-; $7,5861 o C4 4.:* : 49 cn rim 0 • 1,- 49 • 0 g co 1-• 4: Q)33 rs • in , 69! I i I 1 el •-• ,.: V) in en v.: 0) , N. 4933 1.. , C • Dv4 I Ii I 0 • 4.: Ce) : 101 • 1 1 1 : C•I (Q ' 40) la so' c4 ..r.- v.: 49 J $1,125 -] 1 2 14.- . * • v- p... fa 69 010 9 69 0 9 6 0 - ••• Ea ce) CV_ CV •-• N.: 69 • 69 CV CO LCH 69: i . I 1 • in ('1 r•• a (C) CV ■•••• • .- : co a 'ITV1 ,•• 1 01 • 9 • 1 oi•I I 0 (0 0 Cg O '9 CN C 0 $1100!2 $1,092 $6,942 0 69 0 9 $3,2751 [$3, 2751 0 ft a) 0) _ : 4i40 0) , - a cr1- 1 4• Lo1 69 • I 1 I1 ry 0) 0.0 .. a c‘i 0) a $2, 7301 . 1 4in .• iI . ' iA, 1 A l9 rfell 11 :2 nft I I ea 0 U.10 n a Ca .! , 0 i in e i el 0 0 n ("i 9 0 8 I 9 0 8 . O ! .... _, - _ 0) 0 a 01 0) T 0 0 a g to c) rs CO 0 0 ,,--_ !.0 0 933 010 a a n. 4, 1 0 CD - 69 0 (0 4,33 0 of ! : 9, . to al . 1 40— 1 ! .5 B.! 1 . ..., a. en 0 • 1 o in a fa o Lo c`i. 0 V) 0 V) o 0 g 0 ._-- ;0 0 0 G •o O 69 To , i i 0 .... 0- 0 eel to 9 0 in 4, 0 69 0 0 O 9 - 0 0 E 0 0 9 0 8 4 0 8 4, o, el o h .- - v'7 ) o 0 ,... to (1) 0 c. r-. 0 v) , V) 01 0 0 r o ) 4333 o C.D - - $ol en 0 4. In tb 1 •ar 'V 'V ca 1 el •ct nt I O "It '1. to -0 u --- 6, 0 0 ci 0 ci - li: o • o 0.251 r• 0 v■ : in O in CNA 0 1 1 ! I - , map perimeter of water edge w/ GPS acquire low tide aerial photos acquire tide gauges TASK SUBTOTAL 1 1 • EB /DRP Monitoring Program Budget I Y h -1 M co N...• I I I C M i b i ..is: iu >, si .. r w49w $3,4581 _l .1 s'' N ..-�0 4944 0/49 asszi t8p .-7 N 49 69H Is.. > S 00 N. 49 49 I • K $2,373 $1,187 $1,187 Q) y IO 914 ra N to V► y 049 M 0 total year 5. - -- 1 i L$2,237 $1,118 $1,1181 to $1,193 $1,790 tv 69 4., al 3 0Cs 0 fN;f9 y i • .- 69 0) : �+O O 6914 MIV, Co O N CO 49 0 ti � t0p 490, o a) 14 N 6944 a N 0. i ID 3 ` 1 « N ; 0: 49 0 10 :fRi14 1nj 1 O ti h• st sstt 0.002 N14r- 69.4 Q - 69 0t (0 y co I u7. 49 N W 0 , OCO f'AiM $0 $2,184 y i •"! O « �I I y I TT (0 N 49 1 0) • 0) 1 49 49149 f 1 0) }D 0 y 1f) ; 49 0 O 49ih 0 0 co I0 {(91'- 149 I` co 0 44 A o ra• a co a E ■ —.0 C) V, 0 oCD al 0 0• tH tN : 0 43 los- 0 69 0 )n N 49 0 W 0 Ic9 0 fH 0 H 0 v) 0 v► 0 y CO •V a I C) X143.43 491 •ct 00) 0 w 0 y 0'0 w 0 49 0 49 0 fH 0 19 0 f9 0 y 0 � 0 49 0 y W 0) 49 O ( 69 O y lt sites 1 _ I 0 0 0 N N 1 10 >I i .=C w ' t) 1- h• (0 0 O l .o 0 0 (0 O .. 0.5 111 0 S' h 1 > 0 2, 1 • m N' i . 0 ta N 0 N 0 In N 0 0 0 .Y A 1.. : ro • , E 0) CD c 8l n 1 m oI a) < E; a) a) E l N Nj`� o m 8.o a• .0 . j.0 C 10'Q -8�'1— y m 07 y> .c'to may R N y > 8 C •a) -o a' OI7•C co w q y > 8 > t9 I a) sv C •a) m m a) c�y g 49,7 € c N a E 3 as i E I to N- ci. t (I) Q. p N 8 N a) measure stem height measure shoot density .TASK SUBTOTAL vaoetation 1 fidelineate rioarian vex. cover ct O tune G P S t- $ > C a c a) •o fuse nermanent transect t eco o m m . N a) tTASK SUBTOTAL 11 c a c TO- O N ci N a) monitor quarterly 4- TASK SUBTOTAL to jC' . a) 1 z �m) C.) ; r,)1 1 to 2 I c3 N 0 0) a a� v m E O a` 0) .c 0 .c O 2 a cG m w . . : . . .3c !ll .0 3 ' Z 0 I VI or I 1 1 ' • -- - - u:t i c's ,,,: I I : • r... cn . cti I - CD .e.- n.,1 !to . VP • Tr . :‘,. 1 . 0 VI , wv,vva. Vic. 4'11 0 4.9 N 01 ui $11,0641 IQI Qo� i 0 CO (0 CO 4 N co N co F,...5. 14 + (0 1CO Z 41 0 to 01 8 arc 469 el E arc VP I 0 49 VI (13 Iv. N P.. ,r-. I (3) cil K. ... • Cr) 69'4, ■ 0 N ‘-• 49 (0 V' (.... 14 N 111 I, - $4,772 4.772 0.N IVO 1... NI ac'le TI ‘Ir a) tit" 49.(. !.. • rNs r. . o t•-• 6.1P 49 el- ccc, vz) -. 41 o 1. 41 6. >a(ii l t I ; • 3 . 2 • 1 (0 iz...- 1.4 i 0 4, 010 C C 3;a 0 0 9 C a $8,996 533.737 $8,734 1 (0 Ps CI1 r- CI N. cc ,r w, w, (C0 O .e-.. . IN 1.12 r, ...: v.. lo) , '10 0 ,t-... I,. ID VP L. . es • al , - . • a 2 cv o 49 !co 1,.m. . 0) D:. I- 49. I a 101 1.-.. r• CD ;10 cl!rt SA I o 1.... VP CD fel a 332,754 .- •ts. V a) v— 0 .6 a CD to 7.cr co "0 4#* Ci: 63 in NI Ca� VP .... I o a in I CI v.. • CI- ... 1,. 69 0 CA, ! o , a ; (13 1 0. or- o o o •cr (NI C ‘4.* VI • 'az '0 ! . .cr N. o 0 CN VP o 'V (N. ....• 4 $35 00 0 0 ta 111 CD C010 49 461 0 CO c) . tv) «) 41 al 01 CI 0; 43 10 43 = a. CU .... 00 10 0 1 i 0 CI 0 ri 411 : 0 IN 49 IOozs — 0.0 Tv' 61 C . 0 : 3 ,„E l -, I SI o .a 49 VP 1 I (a.o! I CO, I; al 0 c3 VI 4,49 0 0:0 0 0 •cr:•cr 4,4) 44144 0 Izt Z '0 • CO S : ..a• ! as ! In i I I i a 1 I 1 ist• ..tt• ! •ct • ••cr >, !, i !c° in • .= 0 . , • u — ! w .22 • I i N . 'V 1 N CO r a I >. I01 , 'tS i I 413 ' ..-. Lt.: 1 03 tn i 1 sample for fish access deploy block nets 2>t/mo.-1 Mar -15 June ir1 monenro rulmen sample fallout insects deploy float traps sample benthic inverts collect core samples 1'4— !,:, 1 co I I 1 .2 !ini I 1 al • 1 : •C 1 1 I 111 ! I 11 • • ! I ! 0) I 'S. Ct 1 a EB /DRP Monitoring Program Budget State of Washington DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Region 4 Office: 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard - Mill Creek, Washington 98012 - (425) 775 -1311 July 3, 2001 City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development ATTENTION: Deborah Ritter 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Dear Ms. Ritter: JUL 0 5 2!!++001 PmENT SUBJECT: Restoration Project; Cecil Moses Memorial Park, Duwamish Waterway, Tributary to Puget Sound, Section 04, Township 23 North, Range 04 East, King County This is to notify you that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has reviewed the plans and specifications for the proposed restoration project at Cecil Moses Park on the Duwamish Waterway. The WDFW has determined that the proposed project is designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat and fish passage. Prior to any construction, the project must receive a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) permit by the Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to Chapter 75.20 RCW to ensure the habitat improvements will benefit fishery resources to the maximum extent possible. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 379 -2306. Sincerely, Pia /1-1Aci Pamela Erstad Area Habitat Biologist PE:pe:cecilmoses.wpd cc: Deborah Cornett, WDFW Mike Lozano, King County Facilities Management Division, Seattle Office Lynn Lewicki, SEPA Coordinator, City of Tukwila z 6 00 CO w= Jam' CO LL w0 gQ a. F w. z� t=o Z I— w w O -. O I-- ww F=- 0`. It—. O� Iii z O �. F--=, 0 z City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor July 3, 2001 Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, Washington 98104 -2337 VIA FAX 206 - 296 -0186 Re: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Cecil Moses Memorial Park ( —aka- North Wind Weir Park) at 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 Dear Mike: We are in receipt of your July 3rd letter requesting that the project be exempted from a Shoreline permit under WAC 173- 27- 040(2)(p). You also provided us with a copy of a July 3, 2001 letter from Pamela Erstad at the State Department of Fish & Wildlife indicating that a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) has not been issued. As stated in my June 18th letter, WAC 173- 72- 040(2)(p)(ii) requires that "the project has received hydraulic project approval by the Department of Fish and Wildlife ". I have attempted to contact Ms. Erstad however her voice mail indicates that she will be out of the office until July 10th. In an attempt to get clarification on the status of your HPA approval, I left a voice message with Tony Opperman who is handling the file in her absence. Until we can obtain a copy of the HPA approval by Fish &.Wildlife, we will not be able to proceed with your request for an exemption from the Shoreline permit. If you should have any questions, please contact me at 206 - 431 -3663. Sincerely, ,JL-) are_ Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager Jill Mosqueda, Associate Engineer 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 11100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 -431 -3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 King County Division of Capital Planning & Development Department of Construction & Facilities Management 320 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue' Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 296 -0648 FAX (206) 296 -0186 July 3, 2001 Ms. Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Estuary- Exemption of Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Dear Ms. Ritter: The King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management proposes to develop an intertidal estuary at the Cecil Moses Memorial Park site in Tukwila. The Department requests an exemption from a Shoreline Substantial Development permit as allowed under WAC 173-27 - 040(2)(p). The estuary is consistent with the WAC definition of a public project, the primary purpose of which is to improve fish and wildlife habitat or fish passage. Design of the estuary includes an embayment of intertidal marsh similar to an area directly across the Duwamish River. (Enhancement of the existing intertidal marsh is currently proposed as a separate project sponsored by King County Department of Natural Resources and the US Army Corps of Engineers.) The estuary is designed to allow a regular exchange of water with incoming tides and to provide an off - channel pool as a retreat for migrating salmon. Protective cover in the form of large woody debris will provide shade and hiding places for juvenile salmonids. Native trees, shrubs, groundcovers and grasses will be planted in and around the estuary to provide shade and improve habitat for bird and animal species and the design also includes an estuary perimeter wood fence. The scope of work for the Cecil Moses Park Project, currently in permitting with the City of Tukwila, has been reduced to include only the construction of the estuary. Sufficient funds are not available to construct the park scope of work. As I have done for the past three years, I will continue to include the development of the park in my annual request for budget consideration. Until the budget is approved, I am unable to continue with this portion of the project. When the budget is approved, I will submit for all required permits to develop the park, including the Shoreline Substantial Development permit. z ~W JU UO NO LU J H cn LL- wO gQ _a 1- uj ZF- I— O w~ U0 O( 0 1- WW 1- LL:'O wz 0 1' z } Currently, Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) uses the existing road that bisects the site for access to SPU utilities. This road will remain in place allowing continued access. I have discussed this issue, and received approval from Pat Herbig, SPU engineer. The site access for police and fire will remain as is and will not be impacted by the estuary construction. As requested, enclosed is an 81/2" x 11" plan of the site identifying the limit of work area and a letter from Ms. Pam Erstad with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Based on an earlier conversation, I understand the City will make a determination in approximately ten days. I appreciate the City's timely response. incerely, Micha ozano, Project Manager cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Curtis Tanner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pam Erstad, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Bud Parker, Supervisor, Parks CIP Section, DCFM Lynn Lewicki, SEPA Coordinator, DCFM Attachments Z' uJ 00 • wI J F-: CO L w0 2 ga �w z� F- O w Oco O F—' Ww - O; lilt. U - O I; z State of Washington DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Region 4 Office: 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard - Mill Creek, Washington 98012 - (425) 775 -1311 July 3, 2001 City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development ATTENTION: Deborah Ritter 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Dear Ms. Ritter: SUBJECT: Restoration Project; Cecil Moses Memorial Park, Duwamish Waterway, Tributary to Puget Sound, Section 04, Township 23 North, Range 04 East, King County This is to notify you that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has reviewed the plans and specifications for the proposed restoration project at Cecil Moses Park on the Duwamish Waterway. The WDFW has determined that the proposed project is designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat and fish passage. Prior to any construction, the project must receive a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) permit by the Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to Chapter 75.20 RCW to ensure the habitat improvements will benefit fishery resources to the maximum extent possible. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 379 -2306. Sincerely, Parn•Li (c/34,0 Pamela Erstad Area Habitat Biologist PE:pe:cecilmoses.wpd cc: Deborah Cornett, WDFW Mike Lozano, King County Facilities Management Division, Seattle Office Lynn Lewicki, SEPA Coordinator, City of Tukwila Z _� a: W UO cnw w= J1.- wO 2 wd w z�: 1- o Z F— w o; o �' 1— W w LI_ 0 U C' O z Deborah Ritter RE: Cecil Moses er grounding and Indemnificatiori6 From: Jill Mosqueda To: Lozano, Mike Date: 6/27/01 10:52AM Subject: RE: Cecil Moses Park Under grounding and Indemnification Mike, STREET VACATION Regarding the power poles, my part of our e-mail discussion of the last couple of days applies to Condition 2 in Ordinance 1899 for the street vacation and whether Connie could supply a letter of intent to remove or relocate the power poles, instead of actually doing the work. These previous e-mail discussions are not addressing design requirements for the project, only what needs to happen regarding the power poles for the street vacation. If the poles remain onsite and are relocated to meet condition 2 of the street vacation, then the power to tl-e poles needs to be underground. PROJECT DESIGN Regarding the design requirements for the actual estuary project, which is a different subject than the street vacation power poles, King County does need to ensure the design meets applicable codes. Your design team can figure out how best to handle power supply to the site. Of course, the design for your estuary permit application plans should include underground power for the site per City requirements. As stated to you yesterday, I am working with Bob Noe on the indemnification for the estuary. Mr. Noe is on vacation this week, so I will go promptly to his office next week when he returns and attempt to get this completed. Thanks for your patience. »> "Lozano, Mike" <Mike.Lozano @METROKC.GOV> 06/27/01 10:25AM »> Jill, I have a question related to your description of options related to the power poles. In paragraph 4. you state, "If the poles are removed, then you do not need to underground. If the poles are relocated, you will have to go underground ". Did you turn this around? If the poles are removed (first option described), the only way to continue power is to place underground and if the poles are relocated, power would remain at the poles and there would be no need to go underground, right? Why would we relocate power poles and place power underground? Your clarification is appreciated. On another matter, I left a voice message with you several weeks ago asking for the final indemnification form with signature identification. You sent me a letter stating that the City attorney agreed with the County attorney's addition. You also asked that I send you the final documentation. The County is agreeing with the City's indemnification and I don't want to second guess what the City requires as a final document. If the County was requiring the same of the City, then we would provide. Please send me two originals so that both parties can sign. Thanks. M. Lozano Original Message From: Jill Mosqueda fmailto:imosquedana ci.tukwila.wa.usl Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 2:18 PM To: Mike.Lozanona METROKC.GOV Cc: Deborah Ritter; Jim Morrow; connierna macleodreckord.com Subject: Cecil Moses Park Under grounding and Indemnification Page Y..._., +..a.s. �,...,.u....,....wu.�.....s,... .wa...su,..... .,..,.wu- ........, ,,,.a.s. .n. ,....._ . .... ........v -.,.. Deborah Ritter - RE: Cecil Moses Park t' ... er grounding and Indemnification Page 2 Following our e- mailing on June 21st, I reviewed all correspondence I have in my files for references to under grounding. Here is a summary of what I found and some clarification of my e-mail last Thursday. 1. The SEPA checklist for this project indicates that only a light at the bathroom will remain. This infers that the street lights on the project site will be removed. 2. The King County shoreline code KCC 25.16.160 requires under grounding. 3. Connie Reckord indicated on 03.10.00, that she was working with Seattle Light to under ground the power. You may want to check with her how this is going. 4. Condition 2 of street vacation ordinance 1899 requires relocation or removal of the power poles. Here is where I must clarify. If the poles are removed, then you do not need to underground. If the poles are relocated, you will have to underground. For your information, on Jan. 26, 2000, I spoke to Don Benson about a waiver to under grounding. Subsequently, I conferred with the PW Director on this issue. His response is that KC must make a strong case that under grounding is technically difficult or prohibitively expensive in order to get a waiver. (TMC 13.08.100). I sent this information to Don, in case he decided to proceed with a request for a waiver. Remember, the street vacation requires relocation or removal. Removal may be the better choice, for the following reasons: 1. Someone is paying the lighting bill and, if this is going to be a fish habitat enhancement project, the habitat people will probably recommend removal of the lighting. 2. As I remember, the park will be closed at night and will not be lighted anyway. 3. If the lights are removed, any under grounding requirement disappears. 4. Also, in light of our "energy" shortage and rising rates, the removal rather than relocation would seem a reasonable choice to meet Condition 2 of the street vacation. Please contact me if you have any further questions. On another topic; I am working with Bob Noe on the indemnification for the estuary. Mr. Noe is on vacation this week, so I will go promptly to his office next week when he returns and attempt to get this completed. Thanks for your patience. CC: Connie Reckord; Deborah Ritter =z w 00 WI w w }}O. g J. u. -a =w z� � O z f- LU uj O� OH ww U u' O wz U= O 1- z j Deborah Ritter - RE: Cecil Moses Park Iffier grounding and Indemnification From: "Lozano, Mike" <Mike.Lozano @METROKC.GOV> To: 'Jill Mosqueda' <jmosqueda @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 6/27/01 10:22AM Subject: RE: Cecil Moses Park Under grounding and Indemnification Page 1 Jill, I have a question related to your description of options related to the power poles. In paragraph 4. you state, "If the poles are removed, then you do not need to underground. If the poles are relocated, you will have to go underground ". Did you turn this around? If the poles are removed (first option described), the only way to continue power is to place underground and if the poles are relocated, power would remain at the poles and there would be no need to go underground, right? Why would we relocate power poles and place power underground? Your clarification is appreciated. On another matter, I left a voice message with you several weeks ago asking for the final indemnification form with signature identification. You sent me a letter stating that the City attorney agreed with the County attorney's addition. You also asked that I send you the final documentation. The County is agreeing with the City's indemnification and I don't want to second guess what the City requires as a final document. If the County was requiring the same of the City, then we would provide. Please send me two originals so that both parties can sign. Thanks. M. Lozano Original Message From: Jill Mosqueda [mailto :jmosqueda @ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 2:18 PM To: Mike.Lozano @METROKC.GOV Cc: Deborah Ritter; Jim Morrow; connier @macleodreckord.com Subject: Cecil Moses Park Under grounding and Indemnification Following our e- mailing on June 21st, I reviewed all correspondence I have in my files for references to under grounding. Here is a summary of what I found and some clarification of my e-mail last Thursday. 1. The SEPA checklist for this project indicates that only a light at the bathroom will remain. This infers that the street lights on the project site will be removed. 2. The King County shoreline code KCC 25.16.160 requires under grounding. 3. Connie Reckord indicated on 03.10.00, that she was working with Seattle Light to under ground the power. You may want to check with her how this is going. 4. Condition 2 of street vacation ordinance 1899 requires relocation or removal of the power poles. Here is where I must clarify. If the poles are removed, then you do not need to underground. If the poles are relocated, you will have to underground. For your information, on Jan. 26, 2000, I spoke to Don Benson about a waiver to under grounding. Subsequently, I conferred with the PW Director on this issue. His response is that KC must make a strong case that under grounding is technically difficult or prohibitively expensive in order to get a ' Deborah Ritter - RE: Cecil Moses Park I -✓ er urounding an Indemnification waiver. (TMC 13.08.100). I sent this information to Don, in case he decided to proceed with a request for a waiver. Remember, the street vacation requires relocation or removal. Removal may be the better choice, for the following reasons: 1. Someone is paying the lighting bill and, if this is going to be a fish habitat enhancement project, the habitat people will probably recommend removal of the lighting. 2. As I remember, the park will be closed at night and will not be lighted anyway. 3. If the lights are removed, any under grounding requirement disappears. 4. Also, in light of our "energy" shortage and rising rates, the removal rather than relocation would seem a reasonable choice to meet Condition 2 of the street vacation. Please contact me if uou have any further questions. On another topic; I am working with Bob Noe on the indemnification for the estuary. Mr. Noe is on vacation this week, so I will go promptly to his office next week when he returns and attempt to get this completed. Thanks for your patience. CC: Deborah Ritter <dritter @ci.tukwila.wa.us >, Jim Morrow <jmorrow @ci.tukwila.wa.us >, <connier @macleodreckord.com> 1 Deborah Ritte RE Cecil Moses Park'9,4grounding and From: Jill Mosqueda To: Connie Reckord Date: 6/26/01 7:47AM Subject: RE: Cecil Moses Park Under grounding and Indemnification NO. Condition 2 says remove or relocate the lights. »> "Connie Reckord" <connier @macleodreckord.com> 06/25/01 06:08PM »> I should clarify a point that I believe has been misunderstood for some time. The existing poles are street lights that were operational when there was housing on this site, and power does not extend off -site from the southern -most pole. There is no need for the street lighting to remain. King County has always planned to remove the poles and has no interest in any site - lighting other than what has already been provided at the restroom building (which is already underground coming from the pole off-site to the north). The problem is that the power that serves SPU's sump pump in their vault in the cul -de -sac comes from the middle pole, down the pole to an above -grade pedestal panel, then underground to the vault. This service cannot be interrupted. City Light has recently indicated it will locate the point of service at the pole that is off -site to the north and from there, the customer (as yet undetermined whether this means King County or SPU), may provide their own service. The County is in the process of discussing with SPU how this needs to be handled. The waterline is not being relocated. SPU and King County are finalizing language and a legal description for the easement for that waterline. If SPU and the County can agree, the best course of action may be to include the proposed alignment of the electrical service into the easement for the waterline. That decision has yet to be made, but if it can happen that way, the question may again be asked, will the City of Tukwila permit the street vacation before the street lights come down? Jill, you indicated in your e -mail of June 21 "If the lights are removed, any undergrounding requirement disappears." The lights will be removed as part of the estuary project. The undergrounding of electrical service is only for benefit of SPU's sump pump, not relocated lighting. Connie Reckord Original Message From: Jill Mosqueda ( mailto :imosqueda(c�ci.tukwila.wa.usj Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 2:18 PM To: Mike.Lozano(a)METROKC.GOV Cc: Deborah Ritter; Jim Morrow; conniermacleodreckord.com Subject: Cecil Moses Park Under grounding and Indemnification Following our e- mailing on June 21st, I reviewed all correspondence I have in my files for references to under grounding. Here is a summary of what I found and some clarification of my e-mail last Thursday. 1. The SEPA checklist for this project indicates that only a Tight at the bathroom will remain. This infers that the street lights on the project site will be removed. 2. The King County shoreline code KCC 25.16.160 requires under grounding. Page 1 Deborah Ritter - RE: Cecil MosesParkLI er grounding and Indemnification 3.. 3. Connie Reckord indicated on 03.10.00, that she was working with Seattle Light to under ground the power. You may want to check with her how this is going. 4. Condition 2 of street vacation ordinance 1899 requires relocation or removal of the power poles. Here is where I must clarify. If the poles are removed, then you do not need to underground. If the poles are relocated, you will have to underground. For your information, on Jan. 26, 2000, I spoke to Don Benson about a waiver to under grounding. Subsequently, I conferred with the PW Director on this issue. His response is that KC must make a strong case that under grounding is technically difficult or prohibitively expensive in order to get a waiver. (TMC 13.08.100). I sent this information to Don, in case he decided to proceed with a request for a waiver. Remember, the street vacation requires relocation or removal. Removal may be the better choice, for the following reasons: 1. Someone is paying the lighting bill and, if this is going to be a fish habitat enhancement project, the habitat people will probably recommend removal of the lighting. 2. As I remember, the park will be closed at night and will not be lighted anyway. 3. If the lights are removed, any under grounding requirement disappears. 4. Also, in light of our "energy" shortage and rising rates, the removal rather than relocation would seem a reasonable choice to meet Condition 2 of the street vacation. Please contact me if uou have any further questions. On another topic; I am working with Bob Noe on the indemnification for the estuary. Mr. Noe is on vacation this week, so I will go promptly to his office next week when he returns and attempt to get this completed. Thanks for your patience. Page 2 z 1 z JU O 0 W I J 1-- U) u_ O. 2 • a =• w z� � o zr U• � S: O H w w` I- U u_I _z ui U( • _ O H z Deborah Ritter - CecTMoses Park UndE ound'ing and indemnification From: Jill Mosqueda To: Mike.lozano @metrokc.gov Date: 6/25/01 2:17PM Subject: Cecil Moses Park Under grounding and Indemnification Following our e- mailing on June 21st, I reviewed all correspondence I have in my files for references to under grounding. Here is a summary of what I found and some clarification of my e-mail last Thursday. 1. The SEPA checklist for this project indicates that only a light at the bathroom will remain. This infers that the street lights on the project site will be removed. 2. The King County shoreline code KCC 25.16.160 requires under grounding. 3. Connie Reckord indicated on 03.10.00, that she was working with Seattle Light to under ground the power. You may want to check with her how this is going. 4. Condition 2 of street vacation ordinance 1899 requires relocation or removal of the power poles. Here is where I must clarify. If the poles are removed, then you do not need to underground. If the poles are relocated, you will have to underground. For your information, on Jan. 26, 2000, I spoke to Don Benson about a waiver to under grounding. Subsequently, I conferred with the PW Director on this issue. His response is that KC must make a strong case that under grounding is technically difficult or prohibitively expensive in order to get a waiver. (TMC 13.08.100). I sent this information to Don, in case he decided to proceed with a request for a waiver. Remember, the street vacation requires relocation or removal. Removal may be the better choice, for the following reasons: 1. Someone is paying the lighting bill and, if this is going to be a fish habitat enhancement project, the habitat people will probably recommend removal of the lighting. 2. As I remember, the park will be closed at night and will not be lighted anyway. 3. If the lights are removed, any under grounding requirement disappears. 4. Also, in light of our "energy" shortage and rising rates, the removal rather than relocation would seem a reasonable choice to meet Condition 2 of the street vacation. Please contact me if uou have any further questions. On another topic; I am working with Bob Noe on the indemnification for the estuary. Mr. Noe is on vacation this week, so I will go promptly to his office next week when he returns and attempt to get this completed. Thanks for your patience. CC: Connie Reckord; Deborah Ritter; Jim Morrow Page 11 Cecil B. Moses Park Log of Under Grounding Correspondence with King County Resource Comment Authority Street Vacation Ord. 1899 Condition 2 Remove or relocate Seattle Light facilities 10.21.96 Letter from R. Earnst to M. Lozano Seattle City Light relocation or easement Street Vacation 09.15.99 Letter from D. Ritter to M. Lozano Items 5 -6 Under gound per KCC 25.16.160 L98 -0054 Shoreline Permit 09.15.99 Letter from D. Ritter to M. Lozano Items 18 -19 Site visibility, safety and lighting SEPA checklist 10.22.99 Letter to M. Lozano from J. Mosqueda Estuary construction plans, Phase 1 and Phase 2, should be updated to reflect previous work, such as utility pole removal 01.12.00 Phone conversation C. Reckord and J. Mosqueda As part of street vacation discussion, C. Reckord indicated the poles are being removed. Street vacation 01.13.00 Letter to C. Reckord from J. Mosqueda Street vacation condition 2. Relocation or removal of Seattle City Light facilities Street Vacation If relocated, then the City will require under grounding. 01.26.00 Don Benson to J. Mosqueda D. Benson says City Light does not want to underground. 01.26.00 J. Mosqueda to D. Benson PW Director requires strong case before granting under grounding waiver, must be technologically difficult or prohibitively expensive. Page 1 of 2 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. Cecil B. Moses Park Log of Under Grounding Correspondence with King County 01.28.00 Letter to M. Lozano from J. Mosqueda Under street vacation, Item 3 lists under ground electrical utilities Street Vacation PW will not support a variance 03.10.00 C. Reckord to D. Ritter KC needs to relocate power and are discussing under grounding routing with Seattle City Light 02.22.01 Letter from D. Ritter to M. Lozano Items 13 -15 Under ground per KCC 25.16.160 L98 -0054 Shoreline Permit 02.22.01 Letter from D. Ritter to M. Lozano Items 27 -28 Site visibility, safety and lighting SEPA checklist 06.21.01 J. Mosqueda e-mail to M. Lozano The street vacation does not require under grounding. Need to clarify this with Mike: If the lights are removed, no under grounding. However, if the lights are relocated, then the under grounding ordinance applies. Page 2 of 2 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. peborah Ritter - RE: Cecil Moses Memo'T°^ Park �Y From: Jill Mosqueda To: connier @macleodreckord.com; Lozano, Mike Date: 6/21/01 5:52PM Subject: RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Page 1 Mike, This vacation process began in 1996 and everytime I start work on it, I need to review. For your convenience, I will restate the conditions for vacation: 1. Relocation of the Seattle water line facilities and granting of an easement by King County to Seattle 2. Relocation or removal of Seattle City Light facilities and granting of an easement by King County to Seattle Light, if the facilities remain onsite. Connie's e-mail was asking about requirements for the street vacation and what she could do instead of meeting the conditions. As I understand her questions, Connie wishes to provide a letter of intent to perform services, rather than perform them. The City will not accept this. This is the same answer she has received several times before to the same question. The work must be performed and needs to be performed under a City Miscellaneous permit. Once the work is performed and the City receives the easements and everything is recorded, the vacation will be complete. The vacation does not require undergrounding of power. Therefore, as part of the vacation, an undergrounding waiver is not necessary. I hope this clears up the undergrounding question as part of the vacation process. Undergrounding may be required under another permit, such as the shoreline permit. I have not reviewed that file recently, so I am not sure. I understand you have requested exemption from the shoreline permit. If you receive exemption, and if the requirement for undergrounding is part of the shoreline requirements, the undergrounding requirement will disappear. However, something should be done about the street lights located inside the park boundaries. Someone is paying the lighting bill and, if this is going to be a fish habitat enhancement project, the habitat people will probably recommend removal of the lighting. As I remember, the park will be closed at night and will not be lighted anyway. If the lights are removed, any undergrounding requirement disappears. Also, in light of our "energy" shortage and rising rates, the removal rather than relocation would seem a reasonable choice to meet Condition 2 of the street vacation. In addition to the above conditions, Mike and I need to ensure the following is met as part of the vacation conditions: On May 25th, 2001, I received a letter which was sent from Patrick S. Herbig at Seattle Public Utilities to Pat Brodin, the City's Operations Manager. Mr. Herbig has added some conditions for vacation. These conditions concern the domestic /fire services, the pipeline easement and the SPU pipeline stability. Mike was on the courtesy copy list and should have received a copy of this letter. If you did not receive one, I will be happy to fax one to you. I would like to see this vacation completed. Not much more can occur on the project until the street vaction is completed. The only way that can happen is if you and Connie move forward to complete the conditions, which are: 1. relocation of the water line and granting of an easement and 2. relocation or removal of power and a easement granted if the power stays onsite and 3. satisfy the SPU conditions stated in the May 25th letter. From what you are saying, you have been moving ahead with the water line stability questions and other items. That's great. And once the other conditions are met, we can complete this vacation, move on to [-Deborah Ritter RE Cecil MosesyMema-'',sParktl Po, the boundary line adjustment and get some construction permit review started. �. ., . Page 2j In the meantime, I will research the undergrounding requirement for its source and see what can be done about it. I will get back to you by next Wednesday. I will be happy to arrange a meeting between you and the Public Works Director to discuss the undergrounding, if it appears that the lights will remain and that one of the permits triggers the undergrounding codes. If there is anything else I can do to help this along, please let me know. Sincerely, Jill »> "Lozano, Mike" <Mike.Lozano @METROKC.GOV> 06/21/01 02:23PM »> I have a fax sent to me by Deborah on 2/26/01, a copy of Tukwila undergrounding code requirements. I asked Deborah to send me written City requirements to physically relocate utilities before vacation of the street and this is what I received. Highlited in the Municipal code is the following "The health, safety , and general welfare of the residents of the community require that all such existing overhead facilities be relocated underground as soon as practicable in accordance with the requirements included in TMC 13.08, and that all new facilities specified in TMC 13.08 be installed underground " The most "practicable" way for the County to do this work is under the estuary construction contract. There is no resident health, safety or general welfare concerns with this project. I would like to sit down with management to discuss this issue. Please give me a name and phone number so that I may arrange. I only do this because In feel strongly that someone in the City has to view this unique project as it relates to City Code. With the interest in Salmon protection and habitat by the City's mayor, I believe that it would be in the best interest of all parties to do what we can to construct this project. (See editorial Seattle Times dated May 16, 2001)Is the mayor aware of the County's efforts to provide a facility for migrating salmon, that he so strongly supports, in his own backyard? If he is not, I strongly suggest that this project be brought to his attention. I am not asking for anyone to break the law, only that I am allowed to sit down and go over our project as it relates to City requirements. This is a unique project in more ways than one and it seems to me that it can be viewed as such by management willing to look at the project with some flexibility. The "No, No, No's" in the response below is not the flexibility I am looking for and therefore request a meeting with Department management. appreciate, in advance, a contact with the City. M.Lozano Original Message From: Jill Mosqueda jmailto :imosqueda(a)ci.tukwila.wa.usl Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 12:44 PM To: conniermacleodreckord.com Cc: Deborah Ritter; Mike.Lozano ci METROKC.GOV Subject: Re: Cecil Moses Memorial Park You have asked two questions. Please refer to the following for previous Z Ce JU O 0 co o w= J I- �lL w0 u. W d =• w z� �- 0 zi- w Lu 0 0 0 I-- ww u' O wz • I. 0H z Deborah Ritter RE: Cecil Moses Memoir -Park Page 3 I. responses to these questions. 1. My letter to you of March 15, 2000, which answered this question. 2. Your memo to Deb Ritter dated March 10, 2000. 3. The letter copied to you dated Jan. 28, 2000, which answered this question. 4. My letter to you dated Jan. 13, 2000, which answered this question. The following are answers to your two questions in a more blunt way than the letters referred to previously. I hope this makes things clear for you. If you are still in doubt, feel free to request further clarification. Question 1. Can the City process the street vacation with a written easement or a letter stating SPU will give the easement, rather than wait for the facility to be moved? NO, NO, NO. KC MUST complete the conditions for vacation in Ordinance 1899. Moving the utilities and providing an easement are two different activities. You can not do one in place of the other. Both of these activities must be completed. KC must relocate the utilities AND KC must provide a copy of the easement provided to KC from Seattle. (see Condition 1 of Ordinance 1899.) please refer to Ordinance 1899, which spells out the conditions for vacation of W. Marginal Place South. Among several conditions stated in the ordinance, the water line facilities and Seattle City Light utilities shall be relocated and easements shall be provided. Please Note: If you are going to do the work necessary to meet the conditions, then you MUST HAVE a copy of the ordinance, so you know what you need to do. Ordinance 1899 was approved by council on 02.22.00. Please contact Bob Baker, Deputy City Clerk, at 206 - 433 -1854, if you need another copy of the ordinance. Please understand, in order for the vacation to be completed all conditions in ordinance 1899 shall be met and all documentation provided to me for review and recording. THE VACATION IS COMPLETE ONLY WHEN ALL CONDITIONS ARE MET AND ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS ARE RECORDED WITH KING COUNTY ASSESSORS. PLEASE PROVIDE THE DOCUMENTATION TO ME FOR REVIEW AND RECORDING. Question Number 2: Can we submit the application for road vacation with letters from these two agencies, stating the easement will be provided by a certain date? NO. NO. NO. Please refer to the previous correspondence listed above and to the answer to question Number 1. YOU DO NOT NEED TO APPLY FOR A VACATION. KC has already applied for the L Deborah Ritter= RE: CeciiMoses Memo -Park Page .4s vacation and the council passed ordinance 1899 in 2000, stating the conditions for vacation. YOU ONLY NEED TO MEET THE CONDITIONS STATED IN ORDINANCE 1899. A LETTER STATING THE WORK WILL BE COMPLETED AT SOME FUTURE DATE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. IF YOU ARE THE PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STREET VACATION, THEN PLEASE MOVE FORWARD AND COMPLETE THE CONDITIONS AS STATED IN ORDINANCE 1899. COMPLETING THE WORK MEANS THE RELOCATION AND OTHER CONDITIONS IN ORDINANCE 1899 MUST ACTUALLY BE DONE. THE CITY WILL NOT ACCEPT INTENT IN PLACE OF ACTUAL PERFORMANCE. »> "Connie Reckord" <connierCa�macleodreckord.com> 06/21/01 11:19AM »> Jill, Thank you for your voice mail, and yes, I concur that getting questions and answers in written form is the best strategy for all. My question regarding road vacation process is: Can you process the application for road vacation with the written easement in place, or even a letter from the agency (SPU or City Light) stating they will give King County an easement, rather than waiting for either the utility to be physically moved or the easement recorded? The County hopes to have the final language for the easement for the 20" water line (which will remain in place) resolved with SPU in the next two weeks for the water line, but it may not be recorded. In addition, the County has gotten verbal assurance from City Light that they will grant an easement for the relocated electrical service to the sump pump in SPU's vault, but the final design for the electrical relocate won't be done for another week to 10 days, and the legal description and easement will follow that. The electrical service won't be relocated until City Light issues a work order and gets it on their work list, which could take two or three months. Can we submit the application for road vacation with letters from these two agencies stating the easement will be approved by a certain date? Please respond to me and Mike Lozano on this. Thank you, Connie Reckord CC: Deborah Ritter City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director June 18, 2001 Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, Washington 98104 -2337 VIA FAX 206 - 296 -0186 Re: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Cecil Moses Memorial Park ( —aka- North Wind Weir Park) at 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 Dear Mike: We are in receipt of your June 4th letter suggesting that the project may be exempt from a Shoreline permit under WAC 173- 27- 040(2)(p). 1 have discussed your letter with our Planning Manager (Jack Pace) and the Engineer on the project (Jill Mosqueda). In order to obtain Tukwila's approval for an exemption from a Shoreline permit, please provide the following: A letter formally requesting exemption under WAC 173- 27- 040(2)(p). This letter should clearly describe the reduction in the project scope of work and briefly state the reasons for the change in scope. You should discuss how this public project's primary purpose will be to improve fish and wildlife habitat or fish passage. The letter should also address the following: Please describe how the project will accommodate Seattle Public Utility's access requirements. Will a fence surround the project? If so, what access procedures will be in place for police and fire? Please acknowledge that you will apply for a Shoreline permit if you plan to develop a park at this location in the future. Please attach a simple 8 -1/2 x 11 drawing of the site indicating the new limit of work line and location of any internal access road. • Documentation from the Department of Fish and Wildlife to show your compliance with WAC 173- 27- 040(2)(p)(i) and (ii). 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 11100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206 -431 -3665 Michael G. Lozano June 18, 2001 Re: L98 -0054 Page 2 Upon review and approval of the items referenced above, we will issue a letter of exemption. As a reminder, the following list reiterates the sequence of steps that need to be taken following the granting of the Shoreline exemption. Please note: Items 1 through 5 below must be approved and finalized prior to the issuance of land altering permits. 1. King County issues a SEPA Determination followed by a 15 -day SEPA appeal period. Please provide the undersigned with a copy of that Determination at the time it is issued by King County. 2. Execution of Indemnification Agreement by King County and City of Tukwila. 3. King County completes the street vacation process (please contact Jill Mosqueda regarding outstanding items). 4. King County submits an application for lot consolidation (please coordinate with Deb Ritter regarding application requirements). 5. King County submits an application for the removal and replacement of significant trees under a tree permit (please contact Deb Ritter regarding Tukwila Sensitive Areas Ordinance requirements). 6. King County applies for all necessary land altering permits (please coordinate with Jill Mosqueda). 7. If signage will be installed, please contact Deb Ritter regarding sign code requirements. If you should have any questions, please contact the undersigned at 206 -431- 3663 or Jill Mosqueda at 206 - 433 -0179. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Jill Mosqueda, Associate Engineer King County Division of Capital Planning & Development Department of Construction & Facilities Matmgement 320 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue' Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 296 -0648 FAX (206) 296 -0186 Deborah Ritter Dept. of Cpmmunity Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Estuary Dear Deborah: �9•rl i�. <[.r JUN C 7 2001 DEVEL�. };'i'ss5Er (`i' June 4, 2001 Attached is a memo from Lynn Lewicki, SEPA Coordinator, dated June 1, 2001 regarding the project Shoreline Permit. As stated in her memo, local governments are allowed, through State law, to exempt from a shoreline substantial development permit a public project which improves fish and wildlife habitat or fish passage. This project definitely meets the criteria of improved fish passage. The project must be consistent with the local government's shoreline master program in order for the City to consider a project exempt from the shoreline permit. Will the City consider exempting the shoreline substantial development permit? If so, I will provide a letter to the City from the Department of Fish and Wildlife stating the project is necessary for the improvement of the fish passage within this stretch of the Duwamish River. The Hydraulic project approval will be provided in the permit process. Please contact me as soon as possible so that I can determine how to proceed with the permit process. Thank you. incerely, Mic Lozano, Project Manager Cc: Lynn Lewicki, SEPA Coordinator Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Attachment z 1 z ce WtO 00 U) CO LLI W i•- w 0 uj a I— z l-0 z U.1 t• l.l U D 0- O I- ll]w 1- H. LI z w 0 01 Z 4 1 June 1, 2001 To: Mike Lozano From: Lynn Lewicki RE: Exemption from Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Restoration Project The Cecil Moses Park intertidal estuary project would be exempt from a shoreline substantial development permit under WAC 173- 27- 040(2)(p) as "a public project, the primary purpose of which is to improve fish and wildlife habitat or fish passage, when all of the following apply: (i) The project has been approved in writing by the Department of Fish and Wildlife as necessary for the improvement of the habitat or passage and appropriately designed and sited to accomplish the intended purpose; (ii) The project has received hydraulic project approval by the Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to chapter 75.20 RCW; and (iii) The local government has determined that the project is consistent with the local shoreline master program. The local government shall make such determination in a timely manner and provide it by letter to the project proponent. 6 -J C-) UO W= 1—: cn u_ W O. �a W Z1.- t- O Z I- 111 uj 0 c 0 I-- W LU_ F=- U H Z U N' O Z go' City of Seattle Paul Schell. Mayor Seattle Public Utilities Diana Gale, Director MY 2 cj 2001 May 24, 2001 Pat Brodin Operations Manager City of Tukwila Department of Public Works 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98138 Subject: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Project Dear Mr. Brodin: This letter pertains to the proposed Cecil Moses Memorial Park by King County Parks, which includes the vacation of 27th Avenue South. in Tukwila. This proposed park and vacation will impact Seattle Public Utilities' (SPU) existing 20 -inch feeder main in addition to creating the relocation of an existing fire hydrant and water service. SPU and King County Parks have been in negotiations to resolve the major impacts to the existing 20 -inch feeder main in 27`h Ave S. and we have reached a consensus on how to address these impacts. With this consensus between our agencies, the specific SPU issues that need to be addressed through the vacation process of 27`h Ave S. can be identified. These issues are presented in the following: Provisions for Domestic/Fire services: The existing fire hydrant and King County Parks water service in 27th Ave South will need to be relocated outside of the proposed Cecil Moses Memorial Park to the right -of -way in West marginal Place South (the closest street) to conform to SPU's policies. These requirements for King County Parks are detailed in the following: • The existing fire hydrant on 27`h Ave South will need to be relocated to West Marginal Place South, as mentioned above. If King County Parks desires fire protection within the park, they will need to purchase a metered fire service to be located in the street right -of -way of West Marginal Place South. Downstream of this fire service meter, King County Parks will then need to install a private (King County Parks) fire system if they desire that level of fire protection. • The existing King County Parks domestic water service will need to be relocated so that it is also in the street right -of -way of West Marginal Place South. The plumbing inside the park will need to be private plumbing owned and maintained by King County Parks, since this area is not part of the street right -of -way. • The work and fees required by SPU for the removal of the existing hydrant, water service retirement, and purchase of a new fire and water service will need to be paid in advance. When King County Parks is ready to proceed with payment, they may contact SPU's Customer Service Representative Terri Kanyer at 206 - 684 -5804. I have forwarded to King County a fee list so that they can determine the cost of choices they may wish to make. Dexter Horton Building, 10th Floor, 710 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 Tel: (206) 684 -5851, TTY/TDD: (206) 233 -7241, Fax: (206) 684 -4631 An equal employment opportunity, affirmative action employer. Accommodations for people with disabilities provided upon request. nC4 41 z w Ce UO W Z. J w• O 2 L 2 Ci "W Z� H O W — W 2 p. U O • I- ww • U, z:. ON z Mr. Pat Brodin 2 05/24/01 Pipeline Easement: As a part of this street vacation, an easement will need to be provided to SPU from King County Parks for the 20 -inch water main through the proposed Cecil Moses Memorial Park. In this easement the following things need to be considered by King County Parks: • Survey the water main to get a legal description for the easement (see attached neap and information sheet of proposed SPU easement). • Have a licensed surveyor stamp the survey. • Return the legal description to Bob Gambill, SPU's right -of -way agent, so he can finish the easement (Please see the attached easement template that will need to be completed). • Send ordinance approval from King County to Bob Gambill. • SPU will record the easement (all recording fees will be borne by King County Parks) SPU pipeline stability SPU and King County Parks agreed that the 20 -inch water main will be adequately protected provided that: • The Stone Column construction as outlined in the March 14, 2001 HWA Geosciences, Inc report is implemented (See attached report). • The soil densities are quantified before and after construction of the Stone Column construction as was discussed at the meeting on March 28, 2001. • Loading over the existing SPU 20" pipeline does not exceed HS-20 loading during or after the construction. • SPU is involved in the review and comment process of the Cecil Moses Memorial Park plans and specifications prior to advertising the project in order to assure that terms of the water -main easement and items to protect the 20 -inch water main are implemented. • Settlement monitoring points are installed on the SPU 20" pipeline to monitor settlement during construction and settlement is within the specifications as was discussed at the meeting on March 28, 2001. This letter requests that the fire and water service issues, easement requirements, and pipeline protection needs should be conditions of the vacation of 27`h Ave South and to date we have been working with King County Parks so they can address these issues in this project. I hope that SPU, the City of Tukwila, and King County Parks can work together to construct an intertidal estuary while not compromising the integrity of SPU's water system. Please call me at 206 - 684 -4629 with any questions or concerns. Sincerely, 4/9-24 Patrick S. Herbig Assistant Civil Engineer Seattle Public Utilities Enclosures Mr. Pat Brodin 3 05/24/01 cc: SPU Terri Kanyer, Major Services Team Charlie Madden, Water and Wastewater Engineering Aziz Alfi, Water and Wastewater Engineering Bob Gambill, Property Management Doug Goett, Water Operations Henry Haselton, Materials Lab Judith Noble, Watershed ESA Coordinator Green/Duwamish Watersheds City of Tukwila Jill Mosqueda, Public Works Development Deb Ritter, Department of Community Development King County Parks Mike Lozano King County Division of Capital Planning & Development Department of Construction & Facilities Management 320 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue' Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 296 -0648 FAX (206) 296 -0186 May 9, 2001 Ms. Deborah Ritter Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 HAY 1 0 2001 c)121 y,..iip.•,F tijE RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Dear Deborah: As I mentioned to you recently, I have spent the past year working with Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) engineers on the estuary design and the related SPU water line easement. Attached is a description and details of stone columns to be included in the estuary design for protection of the water line in event of an earthquake. The stone columns are a recommendation made by my consultants based on a geotechnical survey /report of the site. SPU personnel have reviewed, commented, and approved the stone column design and the County and SPU property services personnel are currently working on the easement, as a result of this approval. We will supplement the construction plans submitted to the City of Tukwila for permitting with additional plans and specifications for the stone column construction. Please let me know the number of submittals required. If you have any questions, please call me at 296 -4240. incerely, Micha Lozano, Project Manager Cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Attachments z r4 JU Uo t t� 0 !)W JI 1—. 2u wo J cod I— W I— o Z1-. w uj o= 0 I—; ww 1- 0. o .z P F-': z 111 a q 9 w GEOTECHNICAL REPORT CECIL MOSES PARK PROPOSED INTERTIDAL ESTUARY KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON HWA Project No. 90102 -900 March 5, 2001 revised March 14, 2001 Prepared for: MacLeod Reckord UZI HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. Z IZ w JU O 0 0 ef) Eli LU -I I--: w 0 2 ▪ O w z� n • o o U N: W W; WZ! _„ O E- March 5, 2001, revised March 14, 2001 HWA Project No. 90102 -900 Recommendations for the soil improvement (stone columns) and the recommended re- location of the proposed slope are discussed in detail in the following sections. 4.3.1 Stone Columns Stone columns consist of vertical columns of compacted crushed rock, generally installed on a 5- to 10 -foot triangular grid as illustrated on Figure 8. They are installed by jetting a vibratory probe from the ground surface to a predetermined elevation or the top of a dense soil layer and filling the probe hole with crushed rock as depicted on Figure 8. Repeated additions of crushed rock and insertions of the vibrating probe result in a dense column of crushed rock 30 to 42 inches in diameter that extends from the given depth to the base of the structure or to the ground surface. The stone column installation also densifies in situ granular soils around the column and creates a vertical column of non- liquefiable crushed rock. Moreover, the stone columns can serve as conduits for relief of high pore pressures which cause liquefaction to occur. Stone column installation can be achieved using either wet, top -feed, or dry, bottom -feed, procedures. The wet, top -feed, method uses water (jetting) to flush out the in -situ material, to advance the probe and aid in placing the backfill which is fed at the ground surface. The wet, top -feed, procedure produces silty waste water which must be collected in de- silting basins and then properly disposed. The dry, bottom -feed, method uses air to advance the probe and place the stone backfill which is fed through a feed pipe attached to the vibrator. The maximum particle size of the backfill material for the wet method is generally 2 to 3 inches. The maximum particle size of the backfill material for the dry method is limited by the size of the feed pipe and is typically on the order of 1 -inch. Either the wet or dry method would be feasible for this site. To limit the potential for slope instability in the proposed development, stone column spacings and diameters should be sufficient to increase the relative density of the sandy soils between columns to at least 75 percent. We expect conventionally installed, 34- inch - diameter, stone columns spaced on a 7 -foot triangular grid will result in the 75 percent minimum relative density. The effectiveness of soil densification will, however, depend on the equipment and materials used, and on the type of soils present. Silt or siltier sands and peat are less amenable to densification and tighter column spacing may be required. Stone columns should extend through loose and soft soils to the underlying dense glacial till or bedrock. The till or bedrock varies in elevation between 0 to —10 feet. However, variations from this should be expected. For cost estimating purposes, we recommend the zone of the stone columns be estimated as an area not less than 20 feet wide, 20 feet deep and 200 feet long. We have contacted 90102fr 8 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. March 5, 2001, revised March 14, 2001 HWA Project No. 90102 -900 Hayward Baker for some preliminary estimates. For a 20 foot wide zone, the estimate provided to HWA is $90,000 to $100,000 for installation of the stone columns. 4.3.2 New Slope Geometry We additionally recommend the geometry of the slope between Stations 83 +90 and 84 +50 be re- aligned so that the proposed 6 foot elevation contour is moved to the east at least 10 feet at Station 84 +30. This re- alignment will move the slope away from the existing water line. Our slope stability analysis indicates that this shift of the slope will, accordingly, shift the slip surface away from the water line. 4.4 EXCAVATIONS AND TEMPORARY SHORING z 1—. Z. w tr 2 00 co p; co tu JI H CO u_ w 2 Maintenance of safe working conditions, including temporary excavation stability, is the responsibility of the contractor. All temporary u_ P ary excavations in excess of 4 feet in depth N d should be sloped in accordance with Part N of WAC (Washington Administrative Code) z� w 296 -155, or be shored. The alluvial and fill materials at this site classify as Type C soil. o Unsupported temporary excavations in Type C soils must be inclined no steeper than w 1 V2H:1 V (horizontal to vertical). Flatter slopes may be required where ground water w seepage occurs. Temporary slopes should be protected from erosion, as necessary, v covering the cut face with well- anchored plastic sheets.' by o LLI o1-. Based on the soil conditions observed in our explorations, we anticipate that the w, u_8 soils can be excavated with conventional equipment such as backhoes and loaders. on-site lL Z However, the in situ soils are typically very loose or soft and highly o N by excavation equipment. Therefore, equipment travel on excavated surfaces disturbance be ce z �: prevented or restricted. This may necessitate use of drag line or similar equipment to 0 z effect successful excavation of the estuary area. 5.0 UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for King County and MacLeod Reckord for use in design of a portion of this project. This report should be provided in its entirety to prospective contractors for bidding and estimating purposes; however, the conclusions and interpretations presented herein should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. Experience has shown that soil and ground water conditions can vary significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between explorations that may not be detected by a geotechnical study. If, during future site operations, subsurface conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those described herein, HWA should be notified for review of the recommendations of this report, and revision of such if necessary. If site conditions change between submission of this report and the start of construction, or if conditions change due to other work at the 9oio2tr 9 '. <.,ln ✓ „ HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. Z re 2 J 0 O O tp 0 W=.. J H. W O to Zd ▪ lL ZF F- O w H 2 U 0 O -; WW. 1-- 0 u" O, .Z. C.) g)— F-I; 0 City of Tukwila Department of Public Works April 30, 2001 Ms. Jill Hoyt Seattle Public Utilities Key Tower, Suite 3100 700 Fifth Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Subject: Cecil B. Moses Park at Oxbow (SPU Ref. C11 -5078) Dear Ms. Hoyt: Steven M. Mullet, Mayor James F. Morrow, P.E., Director The City of Tukwila currently cannot provide water service to the Cecil B. Moses Park near the West Seattle supply line in the Oxbow area at this time. This letter specifically authorizes Seattle to continue serving the Park for fire and domestic needs. With SPU concurrence, this authorization shall be construed as temporary until such time that development occurs and the Tukwila system can be feasibly extended for both domestic and fire protection needs. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (206) 433 -1861. Sincerely, Pat Brodin Operations Manager PB:ad cf: Michael G. Lozano, King County manna Spencer, Permit File Michael Cusick Finance Dept. (P:dicro\Cecil Puk�j) i - RECEIVED 0 2001 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 433 -0179 • Fax: 206-431-3665 City of Tukwila Department of Public Works Mr. Michael Lozano Division of Capital Planning and Development Department of Construction and Facilities Management 320 King County Administration building 500 Fourth Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 Subject: L98 -0054 Shoreline Permit Indemnification Steven M. Mullet, Mayor James E Morrow, P.E., Director Dear Mike, Bob Noe reviewed and approved the language you sent me on March 8, 2001. The City will need to see the full agreement, of course, once it is ready for signatures. If you have any questions, please contact me at 206 - 433 -0179. Sincerely, Jill Mosqueda, P.E. Development Engineer Cc: •Deborah Ritter, Department of Community Development Bob Noe, City Attorney 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 433 -0179 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 z w CIL U; oo W0 J = w o: u- Q. co 0 z� �= o' z 1-: w uj ocn: 0 F- . w uj 1-- U I- LL Z. V --Z`. o z INDEMNITY AGREEMENT This indemnity agreement is entered between King County ( "County ") and the City of Tukwila ( "City ") on 'the date below indicated. RECITALS King County is the owner of certain real property located within the City of .Tukwila commonly referred to as Cecil . Moses Park :,(North Wind Weir Park). and legally described in Exhibit "A" attached 'hereto. 2 King County wishes to take engage in development activities related to . the. aforementioned property. 3 . The ` County's - proposed development activities for the property inc?ude..cutting away: portion of the:riverbank on the Duwamish River to establish an estuary. B AGREEMENT 'The ' County agrees to `.indemnify and hold - the' City harmless •against '.any and all ` clairis , demands, damages , losses, liens; liabilities. penalties; 'fines, lawsuits, or'.other proceedings and :costs and.expen_ses (including attorneys fees) which accrue, arise, or are incurred as a result of the County's action in cutting away . portions of the Duwarnish River riverbank for its - estuary Project `associated with the property described in Exhibit "A" . The County's liability under this Indemnity Agreement shall be limited solely to the County's negligence.' This agreement shall be •binding upon and shall inure to the benefit ,'of the ;parties, ,their respective heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns . This; agreement shall be governed under the laws of the State of . Washington. In any.' suit, action, or : 'appeal therefrom, : to enforce or interpret :` this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled; to recover its expenses incurred therein including, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. .,.. JU, c.) 0, U 0 w uj co 11. w 0' = C! F- w' z�-. F- O' Z uj O -: w W, I- Y. 0, •Z 0 1- z City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director February 22, 2001 Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, Washington 98104 -2337 Re: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Cecil Moses Memorial Park (aka North Wind Weir Park) at 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 Dear Mike: This letter is a recap of our last technical review letter (sent to you on September 15, 1999) as well as an update of items that have been discussed since that date. We are sending this letter in response to your recent communication with us regarding the above - referenced project and your desire to resume the permitting process with the City of Tukwila. This letter represents our review of your Shoreline Substantial Development permit application and is divided into two parts. The first part of the letter identifies certain additional information and /or revisions needed from you to ensure that the project meets the substantive requirements of the City and to continue our review process. The second part of the letter provides comments from our reviewing departments that you may wish to consider as you make those revisions. We understand that King County will be issuing a SEPA Determination on this project. Please make the City of Tukwila a Party of Record in connection with your processing of the SEPA Determination. We would appreciate a final copy of the associated SEPA Checklist prior to your issuance of the Determination. As we have discussed, the City of Tukwila cannot issue the Shoreline permit until the appeal period for the SEPA Determination has passed. The appeal period for the Shoreline permit is 21 days from the date the Shoreline permit is issued by the City of Tukwila and received by the Department of Ecology. No construction activities may occur until after the Shoreline appeal period has expired. REQUIRED INFORMATION AND REVISIONS General 1. Please provide 9 updated and complete plans sets and 1 updated and complete set of PMT's when responding to the required revisions identified below. To make the plan sets internally consistent and current, the updated plans are to replace in their entirety any earlier versions you have submitted and to incorporate all changes you have made prior to this technical review letter. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Michael G. Lozano February 22, 2001 Re: L98 -0054 Page 2 We currently have partial plan sets dated September 16, 1998, January 8, 1999, April 2, 1999, May 28, 1999 and July 14, 1999. Additionally, some supplemental information was never incorporated into the plans. For example, the estuary cross - sections "A" through "P" (referenced on Sheet C1) were submitted in 8 -1/2 x 11 format. These should be incorporated into the plan set. At least 4 of the 9 resubmitted plan sets should be marked with a "bubble" or "cloud" to show the specific revisions and /or changes requested in this technical review letter. 2. Per your October 8, 1999 letter, you anticipate that the park will be constructed in phases due to King County budget constraints. Please verify if this is still the case. If so, please show the limit of work lines for Phases 1 and 2, respectively, on at least one plan sheet. Indemnity Agreement 3. On March 13, 2000 and February 2, 2001 the County was provided with a draft Indemnity Agreement. As stated in the March 13, 2000 letter, if the Habitat Panel wishes to assume liability and provide indemnification, it may not be necessary for King County to indemnify. To date, we have not received a response from the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office. Alteration of Watercourses 4. Per TMC 16.52.050(I)(5)(d)(1), prior to issuance of any land altering permit, you must provide proof that you have notified "all adjacent communities and the Washington State Department of Ecology prior to any alteration or relocation of a watercourse and submit evidence of such notification to the Federal Insurance Administration; obtain necessary approvals for change in watercourse through FEMA, prior to authorizing any development to carry out a development which will change any watercourse." Intertidal Estuary 5. Per KCC 25.16.190, "Landfill or excavations shall be permitted only when technical information demonstrates water circulation, littoral drift, aquatic life and water quality will not be substantially impaired." The estuary channel is dependent on the stability of the river bank areas. The cut banks adjacent to the river and new estuary are fairly steep and toe erosion is likely from tidal action and changes in flow velocity. Accordingly, these cut banks will need toe of bank protection and support. Please provide the following: a. Complete plans and cross - sections showing the structural design of the mouth of the new estuary. b. Per Jill Mosqueda's October 22, 1999 letter to you, your written response to these requirements should address stability issues and provide documentation for the River's ability to take additional sediment loading. You should also discuss the Habitat Panel's maintenance and monitoring plan and its assumption of liability if the project should fail. Construction timing should also be described. On 1, Michael G. Lozano February 22, 2001 Re: L98 -0054 Page 3 Stabilization information (such as toe of bank protection and support) should be reflected on the estuary plans and cross - sections. This information should incorporate King County's guidelines for bank stabilization projects. c• Erosion control information for the proposed estuary construction and stabilization as well as procedures to protect the river from silt. Said erosion control information must be in accordance with King County Surface Water Design Manual guidelines. Please provide the erosion control design plans on a separate sheet, including cross - sections. z � w JU U OQ WI 1- d. Information which addresses the staging for estuary construction and stabilization u_ w0 as well as disposal, stockpiling and timing of excavated and /or dredged materials. Please incorporate this information (as applicable) on the estuary ►Y plans and co D e. A geotechnical report which supports the proposed design of the intertidal estuary. z E- l— I• I 1— 0 z 1- W w O E• l2: 0 I— Site Access and Parking 6.. Per your letter dated. July 7, 1999, King County has agreed . to place a gate ww = U' removable bollard at the "mouth" of the parking lot. This removable bolla bollard will be substituted for one of the standard gateposts. This allows the public to use the grasscrete ~ H turnaround during off -hours when the gate is locked. Emergency and maintenance 4 0 vehicles will enter the locked gate as needed. When exiting, the bollard will be removed z to allow maximum clearance. King County has also agreed to maintain and keep this removable bollard in operable condition. Please revise all affected plan sheets to show 0 0 the correct location of the gate and removable bollard. 0 z Per Seattle Public Utilities' letter to you dated September 27, 2000, traffic will not be allowed over pipelines without their prior review. Please provide documentation regarding your satisfaction of this requirement. 8. On June 24, 1999 the Planning Commission approved your proposal for 12 regular parking spaces and 1 handicapped parking space under File L99 -0036. Landscaping and Signage 9. Per KCC 25.16.030(E), the following minimum landscaping conditions must be met: • Any outdoor parking perimeter ... must be maintained as a planting area with a minimum width of five feet. • One live tree with a minimum height of four feet shall be required for each thirty linear feet of (perimeter) planting area. Michael G. Lozano February 22, 2001 Re: L98 -0054 Page 4 • One live shrub of one - gallon container size or larger for each sixty linear inches of (perimeter) planting area shall be required. .1u t/UCt l v c E_ z ce w QQ� JU 000 W = F- cnu- w0 LLQ =d 12. Sheet L1 and Survey Sheet 1 show the location and size of the existing trees to be F' z� - 10. Per Seattle Public Utilities' letter to you dated September 27, 2000 "no trees shall be placed over the 20 -inch pipeline or the 48 -inch pipeline or within 20 feet of the edge of the pipelines." Please show the location of these pipelines in relation to the proposed landscaping. We recommend you provide this information on a separate landscape plan sheet which has been dimensioned and scaled. 1 1 . Per KCC 25.16.080, no sign ... shall be permitted which is more than 72 inches in height as measured from the average grade level. Please provide height dimensions for the "Dismount and Walk Bicycle" signage indicated on Sheet D2. Tree Permit Requirements Utilities removed (most of which are in the estuary creation area) and the schedule for their 0 replacement. It is our understanding that the construction of the park will occur in phases, z 1— with Phase 1 covering the immediate area of the new estuary. We recommend that all UJ uj replacement trees shown on the schedule on Sheet L1 be planted in the new estuary area D 0 during Phase 1. Please revise Sheets K1, L1, L4 and L5 and any other affected sheets 0 P- o accordingly. 0 H w w. u- O 13. The existing utility poles are not referenced on the site plan. Please revise the site plan ti.i z accordingly to show the location and deposition of the existing poles. P I 1 ip t�l2C(t L'L(C z 14. Under KCC 25.16.160, "overhead utility facilities shall not be permitted in public parks, monuments, scenic recreation or historic sites." Prior to issuance of any land altering permits, the applicant shall place all utilities underground pursuant to the Tukwila Underground Ordinance. 15. Per KCC 25.16.160, all utility distribution and transmission facilities shall be designed so as to: 1) minimize visual impacts; 2) harmonize with or enhance the surroundings; 3) not create a need for shoreline protection; and 4) utilize natural screening to the greatest extent possible. Boat Launch 16. During the June 24, 1999 public hearing (regarding the special permission request for the parking lot), accessibility for canoes and kayaks was discussed. The access point is a pre- existing rock - covered slope at the base of the pedestrian bridge. The project plans do not propose any additional, formal boat, canoe or kayaks launching facilities. If such facilities are contemplated they should be reflected in the existing project plan and conform to the requirements of KCC 25.16.200(E). ' Michael G. Lozano February 22, 2001 Re: L98 -0054 Page 5 COMMENTS As a courtesy, we are providing you with the following, additional comments. Although the items referenced below are not code requirements, we encourage your consideration of this information. Biological Assessment 17. A biological assessment is required for any project using Federal funds or requiring Federal permits. Intertidal Estuary 18. Non - native trees are being planted on the slope in the area of the intertidal estuary. These types of trees may not be acceptable or appropriate to the Habitat Panel. You may wish to incorporate more native pioneer tree species that will survive full sun conditions. z Q: W = QQ J U' U O. o LLI J= H • u- WO �Q co =d I-W z= 19. It appears that only one area of the estuary is to be staked with willows. In order to w O provide cover and stability in a relatively short time, we recommend the use of more live cuttings and salt tolerant willow species around the lower edge of the estuary. v o O CP- off W W 20. In reviewing the most recent Riverbank Stabilization Evaluation (prepared by ~ U z.GeoSciences Inc. and revised April 2, 1998) there appear to be two alternatives: replacement of the tire wall or retention of the tire wall with mitigation measures. In the coi U, opinion of Tukwila's Urban Environmentalist, leaving the tire wall in place with mitigation F _. measures is reasonable. As reported, the riverbank is not failing in this location. O H z Riverbank Stabilization Evaluation Signage Additionally, as the tire wall is adjacent to, and on top of, a City of Seattle water main, it would be very difficult to replace the tire wall and restabilize the riverbank. However, the report states that the tire wall is partially supported by wood piling. The report does not specifically mention the condition of these wood piles but does recommend a monitoring program. The City's Urban Environmentalist recommends that the responsible jurisdictions (King County and Seattle Water Department) coordinate a stabilization plan in anticipation of a failure in the stability of the woodpiles. The Urban Environmentalist also recommends that the area of the riverbank affected by the tire wall be enhanced with live cuttings from native willows and red osier dogwood. However, this option may be limited by the thickness of the tire wall. 21. Appropriate signage in the parking area such as "Dogs must be on a leash" should be installed. Coordinate this with the Tukwila Parks & Recreation Department if desired. 22. The entrances to the park should be well posted with park rules and hours of operation. Michael G. Lozano February 22, 2001 Re: L98 -0054 Page 6 23. Park patrons should be encouraged (by signage) to report suspicious activity or damage to the facility. 24. Due to the inherent danger of the river, signs should be posted warning park patrons to stay back from the riverbanks. 25. The parking area should have posted warning signs asking park patrons not to leave valuables in unattended vehicles. 26. It is our understanding that you wish to install a temporary job sign, a permanent identification sign and one or more permanent interpretive signs. When you are ready to apply for these sign permits please contact Minnie Dhaliwal, Associate Planner at 206- 431 -3685. Site Visibility, Safety and Lighting 27. In the "Light & Glare" section of your draft SEPA checklist (provided on September 16, 1998), you have indicated that the only lighting in the park is a security light on the existing restroom building. Additionally, you have indicated that the park will be closed at dusk. However, the Tukwila Parks Department believes (from a practical standpoint) that due to the park's connection to the larger trail system, the park will be accessible around the clock. In light of this fact, the Parks Department has suggested that the parking lot have lighting for safety and general use. 28. The landscape architect should check site visibility where the secondary trails meet the main river trail for safety. 29. Due to remote location of the park, a pay phone should be installed to facilitate park patrons who seek help or want to report criminal activity. The pay phone should not accept incoming calls and should have digital pager prefixes blocked. Hydrants 30. Per our Fire Marshall's memo to you dated June 14, 2000, the Fire Department must approve the site of any relocated hydrant prior to being installed. Current standards will also require the installation of a 5 -inch Stortz Adapter on the relocated hydrant. Related Permits 31. Excavation of the riverbank to provide a new off - channel estuary habitat will require a Fish & Wildlife HPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Permit. If a 404 Individual Permit is required, additional agency approvals related to the Corps permit would likely be necessary. z �w cc JU O 0 CO O CO LIJ J = H U) LL w 0 IL Q d • w z= 1- 0 w~ • w 0 O — o I-. w W. • U ..z w U2 0 F- z Michael G. Lozano February 22, 2001 Re: L98 -0054 Page 7 If you should have any questions regarding the within, please do not hesitate to contact me at 206 -431 -3663. Sincerely, flt.k 01?Ae___ Deborah Ritter Associate Planner cc: Donald Benson, URS Greiner Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Jack Pace, Planning Manager Bruce Fletcher, Parks & Recreation Jill Mosqueda, Public Works Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist Mike Alderson, Fire Department Bob Abbot, Police Department Z = • IX U1 6 JU o o, U) LU W =: w O g J. LL.= =w z �. o' z� 2 O• _ CI ;UJ W' • Z LLI U =' O H Z Department of Community Development 6300 Sauthcenter BI, #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: 206 -431 -3670 Fax 206 - 431 -3665 To: rn 1 1 1--O C .110 Fax: Q -RD 0 I VO Phone: aoco co - 0 l0_I b From: asdo Date: Pages: Re: ,argent ❑ For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle 1/U t \ c e e n ∎:\- Q • cQ , D &,r CoL, cu*o c't10 (.9ll-Lt R r n ct rn s w- 4elle cQ h ► fn wHq ck c - coki- 66N-sofvkit (\NA- . 3 stodca_c. 1 •n ,SSu • \L� . ( ` a0 Cp City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 March 13, 2000 Alan Abrams, Sr. Deputy Prosecutor King County Prosecuting Attorney, Civil Division 516 Third Avenue, Rm. E -550 Seattle, WA 98104 Re: Cecil Moses Park (North Wind Weir Park) Steven M Mullet, Mayor Dear Mr. Abrams: Thank you for speaking with me recently regarding the proposed estuary at Cecil Moses Park. As discussed, the City is concerned that there will be erosion problems or riverbank failure because the estuary, as proposed, involves the cutting away of the bank on the Duwamish River. I have drafted an indemnification and hold harmless agreement the City would like the County to consider regarding the proposed project. A copy of the agreement is enclosed for your review (jurats and signature lines are not currently included in the draft). Also, in reviewing a letter dated January. 21, 2000 from Jill Mosqueda (Tukwila Public Works) to Michael Lozano at the County, it appears that there has been some discussion regarding the "Habitat Panel" assuming liability for the project and providing indemnification for erosion or failure associated with the cutting away of riverbank. Depending upon that organization's role and the assurances it can provide, it may not be necessary for the City to seek indemnification from the County. Please advise on this aspect of the project and whether and to what extent the Habitat Panel may provide the indemnification the City seeks. I look forward to hearing from you shortly: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY Robert F Noe City Attorney cc: Jill Mosqueda w/ encl. RECEIVED MAR 15 2000 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS Phone: (206) 433 -1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433 -1833 INDEMNITY AGREEMENT This indemnity agreement is entered between King County ( "County ") and the City of Tukwila ( "City ") on the date below indicated. re Ili A. RECITALS JU UO UD' J =, wo 2. King County wishes to take engage in development ga activities related to the aforementioned property. u.< 3. The County's proposed development activities for the ►_-_ property include cutting away a portion of the riverbank on the ? Duwamish River to establish an estuary. z0 w w 1. King County is the owner of certain real property located within the City of Tukwila commonly referred to as Cecil Moses Park (North Wind Weir Park) and legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. B. AGREEMENT = 0 The County agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless p H against any and all claims, demands, damages, losses, liens, w w liabilities, penalties, fines, lawsuits, or other proceedings and i 5' costs and expenses (including attorneys fees) which accrue, arise, U. r or are incurred as a result of the County's action in cutting away w Z, portions of the Duwamish River riverbank for its estuary project ow H =' associated with the property described in Exhibit "A ". 1. O z This agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties, their respective heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns. This agreement shall be governed under the laws of the State of Washington. In any suit, action, or appeal therefrom, to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its expenses incurred therein including . reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. 1 King County Division of Capital Planning & Development Department of Construction & Facilities Management 320 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue' Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 296 -0648 FAX (206) 296 -0186 February 2, 2001 Deborah Ritter Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Soutlicenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Cecil Moses Park Dear Deborah: Z ~ W cc JU O 0 to � uJ w WI F- 'Li 0 2 u_ ? co = z� F— 0 w~ w 2• 0 0 O (n O F- =▪ 0 While working with Seattle Public Utilities almost all of this past year on the Cecil u- 0 Moses Memorial Park estuary project, and continuing to do so, I am finally in a position lil z that I feel comfortable with resuming the permitting process with the City. U = to O 1 — Z The City is requiring the County to provide a letter of indemnification for the estuary project. It is not standard procedure for the County to provide such a document. I believe that the County can provide the letter but in order to expedite this permit condition, and assuming that the City has asked the same of other applicants, will you please send me a standard form meeting the City's needs? Since the County attorney is not certain of the City's requirements, he will be able to review and discuss the indemnification requirements directly with the City rather than producing a document that he would assume meets the intentions of the City. On another note, I appreciate your help on this project, however, please be certain of information and requirements placed on this project. In particular, had I followed your direction regarding the soil borings I would have most likely cancelled the project because of time restraints. The cancellation of this project would have been most unfortunate for me, the County Parks Department, the public and the Elliot Bay Duwamish River Restoration Panel. As you realize, fortunately I asked the same question of another City staff member and was given different direction, which you verified. RECEIVED FEB 0 7 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Thank you. incerely, Mich j Lozano, Project Manager Cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord S a C of Seattle it y Paul Schcll, £vlayor Seattle Public Utilities Diana Gale, Director January 18, 2001 Michael G. Lozano King County Division of Capital Planning and Development Department of Construction and Facilities Management King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Subject: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Project Dear Mr. Lozano: Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) staff has reviewed the Geotechnical Engineering Services proposal from HWA GEOSCIENCES, INC. (DATED January 5, 2001) for King County. This review is to determine if the proposal will adequately explore options of protecting the SPU 20" water main in the vicinity of the proposed intertidal estuary by King County. Comments are as follows: • Response to task #1; If the hired contractor needs access on or across SPU property, then King County will need to obtain a right of entry from SPU prior to such access. King County needs to be aware that two to three weeks should be allowed for this task, so preplanning is recommended. • Response to task #7; Item "d" discusses seismic design considerations being consistent with "building code" requirements. The current SPU seismic guideline is to use the International Building Code (IBC -2000) ground motion and structural criteria. The site shall be engineered for the pipeline to withstand the effects of ground motion due to liquefaction, landslide, and ground settlement. • SPU would like to ensure that the Geotechnical report from HWA GEOSCIENCES, INC. has clear recommendations on Engineering solutions that maintain the integrity of the 20 "pipeline. • Is there a reason no borings are being performed in the south end of the park site (near the end of the cul de sac)? • Please see additional comments in the attached email from Henry Haselton, SPU Materials Lab. Dexter Horton Building, 10th Floor, 710 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 Tel: (206) 684 -5851, TTY1TDD: (206) 233 -7241, Fax: (206) 684 -4631 An equal employment opportunity, affirmative action employer. Accommodations for people with disabilities provided #14t9 MTV D VELOPMENT RECEIVED JAN 222001 .aft Mr. Mike Lozano Page 2 January 18, 2001 I hope that SPU and King County can work together to construct an intertidal estuary while not compromising the integrity of SPU's water system. Please call me at 206- 684 -4629 with any questions or concerns. Sincerely, i7e4 i'WL/47 Patrick S. Herbig Assistant Civil Engineer Enclosures cc: SPU Jillian Hoyt, Major Services Team Charlie Madden, Water and Wastewater Engineering Bob Gambill, Property Management Doug Goett, Water Operations Henry Haselton, Materials Lab Aziz Alfi, Water and Wastewater Engineering City of Tukwila Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord L. A. (Lorne) Balanko, HWA GEOSCIENCES, INC. Pat Broden, Operations Manager Jill Mosqueda, Public Works Development Deb Ritter, Department of Community Development`` Page 1 of 1 Pat Herbig - Cecil Morris proposal From: Henry Haselton To: Aziz'Alfi; Charlie Madden; Pat Herbig Date: 01/11 /2001 10:04 AM Subject: Cecil Morris proposal I have reviewed HWA's proposal and have the following comments: 1) HWA's proposal suggests investigating subsurface conditions using hollow stem drilling techniques. I believe mud rotary drilling techniques to be more appropriate, since evaluating liquefaction potential will be a critical aspect of the analysis. This is not just my personal opinion, it is the primary conclusion from a 1995 seismic evaluation study by ASCE's Seattle geotechnical section, and represents the consensus of the local geotechnical community. 2) I would prefer ground water monitoring to be conducted in a manner to evaluate extreme fluctuations in the groundwater level. This would require an effort beyond taking measurements to determine the "stabilized ground water table conditions ", as proposed. I think something like a 24 hour monitoring period would be more appropriate, as with a transducer set into one of the piezos, coupled with a review of tidal data. This way the extreme possible ground water fluctuations can be evaluated, assisting in the analysis of "rapid drawdown" effects. The rapid drawdown analysis should be included in the proposal. 3) The proposal should include evaluation of the possible need to relocate the water main, and if so, review of existing data (or more explorations) along the proposed re- alignment corridor. Item 2 in the scope includes review of relevent reports in HWA's files. This statement should be clarified to include data by others, as in data from METRO's RETS line that we discussed in our meeting. That's all. Let me know if I can be of more assistance. Henry file: / /C: \WINDOWS \TEMP \GW )00001.HTM 01/11 /2001 King County Division of Capital Planning & Development Department of Construction & Facilities Management 320 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue' Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 296 -0648 FAX (206) 296 -0186 Pat Herbig City of Seattle Water Engineering Division 710 Second Avenue Dexter Horton Building Seattle, Wa$hington 98104 RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Dear Pat: January 8, 2001 Please find enclosed a scope of work for the soils investigation of the water line at Cecil Moses Memorial Park. Please review the scope and call me with any questions /concerns. I am on a very aggressive schedule and would appreciate a prompt reply. I am playing catch -up with the very little progress experienced with this project last year. You will note that I did not include borings on the west portion of the site as discussed in our December meeting. The estimate we were given by Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) at the December meeting of $150,000.00 - $160,000.00 for the pipe relocate was well above the initial estimate that we were given in April of last year by SPU. I have attached minutes prepared by my consultant, Connie Reckord, of our April meeting. We met in April to specifically address the relocate issues /concerns. With recent relocate estimates and other concerns raised with a relocation of tie line, we are no longer considering this an option. Again, I would very much appreciate a prompt response to the proposed geotech scope of work. Thank you. Micha'�, ozano, Project Manager Cc: Charles Madden, Supervising Civil Engineer, SPU Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Attachment JHN—YJt] -1701 eri • e r rt<un I'IHLLLUU KtLKUNU JAN -0S -01 1 { J HN- Utj-1' U l u; dt r Kun flHLLtUU KtLKUKU IU LUrJ KC FPRKS P.04 JAN -05 -01 16.10 PROM:HWA 08CIENCE5 INC I0,42E' "42714 PACE 3/7 Water Liao Evaluation — Cecil Moats Memorial Paris HWA project No. 90102400 preliminary assessment of water line stability aspects, and as roughly indicated on the attached plan. The borings will be utilized to delineate soil stratigraphic conditions and characteristics in this critical slope area. We plan to install 3 standpipe piezometers in selected borings in this area to better define ground water conditions which is also of major significance to stability considerations. 3. Perform the field exploration programs utilizing an HWA engineer or geologist, who will log subsurfhce conditions exposed in the exploration borings. We anticipate utilizing a truck - mounted, hollow -stem auger, drill rig to perfbrm the work, which will include installation of 3 standpipe piezometers at critical locations along the line to allow monitoring of ground water conditions. We do not, however, plan to monitor the piezometers longer than is necessary to establish stabilized ground water table conditions in the vicinity of the line and proposed estuary development during the duration of this evaluation, as indicated in the Schedule section of this proposal. 4. Collect soil samples from the test boring explorations for laboratory testing to characterize subsurface soil deposits at the sites. 5. Perfbrm field and laboratory tests on selected samples to evaluate relevant geotechnical engineering properties of the site soils, including natural moisture content, Atterberg Limits, grain size distribution and direct -shear strength tests Laboratory testing will be conducted in general accordance with ASTM standards, 6. Perform geotechnical engineering analyses and evaluate data derived from the subsurface investigation and laboratory testing program with respect to the items listed in paragraph 7 below. 7. Prepare a report summarizing the results of our geotechnical engineering study of the subsurface conditions and proposed estuary slopes and water line stability. The geotechnical reporting shall include descriptions of surface and subsurface conditions, a site plan showing exploration locations and other pertinent features, summary exploration logs, and laboratory test results. Geotectuaical engineering recommendations pertaining to the following items will also be presented; a) Presence and efibct of existing loose/compressible, or unstable, soils; b) Excavation slope design and/or treatment measures necessary to provide adequate levels of stability for the slopes and the adjoining water line; c) Earthwork requirements including site preparation /mitigation needs, suitability of on -site soils for fill and other construction purposes, ill placement and compaction, as appropriate; 9OI021o0.doc 2 of 3 HWA OEQSOIENCES I C. JAN -09 -1901 09:29 FROM MACLEOD RECKORD JAN -0S -01 16:11 FROM ,HWA ..- 0SCIENCES INC Water Line Draluation — Cecil Moses Memorial Park ITVVA Project No. 90102400 TO [073 KC PARKS 101426f f'42714 P.05 PACE 4/7 d) Seismic design considerations consistent with current building coda criteria; S. Provide project management for the geotechnleal tasks. COST ESTIMATES The estimates of costs of our services have been based on our understanding of the project requirements and the scope of services proposed herein. We estimate that the budgetary requirement for ow work is about '$18,900. A detailed breakdown of man -hours and estimated costs, based on current (2001) HWA labor rates and direct expenses, is provided on the attached spreadsheets for your reference. Should an expanded/reduced scope of work be desired, the cost of our services will need to be adjusted. However, we will not undertake work beyond that proposed herein and will not exceed the current budget without your prior authorization. Please note that the proposed subsurface investigations include evaluation of physical soil parameters only; evaluation of the presence of contaminated soil and/or ground water will not be undertaken SCHEDULE Subject to the availability of suitable drilling equipment, we anticipate that the evaluation will take approximately 6 weeks to complete from the date of notification to proceed and all necessary right --of -entry permits being secured, We will, however, be able to provide preliminary findings, observations, and conclusions on an interim basis, should project scheduling needs so dictate. 0.0 We trust that the foregoing proposal and estimate of costs for our services meets with your current requirements, and we thank you for the opportunity to make this submissions. However, if you have any questions or comments, please contact either of the undersigned at your convenience. Sincerely, L.A (Lorne) Balanko Senior Geotechnical Engineer LAB/SHH:lab 90102$00.doc Sa H. Hong, P.P. Principal Geotechnical Engineer 7 3 of 3 HWA GEOSCEENCES Ltic. L RECERERCE: Bose mop provided by NACLEOQ RECKORD. HVAGEOSCIENCES INC. LEGEND s)44 BORING DESIGNATION AND o' 30. go. APPROXIMATE LOCATION rilimilimilliiimmemenual 1)1-(O 3 not 5 tzcn j) SCALE; 7'-4i GREEN RIVER TRAIL — PHASE 2 NORTH WIND WEIR PARK DEVELOPMENT KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON SITE PLAN PEGRR W. 90102-500 C V C8S89•,901 02-30090102tY31 Dr1'C. NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director ober 20, 2000 Patrick Herbig Seattle Public Utilities 710 Second Avenue, 10th Floor Seattle, Washington 98104 Re: Cecil Moses Memorial Park ( —aka- North Wind Weir Park) at 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 (Shoreline permit application) Dear Mr. Herbig: We are in receipt of a copy of your September 27, 2000 letter to Mr. Lozano. I wanted to take this opportunity to specifically respond to Items 6 and 7. Item 6 You have requested that Seattle Public Utilities ( "SPU ") be exempt for any future pipeline maintenance under the proposed Shoreline permit. I discussed your request with Robert Fritzen, Shorelands Specialist at the Department of Ecology (425- 649 -7000) on Wednesday, October 18th. He indicated that pipeline maintenance is a covered exemption under WAC 173-27 - 040(2)(b), (copy attached). However, SPU will be required to submit a written request for an exemption under this clause to the City of Tukwila each time that maintenance is needed. A blanket exemption for any and all future pipeline maintenance is not available. If you have any 'questions or concerns regarding this requirement, please contact Mr. Fritzen at the number provided above. Item 7 Please coordinate with Mr. Lozano regarding access to all SPU facilities in the proposed park. King County Parks has agreed to maintain and keep in operable condition a removable post which will secure the park entry gate into a closed, locked position during off - hours. Mr. Lozano will provide you with the name of a contact in Parks maintenance who will be available to provide SPU with access during off - hours. If you should have any questions regarding Items 6 and 7, please contact me at 206 -431 -3663. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Mike Lozano, King County Jill Mosqueda, Public Works, Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Z H W. ce 6 UO. N o CO W WI f- w O. 2 u_? a w z 1- o w~ 2 0 O = 0 H ww I- U: Li. O Z UD- P F- z 9S City of Seattle Paul Schell, Mayor Paul Schell, Mayor Seattle Public Utilities Diana Gale, Director September 27, 2000 Michael G. Lozano King County Division of Capital Planning and Development Department of Construction and Facilities Management King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Subject: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Project Dear Mr. Lozano: T UKi+'JILA PUBLIC WORKS Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) staff has reviewed the draft Cecil Moses Memorial Park Plans by King County. These plans are not completed yet to a level for final comments by SPU and as such, there are a number of issues that need to be resolved. Some of the major issues are as follows: 1. A new fire service meter and domestic service meter will need to be shown on these plans, which is consistent with the Seattle Water Code. Briefly, this requires the meters to be in the street right -of -way (West Marginal Way South) adjacent to the park. These meters must be in a riot[- traffic area within the_.. street right -of -way. A private plumbing system will be required to provide fire protection and domestic water service within the proposed park. 2. The existing domestic water service to the restrooms and fire hydrants within 27th Ave South will need to be.retired. 3. The soils surrounding SPU's 20" pipeline is subject to liquefaction (please see attached memo from SPU's Materials Lab). Additional Geotechnical investigation will be needed by King County to address soil and pipe stability issues. 4 No trees shall be placed over the 20" pipeline or the 48'" pipeline or within 20 feet of the edge of the pipelines C. r�l',�3tA.C+;' , k)..)1-1:11) i, t:;'t`,j f {a_ .)'. "t,l� NJ:" k) 5' CI. s `,' :`- )tt�(� 5. Please provide SPU with a copy of the "Right -of Waybse Permit ", issued by SPU to King County for the bridge and path portion of the park constructed earlier. SPU would like any future pipeline maintenance to be exempt under the Shoreline Permit (King County should apply for this during Shoreline Permit process for the estuary) 7 Vehicle access will be needed to all SPU facilities within the proposed park. c„u5 ive cc1,- lea 8. SPU is concerned about the loading on the pipelines during and after construction. Please blip not allow traffic over the pipelines without review by SPU. Dexter Horton Building, 10th Floor, 710 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 Tel: (206) 684 -5851, TTY/TDD: (206) 233 -7241, Fax: (206)684 -4631 An equal employment opportunity, affirmative action employer. Accommodations for people with disabilities provided upon request. • CGCAJ >..aa u • September 27, 2000 Michael G. Lozano Page 2 of 2 SPU would like to reiterate that there might be additional unforeseen events or additional comments that SPU is not aware of at the present time that may affect these plans. If you have any questions or comments please call (206) 684 -4629. Sincerely, Patrick S. Herbig Assistant Civil Engineer cc: SPU Jillian Hoyt, SPU Major Services Team Charlie Madden, SPU Water and Wastewater Engineering Bob Gambill, SPU Property Management Doug Goett, SPU Water Operations Henry Haselton, SPU Materials Lab Aziz Alfi, SPU Water and Wastewater Engineering City of Tukwila -Pet B1vtlen Pat 6rodih Enclosures: Memo & Plans tY uJ J0. U 0 N0 W =. —1 I- LL: w O. LL< a Z �. I— O. Z 1— LLI U Cf 'O co 'Cl 2 W'. — O, LL.Z F= _ O~ Z Seattle Public Utilities Materials Laborato y Memorandum Date: September 7, 2000 To: Patrick Herb g, SPU From: Henry Haselt. n, P.E., SPU Materials Laboratory Subject: Cecil Moses emorial Park Plans Review This memorandum documen s the SPU Materials Laboratory's review of the referenced plans. We have several concerns abut the proposed project's possible impacts to SPU's 20 -inch water transmission pipeline. Our concerns are mainly related to the construction of the "Intertidal Estuary", and are summarize as follows: 1. It appears that the Intertidal Estuary would be constructed by excavating beneath the water table. The depth of exca ation beneath the water table is dependent on the tide. Therefore, dewatering will likely be equired. Additional study is required to determine possible dewatering induced impa is (e.g. total and differential settlement) on' the pipeline and tbei, mitigation. 2. A permanent 3H to IV sl pe is planned for the edge of the estuary. We request technical documentation be provid d that proves this slope inclination is stable, especially in the "rapid drawdown" condition th would prevail as the tide goes out. The slope should have a minimum factor of safet of 1.5 under static "rapid drawdown" conditions, and 1.15 under seismic conditions (10 p rcent probability of exceedance in 50 years). 3. The shallow soils appear to be highly susceptible to liquefaction. Lateral spreading would also be likely in the pipel ne vicinity if the estuary is constructed. We request mitigating measures be defined for .rotection of the pipeline from these circumstances. 4. We are concerned about . ound movement associated with excavation. The pipeline and vicinity should be instru ented and monitored during construction. A contingency plan should be established in t e event that movement is detected. We are not very concerned about the small changes planned to the soil cover over the pipeline, provided excessive filling do -s not occur above the pipe. We would, however, prohibit labmemol SPU Materials Laboratory 707 South Plummer Street Seattle. Washington 98134 (206) 386-1236 (206) 386 -1168 FAX Revised: 09/27/00 Cecil Moses Memorial Park September 7. 2000 • stockpiling of excavation spoils over both the 20 -inch and 48 -inch pipelines during construction. We strongly suggest these concerns be addressed before approving the plans. We would be happy to meet with the geotechnical consultant to discuss these concerns. We request that we be involved in reviewing the consultant's report, and would like to be kept involved at the time of construction. Please let me know if you have questions or comments concerning our review. I will return the plans and reports via interoffice mail. 2 SPU MATERIALS LABORATORY City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Fire Department Thomas P. Keefe, Fire Chief June 14, 2000 Re: North Wind's Weir Park Mike Lozano Project Manager King County Facilities Management 500 4th Avenue Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 Dear Sir, It has come to my attention that King County is contemplating removing and capping the Fire Hydrant at the above named Park. Tukwila's Ordinance #1692 requires that there "shall be Hydrants spaced so that a Hydrant is no more than 150 feet by line of Vehicular travel from a building... ". The existing Hydrant was required as a condition of the Building Permit for the structure on the site and must not be removed. This Office must approve the site of the relocated Hydrant prior to being installed. Current Standards will also require the installation of a 5" Stortz Adapter on the relocated Hydrant. If you have any additional questions, contact me at (206) 575 -4407. Respectfully, /// Mike Alderson Fire Marshal cc: Connie Reckford MacLeod Reckford 231 Summet Avenue East Seattle, WA 98102 Debra Ritter, Tukwila DCD Head uarters Station: 444 Andover Park East • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 -575 -4404 • Fax: 206 -575 -4439 City of Tu Department of Co TO: Jack Pace FROM: Deb Ritter DATE: March 27, 2000 ila RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park (Wind We Status of L98 -0054 (Shoreline applica Tukwila's technical review comments were iss We are still waiting for King County's correcti our technical review is nearly complete. Bob Noe is requiring that King County provid construction fail). After discussion with Gary, indemnification document to King County o Shoreline •ermit will not be issued without this Gary met with the Habitat Panel on March 16 that meeting. munity Development MEMO r) ion) Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director ed to King County on September 15th (see copy attached). ns. Lynn Lewicki of King County will not issue SEPA until an indemnification assuming liability (should the estuary Steve Lancaster approved this approach. Bob mailed the March 13th. King County has been advised that the ndemnification. h. His memo dated March 23rd documents the results of King County has been advised of the required -teps (which are to be completed in the order given below). ical review comments and provides indemnification. King County at completion of technical review process. mit will issued (to be valid for 5 years). 1. King County responds to all of our tech 2. A SEPA determination will be issued by 3. If all conditions are met, a Shoreline pe 4. A land altering permit and a street u-e permit will be requested (and hopefully approved) for relocation of the electrical and water util ties. 5. The street vacation will be requested (a d hopefully approved). 6. Lot consolidation will be requested (and hopefully approved). 7. A land altering permit will be requested and hopefully approved) for construction of Phase I of the project (development of the estuary, estuary fence and associated interpretive signage). Phase II of the project is expected to proceed in 2001 (parking lot and associated landscaping). cc: Jill Mosqueda, Associate Engineer Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Wa shington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 MEMORANDUM TO: Deborah Ritter, ssistant Planner File: #L98 -0054 FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist DATE: March 23, 2000 RE: North Wind Wei Park - Meeting with Habitat Panel, Shoreline Permi /Tree Permit for Intertidal Estuary. On 3/16/00 I met with the Elliot Bay/Duwamish Restoration panel for King County's proposed North Wind Weir Park now being referred to as Cecil Moses Park. The issues we discussed that are not resolved are the tree regulations permit, and riverbank stabilization/enhancement work for the new estuary. I have attached an older memo that is revised due to a typographic error. A brief summary of the meeting is provided: 1. Riverbank Stabilization /Intertidal Estuary I mentioned that the City was requesting indemnification from King County because of the riverbank and estuary potential instability. We discussed the fact that there was not any geotechnical evaluation of the current plan to lay back side slopes without structural reinforcement or support. All that is planned for the riverbank and estuary channel is new plantings. The panel agreed that this work should have a geotechnical review and professional engineered design. They expressed some concern that the County may have not covered this as they expected. I told the panel I would double -check to make sure this has not been adequately addressed. The panel still desires to build the estuary without any hard structural component. I researched a 9/15/99 letter the City sent to Michael Lozano, King County Parks Manager. In the letter the City asked for structural design of the mouth of the new estuary and a geotechnical report to support the proposed design of the intertidal estuary. It appears the report has not been submitted. The panel asked me to continue to coordinate with the County's design consultant — MacLeod Reckord. Z cc w 6'D. 00 J I. cn ~' w O. cn a. =W Z� wa uj moo' U O = w. 1— r- u"O wZ • U= O H Z N. Wind Weir Meeting March 23, 2000 Page 2 2. Tree Regulations Permit Because the Park budget keeps changing, the Phase I aspect will be just the new estuary. I asked the panel if they could plant all the required trees for the tree permit in the new estuary area. They indicated that this was reasonable since most of the tree removal will occur in the area of the new estuary. This would be another coordination role to direct Macleod Reckord to revise the landscape plan for the estuary. z w. 6 U UJ J H. U) LL. w O. A few other items mentioned by panel members were City's request to relocate utilities, the Biological Assessment is draft but being reviewed by committee, and construction sequencing = w �—_ including the possible need for a Army Corps of Engineer's permit. z O' To summarize, the panel is very anxious to build the project this year. I feel we need to coordinate w w with Mike Lozano because the panel is confirming the need for additional consultant work. King D o' County has the role of managing the Phase I estuary portion of the park project. Let me know if o cn you have questions. o t-- = w, LL. f" O: u• z: � O z Cc: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Jack Pace, Planning Manager Jill Mosqeda, Associate Engineer City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Public Works March 15, 2000 Connie Reckord MacLeod Reckord 231 Summit Avenue East Seattle, WA 98102 Subject: Dear Connie: Cecil Moses Park (North Wind Weir Park) 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 James F. Morrow, P.E., Director RECEIVED MAR 16 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Today I received copies of two faxes you sent to Deb Ritter. Here is my response to your questions. Fax 1 The first fax asked whether a note on the drawings for the shoreline permit would be sufficient to address relocation of the electrical service and water service. The note would say that you intend to move these utilities. The answer is, "No ". This is not adequate. This information should go in the narrative and the plans should show the proposed new locations. While reading this fax, I got the feeling you are still confused about the sequence of events which must occur BEFORE you apply for permits for construction of Phase 1. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 433 -0179 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 ..._.,.. ___._.._.._. _._,.._....__�.......- ......... ,.,- . . Ms. Connie Reckord Page 2 March 15, 2000 The sequence is as follows: 1. Complete the Shoreline and SEPA processes. 2. Apply for a land altering permit and a street use permit for relocation of the utilities (electrical and water). 3. Relocate the utilities. 4. Supply copies of recorded legal easements for the utilities and a surveyed site plan showing the easement locations. 5. Complete street vacation. (City does this). 6. Complete the lot consolidation 7. Supply all the submittals listed in my letter to you, dated January 28, 2000. Each of these submittals can be submitted as soon as it is ready. Fax 2 The second fax asked if the Elevation Certificate from the Restroom constructed in 1998 would work for the estuary. The answer is, "No ". These are two different projects. The Public Works Department is interested in the elevations and locations for the project being permitted, not something that was completed in 1998. For your information, the Federal Emergency Management Agency requires a Flood Control Zone Permit before construction or development begins within a shoreline. This permit provides permission' to construct within the shoreline. It does not approve the actual construction. This project is a little different from most projects in that the work consists of excavation rather than construction of a building. I reviewed the Federal code to see if we could get out of the Flood Control Zone permit requirement. Excavations and fills are included in the construction and 'development definitions, so the code applies. Q /projects /north winds weir /letter march 15 to reckord Ms. Connie Reckord Page 3 March 15, 2000 Since the project is unusual, on the Elevation Certificate you will have to substitute the word "estuary" every time you see the word "building" and supply the elevation at the bottom of the estuary as the "top of the bottom floor" elevation. You will complete the Elevation Certificate based on construction drawings. Once the estuary is complete, you will provide another Elevation Certificate with the actual bottom elevation. If you have any questions, you can contact me at 206- 433 -0179. Sincerely, L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. Development Engineer enclosure " Flood Control Zone Permit application cc: Mike Lozano, King County Donald Benson, URS Greiner 1511311iit4 e4 : eveiopment{ File Q/projects/north winds weir /letter march 15 to reckord z z, ew 6 00 (0 0:, w = J 1- W0 J `..a _ z� o. ZI- CU uj U = w w, H V w Z U �, OH z City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 March 13, 2000 Alan Abrams, Sr. Deputy Prosecutor King County Prosecuting Attorney, Civil Division 516 Third Avenue, Rm. E -550 Seattle, WA 98104 Re: Cecil Moses Park (North Wind Weir Park) Dear Mr. Abrams: Steven M Mullet, Mayor Thank you for speaking with me recently regarding the proposed estuary at Cecil Moses Park. As discussed, the City is concerned that there will be erosion problems or riverbank failure because the estuary, as proposed, involves the cutting away of the bank on the Duwamish River. I have drafted an indemnification and hold harmless agreement the City would like the County to consider regarding the proposed project. A copy of the agreement is enclosed for. your review (jurats and signature lines are not currently included in the draft). Also, in reviewing a letter dated January. 21, 2000 from Jill Mosqueda (Tukwila Public Works) to Michael Lozano at the County, it appears that there has been some discussion regarding the "Habitat Panel" assuming liability for the project and providing indemnification for erosion or failure associated with the cutting away of riverbank. Depending upon that organization's role and the assurances it can provide, it may not be necessary for the City to seek indemnification from the County. Please advise on this aspect of the project and whether and to what extent the Habitat Panel may provide the indemnification the City seeks. I look forward to hearing from you shortly: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY RJbert F Noe City Attorney cc: Jill Mosqueda w/ encl. RECEIVED MAR 15 2000 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS Phone: (206) 433 -1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433 -1833 INDEMNITY AGREEMENT This indemnity agreement is entered between King County ( "County ") and the City of Tukwila ("City ") on the date below indicated. A. RECITALS 1. King County is the owner of certain real property located within the City of Tukwila commonly referred to as Cecil Moses Park (North Wind Weir Park) and legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 2. King County wishes to take engage in development activities related to the aforementioned property. 3. The County's proposed development activities for the property include cutting away a portion of the riverbank on the Duwamish River to establish an estuary. B. AGREEMENT The County agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless against any and all claims, demands, damages, losses, liens, liabilities, penalties, fines, lawsuits, or other proceedings and costs and expenses (including attorneys fees) which accrue, arise, or are incurred as a result of the County's action in cutting away portions of the Duwamish River riverbank for its estuary project associated with the property described in Exhibit "A ". This agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties, their respective heirs, representatives, successors, and assigns. This agreement shall be governed under the laws of the State of Washington. In any suit, action, or appeal therefrom, to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its expenses incurred therein including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. z w. QeQ2 J O U 0- , J H U) w w0 g ¢ • d = zi-.. I- 0 w w U U O - o f- LU =U F- -. ti 0: wz o s_: z MAR -13 -1900 09:26 FROM MACLEOD RECKORD VacLeod Roc <orc Landscape Architecture • Planning • Urban Design 231 Summit Ave. East Seattle, Washington 98102 206-323-7919 FAX 206-323-9242 MEMORANDUM TO: CC: FROM: DATE: RE: Deb Ritter, City of Tukwila Planning Mike Lozano, King County Facilities Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord March 10, 2000 Cecil Moses Memorial Park TO 431365 P.02 R ESV E D MAR 13 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT We are ready to submit the plans for this project but there is one issue still unresolved. Both the electrical service (Seattle City Light) and water service (Seattle Water) located in the (274i) street ROW need to be relocated because they conflict with proposed improvements. We have made contact with both utilities and are currently in the process of discussing the underground routing and establishment of an easement for each utility. Both utilities have indicated a willingness to locate underground, in the general vicinity of the west edge of the proposed estuary. We would like to submit the park development drawings for final review in the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit process with a note on the drawings indicating that this work is underway and will be completed prior to park construction (and in order to process a Street Vacation Permit Application). My question is whether that will sufficiently address the issue as far as Shoreline review is concerned. The alternative is to wait until we have all the final details of the underground routing resolved with each utility, show that on the plans, and then submit for final Shoreline review. I'm concerned that this may extend the process several more weeks, and further delay the desired date of construction. Please contact me as soon as possible so we may discuss our options. Thank you. TOTAL P.02 King County Department of Construction and Facility Management Cheryl Batalon Fambles, Director King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 296 -0648 (206) 296 -0100 TDD (206) 296 -0186 FAX Jill Mosqueda City of Tukwila Public Works 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Cecil Moses Memorial Park Dear Jill: February 25, 2000 RECEIVED FEB 2 8 2000 PUBLIC WORKS An item included in your letter to me dated January 28, 2000 in which you list outstanding public works related permit requirements for the referenced project, includes item number 11., page two, "Indemnification from King County for failure liability ". As you recall, we have had a couple of phone conversations on this permit requirement at which time I asked for additional information related to the indemnification requirement. You suggested that I speak with your attorney. I left two voice messages with no return call and again contacted you. During our last conversation, I was told that the City attorney discussed this issue with the County attorney. You did not know the name of the County attorney or the result of the conversation. We have an attorney assigned to our Division and he has not spoken to your attorney on the indemnification issue. Our attorney is Alan Abrams and,Alan's phone number is 296 -9015. I discussed the indemnification requirement with Alan. He requests additional information from the City in order to assess the purpose and scope of the indemnification. I would suggest, because of the ambiguity of "failure liability ", that the City attorney prepare a draft indemnity letter for Alan's review and consideration. My consultant is currently preparing all permit submittals and I would like to resolve this issue as soon as possible in order to remain on schedule with the project. Thank you. cerely, Micha `,zano, Project Manager cc: Alan Abrams, King County Prosecuting Attorney City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Public Works James F. Morrow, P.E., Director January 28, 2000 RECEIVED FEB 2 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Mr. Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management 500 Fourth Ave., Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Subject: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Cecil Moses Park (North Wind Weir Park) 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 Dear Mike: z �w 00 U 0 • W =. J H • w0 2 u-a SO— I-w Z w LLJ U 0- W w; 0 wz U =: Following conversations with Connie Reckord and Don Benson, I decided to review all of the 0 1— outstanding Public Works items for this project. The list below includes items you must provide or perform before you can begin the permitting process for Phase 1 and Phase 2 work for the estuary and the park. The list below includes only Public Works items. Complete SEPA (Planning Department) Complete Shoreline (Planning Department) Street Vacation 1. Apply for a street use permit and a land altering permit in order to move the utilities. 2. Relocate the 20" water main. 3. Underground the electrical utilities. 4. Provide copies of the recorded legal descriptions and a surveyed site plan locating the easements. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 433 -0179 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 r Mr. Michael G. Lozano Page 2 January 28, 2000 Don Benson is considering applying for a variance to the undergrounding requirement. Don has a copy of the underground ordinance and the variance procedure. I cannot tell you how long the variance procedure will take. I can, however, tell you that the City Engineer and the Public Works Director are not in favor of allowing a variance unless King County makes a strong case for going against both City and Shoreline regulations. Shoreline Permit Flood Zone Control Permit application Lot Consolidation (Planning Department) Other Submittals Provide copies of the following: 1. Approval by City of Seattle for work adjacent to and near the 48" Seattle Public Utilities Water Transmission Line ROW. 2. Copy of any special precautions or conditions the City of Seattle imposed for work adjacent to and in the vicinity of the 48" Seattle Public Utilities Water Transmission Line ROW. 3. HPA to cover work done below the ordinary high water mark. 4. Corps of Engineers permit to cover the new discharge into the river. 5. 404 Individual Permit, if required. 6. Biological Assessment. 7. Approval from Federal Insurance Administration and Department of Ecology for modification of watercourse. 8. Narrative addressing stability issues. 9. Maintenance plan from the Habitat Panel stating type and level of maintenance for protection of riverbank and property for life of the project. If Habitat Panel does not plan to maintain for life, then additional maintenance plan is required. 10. Plan for reparation if the mouth is not stable. 11. Indemnification from King County for failure liability. Sincerely, L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. LJM:ad cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Donald Benson, URS Greiner b Ritter, Planning and Community Development (P:olice \Jonuory 27 ktter to Lozano -to do list) City of Tukwila la John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director anuary 28, 2000 Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle; Washington 98104 -2337 Re: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Cecil Moses Memorial Park ( —aka- North Wind Weir Park) at 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 Dear Mike: Per our conversation today, I wanted to reiterate the sequence of steps that need to be taken in connection with the development of the park. These steps are outlined as follows: 1. First, King County responds to Tukwila's technical review comments on the Shoreline permit application. As part of this process, please supply the undersigned with at least three copies of the Biological Assessment (currently being prepared by URS Greiner). Once the technical review process is nearly complete, Lynn Lewicki will be able to proceed with SEPA. 2. King County issues SEPA permit. SEPA 15 -day appeal period expires. 3. Tukwila issues Shoreline permit. Shoreline 21 -day appeal period expires. 4. King County begins street vacation process (coordinated by Jill Mosqueda in Public Works). 5. King County applies for lot consolidation (coordinated by Deb Ritter in Planning). 6. King County applies for land altering permits (coordinated by Jill Mosqueda). As we discussed today, no digging or land altering may occur on the site until after the Shoreline permit is issued and that appeal period has expired. If you should have any questions, please contact me at 206 -431 -3663. Sincerely, 'e-L 06a_ Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevar4 Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 : Michael G. Lozano January 28, 2000 Re: L98 -0054 Page 2 cc: Lynn Lewicki, SEPA Coordinator, King County Donald Benson, URS Greiner Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Brian. Shelton, City Engineer, Tukwila Jill Mosqueda, Public Works, Tukwila Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist .', �+>..,•: -. Z 1- w: rt uI2: U Of w w =: .1 H: C.L. w 0: Q N d I-- _ Z�.. • I- 0. •Z H' w ui u) =V. W I ▪ ,▪ '. • Z City of Tukwila Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Public Works January 21, 2000 Mr. Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Subject: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Cecil Moses Park (North Wind Weir Park) 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 Dear Mike: James E Morrow, P.E., Director RECEIVED JAN 2 6 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT During our October 21, 1999, meeting with the Habitat Panel the question of liability came up. The Habitat Panel members stated that there is a DRAFT document describing the Panel's goals and responsibilities regarding the various restoration projects they are involved with. The panel members stated that this document will spell out its assumption of liability, which will include assuming liability if this project fails. Since our meeting, I spoke with Bob Noe, City Attorney, who advises me that this document will not suffice. The City needs indemnification from King County. Please provide the necessary paperwork showing King County assuming liability for damage if any part of the project fails. If you have any questions regarding the indemnification requirements, please contact Bob Noe at 206- 433 -1846. Sincerely, L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. LJM:ad cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Bob Noe, City Attorney Donald Benson, URS Greiner eb Ritter, Assistant Planner Lyn Lewicki, SEPA, King County Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist (P:alice \January 21 letter to Lozano - indemnification) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 433 -0179 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 ;'(, City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Public Works January 13, 2000 Ms. Connie Reckord MacLeod Reckord 231 Summit Ave. East Seattle, WA 98102 Subject: Cecil Moses Park (North Wind Weir Park) 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 Dear Connie: James E Morrow, P.E., Director I am concerned that this project will be delayed during the review stage if the street vacation, lot consolidation and Flood Control Zone Permit requirements aren't met when the Public Works Department receives the Cecil Moses Memorial Park application. Therefore, I am writing to remind you of the requirements, just in case something got missed. Before any Public Works permits can be issued, both the street vacation and the lot consolidation must be completed. The street vacation is completed once the City Council approves it. Before the vacation can go to the Council, King County must complete the conditions of vacation. The street vacation conditions are: 1. Relocation of Seattle water line facilities or granting of an easement by King County to Seattle. 2. Relocation or removal of Seattle City Light facilities or granting of an easement by King County to Seattle City Light. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 433 -0179 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 . • Ms. Connie Reckord Page 2 January 13, 2000 In our telephone conversation yesterday, you stated that the Tight poles are being removed. Mike Lozano told me today that you are preparing an easement for the water facilities. The easements must have a legal description and a site map attached and must be signed by the interested parties. Before the vacation can be approved, both the pole removal and the easement must be completed. The street vacation must be approved by the City Council before the lot consolidation can occur. Both of these must be completed before the City will issue any Public Works permits. At a minimum, Public Works permits for the project include Land Altering, Storm Drainage and Flood Control Zone. I notice that the Shoreline Permit was submitted without the Flood Control Zone Permit (FCZP) application. Enclosed is one FCZP application. Oftentimes, applicants miss the FCZP requirement, that the survey must be stamped and signed by a licensed surveyor and must use the 1929 NGVD. This omission lengthens the review process. I expect you already have all these "ducks in a row." If you have any questions, you can contact me at 206 -433 -0179. Sincerely, 9,6ze 29frd L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. LJM :ad enclosure: Flood Control Zone Permit application cc: Mike Lozano, King County b Ritter, Planning and Community Development Don Williams, Parks and Recreation Brian Shelton, City Engineer File (P:alice \Jon 13 letter to reckord) z w rt U co OQ W= F- uJO 2 J Na =ul z�. F- 0 I- LL! F- 2o U D 01-- 11J wz co 0I- z Page 1 From: Gary Schulz To: Deborah Ritter Date: 10/25/99 11:57AM Subject: Re: Wind Weir Deb, I think the meeting went fine and most of the discussion was related to Jill's comments. For the most part my comments were recommendations and I conveyed them to the Panel members. As a result, I do not have any revisions to my review. The best part of the meeting from my perspective is the Panel is pushing King Co. to build the estuary next year. Gary »> Deborah Ritter 10/22/99 09:58AM »> Do you have any revisions to the 9/15/99 technical review letter as a result of the meeting on 10/21? Any additional comments or waived items? If so, please prepare a letter summarizing what You agreed to at the meeting (Jill is doing this as it pertains to her requirements and will be copying everyone). As soon as King County submits their final Shoreline permit revisions, they will work on issuing their SEPA determination. Once the DNS is finalized, we are free to issue the Shoreline Permit. A street vacation and lot consolidation will be required before land altering can commence in spring CC: Jill Mosqueda z i1 reLAI 6 O - 0 U1 (/) =. J w 0. • ?. • a =w z�' I- 0 z w U • � CI ZU Z: w . U O z City of Tukwila John W Rants, Mayor Department of Public Works James F. Morrow, P.E., Director October 22, 1999 Mr. Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management 500 Fourth Ave., Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Subject: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Cecil Moses Park (North Wind Weir Park) 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 Dear Mike: Our meeting yesterday with the Habitat Panel helped answer some of the questions I have regarding this project. During the meeting, we agreed the City will accept a written response to part of the September 15 letter for the Shoreline Substantial Development permit. Following the meeting, we discussed submittal requirements for permitting for Phase 1 and Phase 2. Response to September 15 Letter Intertidal Estuary Technical Review Comments We agreed that you will supply a written response to the technical review comments found in the September 15, 1999, letter from Deb Ritter. The narrative should address the Intertidal Estuary comments only. It should explain what you are planning to do and provide the reasoning behind the plan. For instance, the narrative should address stability issues. This would be a good place to explain that the estuary is designed as a dynamic system and to provide documentation for the Duwamish River's ability to take additional sediment loading. Here is a good place to discuss the "fish window" for construction and how that relates to your project. This would also be a good place to document the Habitat Panel's Maintenance and Monitoring plan and its assumption of liability if the project "fails." 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: (206) 433 -0179 • Fax: (206) 431 -3665 • Mr. Michael G. Lozano Page 2 October 22, 1999 For the Shoreline permit, you do not need to supply additional cross sections at the mouth or a geotechnical report. I will refer to the geotechnical report submitted for the restroom facility. Even though you provide the narrative, you must still address the remaining items required in the technical comment letter of September 15, 1999. For questions concerning these comments, please contact Deb Ritter at (206) 431 -3663. Phase 1 and Phase 2 Plans Following issuance of the Shoreline Permit, completion of the street vacation and completion of the lot consolidation, the City will begin review of the Phase 1 and Phase 2 permit applications. The City requires more detailed information for Public Works permit review than it requires for a Shoreline permit review. For each phase, the City will require a complete set of construction plans and specifications. These plans should include changes such as the removal of the existing utility poles. Phase 1 should include additional cross sections at the mouth, showing the slopes and the plantings. For each phase, the plans should include an erosion prevention and sediment control plan which meets the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual, Appendix D. At a minimum, Phase 1 and Phase 2 will require Land Altering permits. The Land Altering plan requirements are spelled out in TMC 16.54. Please refer to this municipal code. A word of caution, applicants often must resubmit because they do not provide the total cut and total fill volumes and the existing and proposed topography on the Land Altering plan. Sincerely, L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. Development Engineer LJM :ad cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Donald Benson, UR5 Greiner Lynn Lewicki, SEPA, King County Bob Abbot, Police Department )b Ritter, Planning and Community Development Don Williams, Parks and Recreation Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist Nick Olivas, Fire Department ( P:alice \Octaber221ettertol.ozano) ! From: Gary Schulz To: Jill Mosqueda Date: 10/14/99 10:43AM Subject: N. Wind Weir Habitat Panel Mtg. Hi Jill, I just spoke with Mike Lozano (King Co. Facilities) and he would like us to attend the Habitat Panel meeting next week to work out City's requirements for estuary construction. The meeting is in Seattle - Thursday 10/21 at 10 AM. Exact location to be given to us later, must be a secret? I hope you can attend and I will let you know about some of the conversations I've had with them. Gary z �w 6 -J O 0 CO,0. cn w J Z F- LL. '. W O. J LL Q =0 I- w. Z _F- 1- O z � • 0. co O —i ,0 1-. W W'. h- U,` u-Ol Z' w 0 O H Z City of l ukt44la John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMO TO: Don Williams, Parks Jill Mosqueda, Public Works Nick Olivas, Fire Gary Schulz Bob Abbott, Police FROM: Deb Ritter DATE: October 14, 1999 RE: North Wind Weft Park 11013 West Marginal Place South Shoreline Permit (L98 -0054) As you may know, we are still in technical review under the Shoreline application referenced above. We issued a letter outlining our first round of technical review comments on September 15th. The applicant has advised that due to budget limitations, project construction will be phased (see October 8, 1999 letter from King County, attached). King County estimates that construction of the first phase will not commence until spring of 2000. Once a shoreline permit is issued, the applicant will have five years to complete construction under the permit. So that the entire project may be vested under one Shoreline permit, the City's technical review will continue to cover all phases of the project. If you require that certain documentation be revised to reflect construction phasing, please provide me with your specific written comments to that effect as soon as possible. Additionally, as a point of information, the name of the park has apparently been changed from "North Wind Weir Park" to "Cecil Moses Memorial Park ". To prevent confusion, Planning will continue to use Wind Weir in the Shoreline application documentation. However, as a courtesy to King County, all departments should add an "AKA" in their communications with the County (and other State or Federal agencies). Any questions please contact me. cc: Jack Pace Jim Morrow Brian Shelton 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 :. , King County Department of Construction and Facility Management Cheryl Batalon Fambles, Director King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 296 -0648 (206) 296 -0100 TDD (206) 296 -0186 FAX October 8, 1999 Deborah Ritter Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: North Wind Weir Park Dear Deborah: RECEIVED OCT 12 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Due to budget constraints, the scope of work for the North Wind Weir Park project currently under review for permitting with the City of Tukwila has been reduced. It was anticipated that balance of required construction funding would be approved in the Park's 2000 budget. It did not make the cut. We will submit the project for funding consideration during the 2001 budget process anticipating phased construction to complete the park development as submitted. The scope of work is now limited to the development of the estuary, estuary fence and the interpretive signage related to the estuary. On another note, the name of the park site has been officially changed from North Wind Weir Park to Cecil Moses Memorial Park. If the City requires additonal information please call me at 296 -4240. Thank you. cerely, w Mic Lozano, Project Manager cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord oP lkirifra P 414 1908 City of Tukwila John W Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director September 15, 1999 Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, Washington 98104 -2337 Re: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit North Wind Weir Park at 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 Dear Mike: This letter is in response to the Department of Community Development's detailed review of your Shoreline Substantial Development permit application. Our letter is divided into two parts. The first part of the letter identifies certain additional information and /or revisions needed from you to ensure that the project meets the substantive requirements of the City and to continue our review process. The second part of the letter provides comments from our reviewing departments that you may wish to consider as you make those revisions. REQUIRED INFORMATION AND /OR REVISIONS Alteration of Watercourses 1. Per TMC 16.52.050(I)(5)(d)(1), prior to issuance of any land altering permit, you must provide proof that you have notified "all adjacent communities and the Washington State Department of Ecology prior to any alteration or relocation of a watercourse and submit evidence of such notification to the Federal Insurance Administration; obtain necessary approvals for change in watercourse through FEMA, prior to authorizing any development to carry out a development which will change any watercourse." Intertidal Estuary 2. Per KCC 25.16.190,, "Landfill or excavations shall be permitted only when technical information demonstrates water circulation, littoral drift, aquatic life and water quality will not be substantially impaired." The estuary channel is dependent on the stability of the river bank areas. The cut banks adjacent to the river and new estuary are fairly steep and toe erosion is likely from tidal action and changes in flow velocity. Accordingly, these cut banks will need toe of bank protection and support. Please provide the following: a. Complete plans and cross - sections showing the structural design of the mouth of the new estuary. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 Michael G. Lozano September 15, 1999 Re: L98 -0054 Page 2 b. Stabilization information (such as toe of bank protection and support) should be reflected on the estuary plans and cross - sections. This information should incorporate King County's guidelines for bank stabilization projects. c. Erosion control information for the proposed estuary construction and stabilization as well as procedures to protect the river from silt. Said erosion control information must be in accordance with King County Surface Water Design Manual guidelines. Please reflect the erosion control design on the estuary plans and cross - sections (as applicable). d. Information which addresses the staging for estuary construction and stabilization as well as disposal, stockpiling and timing of excavated and /or dredged materials. Please incorporate this information (as applicable) on the estuary plans and cross - sections. e. A geotechnical report which supports the proposed design of the intertidal estuary. • Landscaping and Signage z Z: O 0 gyp. J • u_ w0 =w z F. I- 0 Z I- LL! U0 3. Per KCC 25.16.030(E), the following minimum landscaping conditions must be met: of- 111 Any outdoor parking perimeter ......_♦ be maintained as planting minimum width of five feet. • Orle live tree with a minimum height of four feet shall be required for each thirty linear feet of (perimeter) planting area. • One live shrub of one - gallon container size or larger for each sixty linear inches of (perimeter) planting area shall be required. 4. Pet KCC 25.16.080, no sign ... shall be-permitted which is more than 72 inches.in height as measured from the average grade level. Please provide height dimensions for the "Dismount and Walk Bicycle" signage indicated on Sheet D2. Utilities 5. The existing utility poles are not referenced on the site plan. Please revise the site plan accordingly to show the location and deposition of the existing poles. 6. Under KCC 25.16.160, "overhead utility facilities shall not be permitted in public parks, monuments, scenic recreation or historic sites." Prior to issuance of any land altering permits, the applicant shall place all utilities underground pursuant to the Tukwila Underground Ordinance. Z Michael G. Lozano September 15, 1999 Re: L98 -0054 Page 3 7. Per KCC 25.16.160, all utility distribution and transmission facilities shall be designed so as to: 1) minimize visual impacts; 2) harmonize with or enhance the surroundings; 3) not create a need for shoreline protection; and 4) utilize natural screening to the greatest extent possible. Boat Launch 8. During the June 24, 1999 public hearing (regarding the special permission request for the parking lot), accessibility for canoes and kayaks was discussed. The access point is a pre- existing rock - covered slope at the base of the pedestrian bridge. The project plans do not propose any additional, formal boat, canoe or kayaks launching facilities. If such facilities are contemplated they should be reflected in the existing project plan and conform to the requirements of KCC 25.16.200(E). COMMENTS As a courtesy, we are providing you with the following, additional comments. Although the items referenced below are not code requirements, we encourage your consideration of this information. Biological Assessment 9. A biological assessment is required for any project using Federal funds or requiring Federal permits. Intertidal Estuary 10. Non - native trees are being planted on the slope in the area of the intertidal estuary. These types of trees may not be acceptable or appropriate to the Habitat Panel. You may wish to incorporate more native pioneer tree species that will survive full sun conditions. 11. It appears that only one area of the estuary is to be staked with willows. In order to provide cover and stability in a relatively short time, we recommend the use of more live cuttings and salt tolerant willow species around the lower edge of the estuary. Riverbank Stabilization Evaluation 12. In reviewing the most recent Riverbank Stabilization Evaluation (prepared by GeoSciences Inc. and revised April 2, 1998) there appear to be two alternatives: replacement of the tire wall or retention of the tire wall with mitigation measures. In the opinion of Tukwila's Urban Environmentalist, leaving the tire wall in place with mitigation measures is reasonable. As reported, the riverbank is not failing in this location. Additionally, as the tire wall is adjacent to, and on top of, a City of Seattle water main, it would be very difficult to replace the tire wall and restabilize the riverbank. However, the report states that the tire wall is partially supported by wood piling. The .report does not specifically mention the condition of these wood piles but does recommend a monitoring program. The City's Urban Environmentalist recommends that Michael G. Lozano September 15, 1999 Re: L98 -0054 Page 4 the responsible jurisdictions (King County and Seattle Water Department) coordinate a stabilization plan in anticipation of a failure in the stability of the woodpiles. The Urban Environmentalist also recommends that the area of the riverbank affected by the tire wall be enhanced with live cuttings from native willows and red osier dogwood. However, this option may be limited by the thickness of the tire wall. �z CL w 00 0. Signage W J H = to u_' 13. Appropriate signage in .the parking area such as "Dogs must be on a leash" should be w O installed. Coordinate this with the Tukwila Parks & Recreation Department if desired. g u_? 14. The entrances to the park should be well posted with park rules and hours of operation. it.) C7 w 15. Park patrons should be encouraged (by signage) to report suspicious activity or damage z to the facility. z� 16. Due to the inherent danger of the river, signs should be osted warning w p g park patrons to stay back from the riverbanks. U 17. The parking area should have posted warning signs asking park patrons not to leave F- valuables in unattended vehicles. w w u' O ..z w co 18. In the "Light & Glare" section of your draft SEPA checklist (provided on September 16, H 1998), you have indicated that the only lighting in the park is a security light on the O existing restroom building. Additionally, you have indicated that the park will be closed at dusk. However, the Tukwila Parks Department believes (from a practical standpoint) that due to the park's connection to the larger trail system, the park will be accessible around the clock. In light of this fact, the Parks Department has suggested that the parking lot have lighting for safety and general use. Site Visibility, Safety and Lighting 19. The landscape architect should check site visibility where the secondary trails meet the main river trail for safety. 20. Due to remote location of the park, a pay phone should be installed to facilitate park patrons who seek help or want to report criminal activity. The pay phone should not accept incoming calls and should have digital pager prefixes blocked. Related Permits 21. Excavation of the riverbank to provide a new off - channel estuary habitat will require a Fish & Wildlife HPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Permit. If a 404 Individual Permit is required, additional agency approvals related to the Corps permit would likely be necessary. • Michael G. Lozano September 15, 1999 Re: L98 -0054 Page 5 If you should have any questions regarding the within, please do not hesitate to contact me at 206 -431 -3663. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Donald Benson, URS Greiner Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Don Williams, Parks & Recreation Jill Mosqueda, Public Works Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist Nick Olivas, Fire Department Bob Abbot, Police Department City of Tukwila la John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist DATE: September 7, 1 999 RE: North Wind Weir #L98 -0054 — Shoreline Permit for Intertidal Estuary and Public Park. I have reviewed the current plan set submitted for King County's new North Wind Weir Park. The project is not subject to sensitive area regulations but does require a City Shoreline Permit as well as other agency review for work in the Duwamish River. There are three aspects of this project that I will comment on — the new estuary being created on the site, the tree regulations permit, and riverbank stabilization/enhancement work. My comments are as follows: 1. Intertidal Estuary Non - native trees are being planted on the slope in the area for fisheries habitat. This may not be acceptable to the Habitat Panel members that are involved with the new estuary. The planting plan could incorporate more pioneer tree species that will survive full sun conditions. It appears there is only one area to be staked with willows. I recommend the use of more willow or other live stakes (salt tolerant willows — Pacific willow, Sitka willow) around the edge of the pond to provide cover and stability in a relatively short time. Finally, my experience has been that smaller plant material has better survival performance and adaptability. 2. Tree Regulations Permit My review of the landscape drawings indicates the tree replacement requirements have been included in the plans. Sheet L1 shows the trees being removed, most of which are in the estuary creation area, and the schedule for their replacement. Sheet K1 indicates quantities and that the majority of trees are and shrubs are native to the northwest. Sheet L5 is the Planting Plan showing appropriate locations for new plants which are also in the area of the new intertidal estuary. 3. Riverbank Stabilization /Enhancement The two project features that are significant are (a) the existing rubber tire wall located on the Riverbank, and (b) the entrance channel to be constructed for the intertidal estuary. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 ,...,.. ...,,.. . North Wind Weir Memo September 7, 1999 Page 2 (a) In reviewing the most recent geotechnical study for the North Wind Weir Park (Riverbank Stabilization Evaluation... Revised 4/2/98 HWA GeoSciences Inc.) there are two alternatives for the tire wall, replacement or retain with mitigation measures. In my opinion, the option of leaving the tire wall in place with mitigative measures is reasonable. Because the tire wall is adjacent to, and overtop a water main of City of Seattle Water Department, it would be very difficult to replace and restabilize. As reported, the riverbank is not failing in this location. However, the report does state the wall is partially supported by wood piling. The report does not mention specifically the condition of these wood piles but does recommend a monitoring program. If there is a failure it is not likely that it would affect the Park improvements. Also, the responsible jurisdictions - King County and Seattle Water Department would need to coordinate a stabilization plan. If this option is agreed on, I would recommend the riverbank area affected by the tire wall, or in close proximity to the wall, be enhanced with live cuttings from native willows and red osier dogwood. Also, there are other species that could be used as cited in King County's Guidelines for Bank Stabilization Projects. At least the habitat and aesthetics would be enhanced and some stabilization could occur with root growth. However, the limiting portion of this option is the condition at the toe of riverbank as influenced by continual tidal action. b) Excavation of the riverbank to provide a new off - channel estuary habitat will require a Fish & Wildlife HPA and US Army Corps of Engineers Permit. If a 404 Individual Permit is required, additional agency approvals related to the Corps permit will likely be necessary. I reviewing the site and plans for the mouth of the new estuary channel, I do not see any structural design for the cut banks adjacent to the river and new channel. These areas are fairly steep and as they adjoin the River will need toe of bank protection and support. Toe erosion is likely from tidal action and changes in flow velocity. It seems the estuary channel is dependent on the stability of the river bank areas. Tukwila may be directly responsible for stability since a new structure will be built that extends the area of shoreline. In the past we have recommended King County's "Guidelines for Bank Stabilization Projects ". The geoteclmical report does address this portion of the project's construction. At a minimum this needs to have geotechnical review and recommendations on the design. Cc: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Jack Pace, Planning Manager Jill Mosqeda, Associate Engineer CITY OF TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS Project Name: North Winds Weir Park 11013 West Marginal Place File #: Date: Reviewer: L. Jill eda, P.E. L98 -0054 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit 09/07/99 Review Using KC Title 25 Shoreline Management regulations KCC25.16.030 No additional comments KCC 25.16.080 Signs A. No free - standing signs over 72" in height Response: Deb, as far as I can tell, sign code interpretation belongs to the building department. TMC 19 refers one to TMC 16.04, which adopts the UBC. There are no dimensions given for the "dismount" signs, shown on sheets L2 and D2; so, those signs I can't tell. There are dimensions for the other signs and they all are under 72 ". KCC 25.16.160 Utilities A.3. Overhead utilities not permitted.... Response: Does not apply. No utilities are part of this project. Q:/projects/N wind Weir Park /N winds weir park shoreline comments z H Z. U0 J = 1- w. w0 2 U_ Q a F_ w' r Z F- I- o Z �. 2 o • - O I-- = U; F— — H w z. U U H F- 0 z Page 2 L98 -0054 Shoreline Substantial Development permit North Winds Weir Park 09/07/99 z KCC 25.16.180 Shoreline Protection w' Response: Does not apply. No shoreline protection replacing existing, no -J o bulkheads on adjacent lots, no bulkheads as part of the project. co o w =. J F-' w KCC 25.16.190 Excavation, dredging, filling g ua C. Landfill or excavation permitted only when technical information F- demonstrates ... z f-o zr Response: Plan provided so not show enough information for me to assess o stability of the estuary mouth for possible effects on aquatic life and water o quality. I wish to see cross sections at the mouth, staging for estuary w ~ construction and stabilization, and more complete plans for the estuary mouth and bank stabilization. I am interested in knowing how the river will . wz be protected from silt. o o� I. through M. Excavation or dredging below ordinary high water mark shall be permitted only when necessary... Response: Applicant did not provide information regarding disposal, stockpiling and timing. KCC 25.16.020 Recreation D. The construction .... Response: The plans do not show construction of launching facilities. So my response to this section is: Any recreational facilities planned in the future will require permitting and must meet the applicable codes in place at the time of application. Q: /projects /N wind Weir Park/N winds weir park shoreline comments z andy.levesque @metro, (.x:10 PM 8/24/99, North Winciiikeir Park To: andy.levesque @metrokc.gov From: Tukwila Department of Community Development <tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Subject: North Wind Weir Park Cc: Bcc: X- Attachments: Hi Andy, Hope all is going well with you! As you know, we still are reviewing this project and I am now putting together my comments on the latest plan submittal. I need to talk with you about bank stabilization as there are some issues. I know you have written some comments about the area of tires. The estuary mouth does not show any stabilization ie. rock toe and bioeng. design. I think the City will require this at least at the river. Lets talk soon if you can. Gary Schulz gschulz @ci.tukwila.wa.us Printed for Tukwila Department of Community Development <tuk... 1 1 , 1-w re -J C.) U 0' W I. Nu_ w0 LQ co =0 IW Z= t- O Z uj 0 g2 0 I- W 111 O LL.Z 0 =' O F-: Z Tukwila Department , (,4:47 PM 8/23/99 , North Wi! Weir Park - estuary X- Sender: tukplan @mail.accessone.com To: rmalcom @muckleshoot.nsn.us From: Tukwila Department of Community Development <tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Subject: North Wind Weir Park - estuary Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 16:47:31 -0700 Content - Length: 1702 Hi Rod! I'm about ready to provide my comments on this project and wanted to give you a "heads up" and get your input. First, there is the issue of the tire wall on the riverbank. I took the engineer out a week ago to look at the condition because the latest geotech report indicates the tires appear stable. Given the location of the waterline, I would tend to not recommend removal, particularly if this would create disagreements and delay the project. I would like to recommend that willow cuttings etc. be used to enhance the stability and habitat. However, the tire wall is so thick that it does not seem that live stakes will be useful. Also, it does not appear stable when considering the old wood piles that support it. Ultimately, I think King Co. will be. responsible for instability and they.should resolve it amongst themselves ? ? ?? Second, in reviewing the ,mouth of the new estuary area .I do not see any . structural design for' the cut banks adjacent to the river and new channel. These areas are fairly steep and leaving the toe area without some protection is likely going to erode from tidal action and possible flow velocity from the falls. This is Tukwila's responsibility because a new structure is being built. On past similar project work, we have recommended King County's "Guidelines for Bank Stabilization" The geotech report does not seem to address this construction but it will be necessary. Is this area left out of Park construction obligations? What do you think? We cannot risk bank failure or excessive erosion. If you have any time I would like to show you the Family Fun Center off - channel habitat pond. I hope you can help, Thanx Gary Schulz Printed for Tukwila Department of Community Development <tuk... 1 . z mow': 2 J 0 O 0 W =. J w 0. g< =3 w z V• 0 O - CI t--. w W`. 1--- - z` iii U= 0 I-▪ ; z De. or.a f ` Rytte..�r - #. wmTweir park L981-''' comment 5. ac"ded) �-- Page A . 11 From: Jill Mosqueda To: Deborah Ritter Date: 8/9/99 5:56PM Subject: #2 wind weir park L98 -0054 (comment 5. added) Comments from Jill Mosqueda, Ryan PArtee and Ryan Larson L98 -0054 Or 1. Plans should ow Right of Way folqhe 48" Seattle waterline. protection:, p ,.,g. 'eon Federal ro erty 2. Recommend removing tire wall and re lacm with more stable bank requirs a biological F,3" A,project•having Federal funds, Federal permit or i p p assessment, tPleaae provide a copy to City. 4. Please provide the City with a copy of HPA and Corps permits. 5'931010e to,CibijSeoof thetali listed:in'TMC 52 050i )rare notified..(Page16 -26) Caa Questions we have: Who is responsible for,maintenance? f Is King; County. going to'maintainAhe park, the estuary an d riVetbanks? � Nh.... What is happening with the street vacation? I read just a little about. Is it complete? Jill Tz-\\Ac6 \\c _\3-12 \‘-k-r- (v03241 cic).) c4etL.664\ caciivAeca - ok 1,Vc (Na Lt.6i ra tv\ onwm v4 '.. '' City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number 12\ - 00 54 LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM TO: ❑ Building Q Planning Public Works X Fire Dept. IXPolice Dept. X Parks /Rec Project: 1^ `.1 nn Address: \ \ O CIA O\ c\o.Q a ���, o .n , t-N lJ Date transmitted: 1— \ 4 - ("1() Re• •onse req ested by: .�._ t1 — \\ - \C tQ)l IU\'ev�1 Staff coordinator: � (R.11 Date response recei -d: COMMENTSu v`OV+,` ` - C r'srou0 o _c •A .(*x c, c)( ()Om •e � 4-- 3o -9s- PQ--(srn o n f an k. (.1,0VA. -00 3 sce_ A-- c Q- -qoi . Cock +e_. v CA') c,r 2Q. +0 mown cAL P01,&41N 6\-- erv- n +c.k 01.., - Se�lk 1- -- � • ov * cam, U c42A o u bco \ o. r ). )ra ' +,J t - A) \ c \ C Oo1/4,r , SrotQ +cam Vie ¶ \cre e c;Vs crl am (-tiATh V.) ,\\ a citA e.&. Q L>Q . ❑ DRC review requested AzA-Q--eQ- ❑ Plan approved ❑ Plan submittal requested ran check date: u°1- C.om'ment's1''' prepared by: - ; %� vl. King County Department of Construction and Facility Management Pearl McElheran, Director King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 296 -0648 (206) 296 -0100 TDD (206) 296 -0186 FAX July 7, 1999 Nick Olivas Assistant Fire Chief Station 51 444 Andover Park S.E. Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: North Wind Weir Park Dear Mr. Olivas: JUL. 0 9 199 As requested by the Tukwila Fire Department, as a permit condition with the City of Tukwila, this letter confirms that King County Parks will maintain, and keep in operable condition, the removable post which will secure the park entry gate into the closed position. The King'County Park maintenance contact is Jack David. Jack's phone number is 296 -2960 and his pager number is 986 -4900. The King County Park Maintenance and Facilities Manager is Bobbi Wallace and her phone number is 296 -4248. If you are unable to reach Jack, Ms. Wallace will be your second point of contact. If you have any questions please call me at 296 -4240. ncerely, Micha ozano, Project Manager cc: ,Deborah Ritter, City of Tukwila Planner Bobbi Wallace, King County Parks Jack David, King County Parks .•> Z I— Z cc 2 O 0 CO W -J CO IL, Wo ga' =a w z� 1- o Z W w • 0 o • -, o1 w wf I- 0 • U° w Z U -(n 0 z MEMO TO: Brian. Shelton Nick Oliv- oohs 44.4.1 FRO . 'eb Ritter DATE: Ju y 1, 1999 RE: Location of Locking Gate North Wind Weir Park 11013 West Marginal Place South King County is proposing that the gate be relocated to the "mouth" of the parking lot. A removable bollard would be substituted for one of the standard gateposts. This scenario allows the public to use the grasscrete turnaround during off -hours when the gate is locked. Emergency and maintenance vehicles can enter the locked gate as needed. When exiting, the bollard can be removed to allow maximum clearance. Would you please provide your comments at your earliest convenience? This is the last item needed to be resolved before we begin technical review on the Shoreline permit. � z _ 1- 6 O UO., gyp: cn w: w= w 0' LL - C7 = w. Z� F-0. Z 2 p' 0 - O C1 I-' =U iL•Z 0 =: 0 0~ Z Cali n ,.. LltrnOVC,OHSTAUCTION " :, .,..,4 1/ , , 1/, l'. 1 , •ij / \ L' /• h . ! P.1-1 e• 11/ ..I, .. i • It 'Is: i•'.:‘ • 1 •,, , . ,..r / . . .! . . ■ 7.4., , / ' i '.• A. • ' • A. / . •-;:i. , \ • / . , " i: \ \/ . .....".; - / A. . ,.. • -.2.., I • ..••••... ,,,,,,,,,,,o, \ ••... \ .....,.„..::: t I i . .... A ?n k \ \ ';‘. zi \ ‘ •-•. 3 \ J \ \ •,, , • z \ ...,•,.. .@. •:.:::. v.ti. a NORTH WINDSWEIR PARK z 5 cn Magri .; 11}1.1111 1.14.1“.■ 6/17•04•1 0.41031. .041.1.0■41 341,IS :,. t — --- I iill1 i'. ••••,...,....... -- . / A A 1 il)rifi III\ \-■k---:-.-.--- '\\\ ,El.- \ ,i gi. ,,,, ,-,,---_42,„ • a ir-)\ : b. • .. , , r ' . , . '. . , - ' 1, \\ 11\v\i\ I. • \ \0 \ \\\ \\,\\\,\\ \\\\ \ \\ \\\\\\ \ \ 1\ \\\ \ \ \ A \ i 1 \ v 1A 1 ", \ 7---_-,""t") ‘\,.///i1)) \1\ \ \,.. \ I \ \ ii..------•---- •"...."/ . \ ' \ - . r ....„. - .„... ..../7-......=-- ----. "" •------- ---- V ,, •-. ' '' /%%.--- ,1,7r-=-7.:::'---5."-.:::_••./ .i.....-.::"._ .2) \ OCIl■ • ti 1 \ P. • *; " * 1 < • • 1— Z Ce _j0 O 0 co 0 U) LLI WI —I 1— w 0 2 7.1 LL 2c5 LI-1 Z I-0 Z W 2 :3 :3 ca U) C) -- en uj 7C 0 F. P: o 0 LLJ0 0 F- File: L9B DD5 • 35mm Drawing# ' z W U: UO W =' J LL: W0 g a, F-_; z I-- 0 z� W 2 i0 -` 0 I-- W -; H L' � _ 0I- z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF DECISION June 28, 1999 TO: King County Facilities Management Division, Applicant Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Lynn Lewicki, SEPA Coordinator, King County King County Assessor, Accounting Division State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Washington State Department of Fisheries & Wildlife Office of the State Attorney General King County Department of Natural Resources Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Indian Tribe Parties of Record z H c4 2 w. —1 C.) 00 co 0 ws J H, w wO 2 u. =d F- w Z= I- O ZI-- w This notice is to confirm the decision reached by the Planning Commission at the June 24, 1999 public hearing. The Commission voted to approve the applicant's proposal for 12 regular parking spaces and 1 0 co. handicapped parking space at North Wind Weir Park based on the findings and conclusions in the staff report a 1— dated June 4, 1999. This letter serves as a notice of decision and is issued pursuant to TMC 18.104.170 on w w the following project and permit approval. H tL O .Z w = O~ File Number: L99 -0036 (Special Permission — Parking) Associated File: L98 -0054 (Shoreline Substantial Development Permit) Applicant: King County, Facilities Management Division Request: Determine the number of parking spaces required for North Wind Weir Park. Location: 11013 West Marginal Place South SEPA Determination: To be determined by King County (lead agency). Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at: Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100, Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. — 5:00 p.m. The planner managing the project is Deborah Ritter, who may be contacted at 206 -431 -3663 for further information. Property owners affected by this decision may request a change in valuation for their property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 z Notice of Decision June 28, 1999 Page 2 The time period for appeals is 14 days starting from the date of this Notice of Decision. The Planning Commission decision is appealable to the Tukwila City Council pursuant to TMC 18.104.010(E). Appeal materials shall include: 1. The name of the appealing party. 2. The address and phone number of the appealing party; and if the appealing party is a corporation, association or other group, the address and phone number of a contact person authorized to receive notices on the appealing party's behalf. 3. A statement identifying the decision being appealed and the alleged errors in the decision. The Notice of.Appeal shall state specific errors of fact or errors in application of the law in the decision being appealed; the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be limited to matters or issues raised in the Notice of Appeal. z ~ w!. JU UO U W r w o' 2 u_= D. d zw F- ZF- F- O Z 2 U 13: O- 0E- = U. LI Z U =_ 'O Z June 18, 1999 City of Tukwila a John W Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section King County Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 RE: Location of Locking Gate at North Wind Weir Park 11013 West Marginal Place South Dear Mike: This is a follow -up to our letter of June 18th. We are asking that the location of the locked gate be moved to the mouth of the proposed parking lot. By relocating the gate in this way, the public will be able to use the grasscrete turnaround during the times that the gate is locked. Emergency and maintenance vehicles would be able to unlock the gate as needed and thus have access to the complete turnaround area at any time. The idea of the gate relocation appears to work conceptually, but its feasibility needs to be evaluated. Even though emergency vehicles will be able .to open the gate, the relocated posts may be "in the way ", affecting or prohibiting their ability to negotiate the turnaround. An alternative would be to keep the gate at your proposed location and to add a small paved area to the north. This paved area would serve the same purpose for passenger vehicles without necessitating the relocation of the gate. However, since this additional pavement would increase the amount of impervious surface, it will likely alter the drainage calculations. I have attempted to indicate both scenarios on a copy of your revised site plan (see attached). Would you please provide your draft drawing of each scenario so we can discuss this with you and make a determination? Once the determination is made, the site plan and drainage information could be revised accordingly. While these changes are not likely to have a great impact on the Shoreline permit, you may still wish to resolve this matter while we're in technical review. Please contact me at 206 -431 -3663 with any questions you may have. Sincerely, e-reo Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord VIA FAX 360- 297 -1741 VIA FAX 206 - 323 -9242 Brian Shelton, City Engineer Joanna Spencer, Associate Engineer 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 . . z z 2/11 U 0 U0 -Jz H u w0 gj Id =w z� I— Co Z~ o O D O E- w w' H V Li: O. .Z w U =. OF-- z 1 City of Tukwila a John W Rants, Mayor June 18, 1999 Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section King County Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Re: Street Vacation Issues North Wind Weir Park 11013 West Marginal Place South Dear Mike: Per our recent conversation, I have been researching the requirements for the street vacation of West Marginal Place South and for the consolidation of the twelve existing lots at the project site. As we discussed, this process should begin as soon as possible so that all the requirements will be met prior to your application for a land altering permit. The street vacation and lot consolidation requests will be processed separately from (but parallel with) the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit application. We do not expect the street vacation or lot consolidation to impact or delay the Shoreline application review. Enclosed is a copy of a letter to you from Public Works dated October 21, 1996. In particular, King County should respond to Items 1 and 2 of this letter. It is our understanding that the Seattle Water Department has a 20 -inch water line, vault, hydrant and water meters in the existing right -of -way. We have also been advised that Seattle City Light has electrical distribution facilities within the existing right -of -way. Please provide Brian Shelton, Tukwila City Engineer, with the required easement documentation for the street vacation as soon as possible. His mailing address and phone number are as follows: Brian Shelton City Engineer Public Works Department City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 101 Tukwila, Washington 98188 206 - 433 -0179 In response to Item 3 of the October 21, 1996 letter, I have provided the following information to Public Works: a) Compliance with SEPA King County is handling SEPA on this project and will issue a determination when Tukwila's technical review of the Shoreline permit application has been completed. We anticipate that the Shoreline technical review will begin at the end of June, 1999. King County and Tukwila anticipate the issuance of a Determination of Non - Significance later this summer. b) Shoreline Permit from City of Tukwila Technical review of the shoreline permit application (L98 -0054) will begin at the end of June. This is to accommodate the Planning Commission's review of the number of parking spaces in the park (L99- 0036). We anticipate that a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit will be issued sometime later this summer. Construction will not commence until 2000, due to King County budget restrictions. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Michael G. Lozano June 18, 1999 Page 2 c) City of Tukwila Planning Commission approval of parking spaces A public hearing before the Commission will be held on June 24, 1999 (L99- 0036). Parks and Planning staff are recommending a total of 13 parking spaces, one of which will be handicapped. This proposal is reflected in the June 4, 1999 Staff Report, attached. d) Compliance with Tukwila Tree Regulations (TMC 18.54) This compliance will be reviewed by Tukwila's Urban Environmentalist during the technical review phase of the Shoreline permit application. The applicant is aware of this requirement and has reflected the requirements of TMC 18.54 in the permit documents. e) Design & Construction of cul -de- sac - turnaround of emergency and maintenance vehicles King County understands the need for 24 -hour access by police, fire and maintenance personnel (both Tukwila and Seattle) and will coordinate with these departments to ensure adequate access to the park. The location and size of the turnaround has been reviewed and approved as to form by Tukwila's Assistant Fire Chief. King County will agree to coordinate the development of the following: Z ~W re 2 00 CO CI LIJ UJ J �, w0 a2 LL ?. 1. A schedule of the times that the park gate will be locked and unlocked. t� a =W 2. A method of gaining access to the park during locked times (such as a lockbox). I— Z� NOTE: Based on conversations with our Parks Department, the information requested in Z O 0 Item (e) above is fairly standard and has been supplied by King County for similar W W. projects. Please provide this type of information as it pertains to Wind Weir Park U so we may finalize our review of this requirement. O I-' At the completion of the street vacation, I will be coordinating the processing of the lot consolidation. Please contact W W me at 206 -431 -3663 so we may discuss all of these issues and establish a preliminary timeline. For your reference, H U. I have enclosed a copy of the Lot Consolidation packet. u_ P O In a related matter, I am enclosing a copy of the staff report that will be presented to the Planning Commission at the ti.l �` June 24th public hearing. As you know, this report addresses the request for 13 parking spaces at the park. Please U =' contact me when you return from vacation to confirm that you will be able to attend the public hearing on that date. p I - Z Sincerely, 1&/ ,e(/jc Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Brian Shelton, City Engineer e•ora itter In • eir Park From: Brian Shelton To: Deborah Ritter Date: 6/17/99 7:52PM Subject: North Wind Weir Park I noticed your letter is out before the 18th. In response to your 6/15/99 memo, the following comment is provided. A small paved area, similar to a hammerhead is needed just north of the closed position of the gate. Something to allow a vehicle (general public and others) to turn around when the gate is closed, and avoid backing into a ditch, or landscaping, or a sign. Remember, this is a very long cul -de -sac when the gate is open. Please advise if this will be included for consideration at this time. Thanks. Page 1 z I z, re w J U' U O co w =- CO LL; W }Or g L < N � =a I- z z� �O Z1 U 0 N O ', Wuj U Z W U =; O 1- z City of TukWlla John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMO TO:. Brian Shelton FROM: Deb Ritter DATE: June 15, 1999 RE: Street Vacation Issues North Wind Weir Park 11013 West Marginal Place South Per our conversation last week, Jane searched her files for documentation related to the proposed street vacation. She has no file information beyond the May 28, 1996 public hearing. However, the project description (as it was presented at the 1996 hearing) appears to match the project description for the current Shoreline permit application. Attached is the revision submitted yesterday by the applicant. This revision shows a "limit of construction" line and the relocated gate. This revised plan has already been reviewed and approved by Don Williams and Nick Olivas. I will be sending Mike Lozano (of King County) a copy of Public Work's letter dated October 21, 1996. In particular, King County will be responding to Items 1 and 2 (creation of utility easements). I am able to respond to Item 3, as follows: a) Compliance with SEPA King County is handling SEPA on this project and will issue a determination when Tukwila's technical review of the Shoreline permit application has been completed. We anticipate that the Shoreline technical review will begin at the end of June, 1999. King County and Tukwila anticipate the issuance of a Determination of Non - Significance later this summer. b) Shoreline Permit from City of Tukwila Technical review of the shoreline permit application (L98 -0054) will begin at the end of. June. This is to accommodate the Planning Commission's review of the number of parking spaces in the park (L99- 0036). We anticipate that a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit will be issued sometime later this summer. Construction will not commence until 2000, due to King County budget restrictions. City of Tukwila Planning Commission approval of parking spaces A public hearing before the Commission will be held on June 24, 1999 (L99- 0036). Parks and Planning staff are recommending a total of 13 parking spaces, one of which will be handicapped. This proposal is reflected in the June 4, 1999 Staff Report, attached. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 4313665 ,4- Brian Shelton June 15, 1999 Page 2 d) Compliance with Tukwila Tree Regulations (TMC 18.54) This compliance will be reviewed by Gary Schulz during the technical review phase of the Shoreline permit application. The applicant is aware of this requirement and has reflected the requirements of TMC 18.54 in the permit documents. z e) Design & Construction of cul -de- sac - turnaround of emergency and maintenance vehicles 1— w o:2. King County understands the need for 24 -hour access by police, fire and maintenance personnel (both Tukwila and Seattle) and will coordinate with these departments to ensure adequate access to the park. The location and size of the turnaround has been a p: reviewed and approved by Nick Olivas. King County has agreed to coordinate the development of the following: -J �. CO u_ in 0. 1. A formal schedule of the times that the park gate will be locked and unlocked. 2 2. A method of gaining access to the park during locked times (such as a Iockbox). ' j King County has been advised that the street vacation and subsequent lot consolidation will be processed F=.. w separately and independent of the Shoreline permit application. The applicant has been advised that the z H street vacation and lot consolidation will be necessary prior to the processing of any land altering permit. z O Ill in 1 will advise Mr. Lozano to coordinate with you regarding the street vacation and to provide you with the required easement documentation as soon as possible. At the completion of the street 8 N vacation, the applicant will be working with Pat Brodin and myself regarding lot consolidation issues. o E, w Lii If you have any comments regarding this memo please let me know in the next few days. I will be i U issuing a letter to Mr. Lozano on June 18th and would like to incorporate any changes or u- ~O additional requirements you may have. Thanks. z tii U w' i= _ 0' cc: Pat Brodin (w /o encl.) Joanna Spencer (w /o encl.) z City of Tukwila Department of Community Development HEARING DATE: STAFF CONTACT: NOTIFICATION: FILE NUMBER: ASSOCIATED FILE: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING DISTRICT: RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Prepared June 4; 1999 June 24, 1999 Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner John W Rants, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director Notice of Application mailed to surrounding properties and posted May 21, 1999. Notice of Public Hearing mailed and posted June 10, 1999. L99 -0036 (Special Permission — Parking) for North Wind Weir Park L98 -0054 (Shoreline Substantial Development Permit) King County, Facilities Management Division Determine the number of parking spaces required for North Wind Weir Park 11013 West Marginal Place South Manufacturing Industrial Center /Heavy Industrial Manufacturing Industrial Center/ Heavy Industrial Accept the Department of Parks recommendation for 13 spaces (12 regular parking spaces and 1 handicapped parking space). A. Application B. Site Plan C. Memo from Don Williams, Parks & Recreation Director, dated May 27, 1999. D. Memo from King County, Facilities Management, dated February 17, 1999. 63�IO�outhcenter Soul ya Sulr ,02.4.. r 4.04,6,1(tgt4tt , ELIA , „!2 0..?,;!;WP, ,,Fa,� 9,01nA4A5? Staff Report to the L99 -0036 Planning Commission North Wind Weir Park Determination FINDINGS SITE INFORMATION The park will be located on a three -acre parcel of undeveloped land which is adjacent to the Duwamish River. The park will include an estuary for intertidal habitat, a Native American interpretive display, canoe access, walking paths, benches, picnic tables and restroom facility. The Green River Trail extends along the western boundary of -the park. The park is being developed through funding received from the METRO West Point Treatment Plant mitigation process that is targeting restoration and enhancement along the Duwamish River. BACKGROUND As the Green River Trail is located along the park's western boundary, the associated parking lot could be called a trailhead. According to King County, there are two classifications of trailheads which are used to provide parking at County trails. Minor trailheads typically provide five to ten vehicle parking stalls. Major trailheads provide anywhere between twenty-five and forty stalls. Although there is no scientific formula available for determining the size of a trailhead parking lot, demand and accessibility to a trail are factors. Due to site constraints, approval of the 13 proposed parking spaces is being sought prior to finalization of the Shoreline Substantial Development permit. DECISION CRITERIA Tukwila Zoning Code, Figure 18 -7 (Minimum Number of Off - Street Parking Spaces) states that parking requirements for outdoor sports areas or parks shall be determined by the Planning Commission. Additionally, Section 1107 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code stipulates that one handicapped parking space is required for parking lots with 25 or fewer spaces. Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.6.10 reads as follows: Where shoreline public access is provided, ensure that it is designed to be safe and convenient and includes access amenities such as benches, drinking fountains, public parking areas, handicapped access and appropriate lighting, consistent with the river access guidelines. Staffs goal is to ensure adequate on -site parking without negatively impacting this shoreline restoration project. However, it is difficult to arrive at a determination given the lack of relevant "scientific" data and this site's unique characteristics. In reviewing the proposal, the Tukwila Parks Department used other, similar, city parks such as Bicentennial Park and Tukwila Pond Park, as comparables (see attached memos from Tukwila Parks Department and from King County). The park is located in the MIC /H with the only vehicle access being from 27th Avenue South. Boeing office workers (who make up a large portion of the trail users) have their own parking off - site. There are no retail users nearby. Peak usage of the park is expected to be during the daytime in the summer months. CONCLUSIONS Although King County and the Tukwila Parks Department cannot cite scientific studies supporting the proposal, they believe that 13 stalls will be sufficient for this site. This recommendation is based on the experience of both departments regarding similar parks. Staff believes this proposal balances the desire to minimize negative impacts both on and off -site while providing adequate automobile access to the park. Staff Report to the Planning Commission RECOMMENDATION L99 -0036 North Wind Weir Park Determination Staff recommends approval of King County's proposal for 12 regular spaces and 1 handicapped parking space at North Wind Weir Park. From: Deborah Ritter To: Brian Shelton Date: 6/7/99 8:57AM Subject: Street Vacation Process - 27th Avenue South Pat Brodin suggested I meet with you to discuss the steps needed to vacate a portion of 27th Avenue South. This is an old cul -de -sac located in the site proposed for North Wind Weir Park, along the Duwamish (at 11013 W. Marginal Place South). I understand that a street vacation can be a lengthy process, requiring processing by Public Works and City Council approval. We would like to get this process started as soon as possible as several other steps will follow (lot consolidation, Shoreline permit and land altering permit, etc.). Do you have a few minutes to discuss this? z _� W 2 U O' o w =' J 1- U) u„ u1 O LL FW _.. Z j- H O Z I• : uj U 'O - 0 1- ILIW 1-- 1:: u. O t11Z 0 CO O~ Z ATTACHMENT C City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 MEMORANDUM TO: Deb Ritter, Assistant Planner FROM: Don Williams, Parks and Recreation Director DATE: May 27, 1999 SUBJECT: North Wind Weir Park - Parking Number Issue John W Rants, Mayor The purpose of this memo is to confirm my position that a total of 13 parking stalls is sufficient for this park. The 13 would include one handicapped parking stall. Although we're lacking "scientific studies" to determine a range of stalls that would be appropriate, I feel our hands on experience may be even more valid. I would equate this proposed park to our Bicentennial Park as far as evaluating the number of stalls needed. In that park, we started with 11 stalls and added 13 several years later. In the middle of the winter, we're "over parked" and in July /August on a warm Saturday, we're "under parked ". In other words, when you look at the size of the park,: plus the trail, the lack of retail areas by N.W.W.P and the fact that Boeing office workers (trail users) nearby have their own parking, I feel 13 stalls is sufficient. I can support this number based on my 22 years of trail development and use experience here in Tukwila. DW:nk cc: File RECEIVED MAY 2 7 1999 COMMON! T ; . DEVELOPMENT Phone: (206) 433 -1800 • City Hall Fax. (206) 433 -1833 CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Tukwila City Council will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, May 28, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, to consider vacation of a portion of West Marginal Place South from South 110th Street extended to approximately 370 feet south. Any and all interested persons are invited to be present to voice approval, disapproval, or opinions on this issue. Published: Seattle Times - May 3, 1996 Posted: Tukwila City Hall Foster Library Tukwila Library On site Jane E. Cantu City Clerk 4 MIL MIL 1 5 101111 SI STREET W c4 non( ReQufisn 1 / 1?\-7111171\ \ Aet\IC -la: ‘,. \ill\ \ \ \\7 \ it la elk- 5117111 S1 I \ �/ {��I • \•�� m#481767? Ili ,, s" mtr 'I► \ -:':11--=:411001111111 ' , 1111111 Ti s t n !T 1 , ■ \\ \ 5 11]11151 .. . ". 1 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director May 19, 1999 Michael G. Lozano Project Manager Parks CIP Section Division of Capital Planning & Development Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 VIA FAX 206 - 296 -0186 and US Mail Re: North Wind Weir Park at 11013 West Marginal Place South Special Permission — Parking (L99 -0036) Dear Mike: On May 21st, we will be forwarding to you a copy of the Notice of Complete Application and Notice of Application for your files. Due to short notice, I have arranged to post the Notice of Application on the 21st. Parking Needs Analysis Your parking needs analysis was forwarded to Don Williams, Parks and Recreation Director, on May 14th. I have enclosed a copy of his remarks, dated May 17th, for your review. Mr. Williams has requested additional documentation in support of the County's request for 11 parking stalls. This information will be necessary in order for Mr. Williams to continue his review: These items are as follows: 1. A brief discussion of comparable King County parks including pertinent site data (park type, type of uses, park size, park demand, number of parking stalls, park access and location). 2. A brief description of potential Wind Weir Park (and trail) users and how they are expected.to physically access the park (i.e., by car, by boat, on foot, etc.). 3. A narrative explaining how King County reached the determination that 11 parking stalls are adequate for North Wind Weir Park. As you know, we tentatively scheduled a public hearing before the Planning Commission on June 24, 1999. However, this date was based on the assumption that no additional information would be required from King County. In order to hold the public hearing on June 24th, all of the information referenced above must be provided to the undersigned by 5:00 pm on Thursday, May 27th. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 - Michael G. Lozano May 19, 1999 L99 -0036 (Parking) Page 2 However, given the nature of the required items and the amount of time it may take to assemble the information, we recommend the public hearing be rescheduled for the next available date: August 26, 1999. In either case, the determination by the Planning Commission regarding the number of parking spaces has to be completed before we can proceed with technical review under the Shoreline Substantial. Development Permit. Fire Department Access As a courtesy, we are providing you with additional, preliminary information regarding Fire Department access to the park. Although it is not a definitive list, you may wish to review and consider this information in connection with the technical review of the Shoreline permit. The park design must incorporate a turnaround for Fire Department vehicles. We have enclosed a dimensioned diagram illustrating two types of turnarounds: a cul -de -sac and a hammerhead. Please feel free to contact Nick Olivas, Assistant Fire Chief, at 206 - 575 -4404 regarding the location of a turnaround on the site. If you have any other questions, please contact me at 206- 431 -3663. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Donald Benson, URS Greiner (w /encl.) 'Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord (w /encl.) Lynn Lewicki, King County SEPA Coordinator (w /encl.) Don Williams, Tukwila Parks & Recreation (w /encl.) Joanna Spencer, Tukwila Public Works (w /encl.) Nick Olivas, Tukwila Fire Department (w /encl.) Gary Schulz, Tukwila Urban Environmentalist (w /encl.) Bob Abbott, Tukwila Police Department (w /encl.) :. City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 MEMORANDUM TO: Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner FROM: Don Williams, Parks and Recreation Director DATE: May 17, 1999 SUBJECT: Parking Needs Analysis for King County's North Wind Weir Park John W Rants, Mayor A review of Mike Lozano's February 17, 1999 letter to the Planning Department, in my opinion, lacks adequate support information to explain how he justifies the proposed 11 parking stalls. It is a unique site and because of that uniqueness, I feel it is justified for the county to provide specific information about other existing sites and other supportive information on how the 11 stalls were decided upon. Factors such as being a commercial location with no nearby housing and difficulty getting to the site are valid concerns. The fact that fisherpersons will use the site, along with joggers, should also be considered; will they drive to the site or just walk through it. The county needs to identify potential park and trail users and explain how they'll get there. This will affect the number of parking stalls needed. My own experience, since we built the very first section of this river trail in 1978, tells me a parking area from 11 to 18 stalls should be considered. However, I'd like to see more information from the county before l make a final recommendation. If you do receive additional information from the county, please pass it along for me to review. DW:nk cc: File ...... ••• Phone: (206) 433 -1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433-1833 z 1w ce J0 O 00 W = J H w0 LLa _a �w Z= I- 0. Z U • 0 O 52 O 1--. ww Z t- .z w 0 z • City of Tukwila Fire Fre'ention 444 Ancicver Park East Tukwila, V\ 98188 206 - 575 -4407 H-14 Commercial and Residential Fire Department Access Road with Cul- de-sac turn around UFC Division II Sec. 10.201.10.206 City Ordinance 1632 Fire Department Access Road with Hammer Head turn around UFC Division 11 Sec. 10.201.10.206 City Ordinance 1632 20' 20' Radius Typical z �• Z re w. u1 -.I C.) O 0 W 2. I__ w u. W o. =• a I- W. z1 �o zE- 0 • 0 o D 0- W W: 1-I: W Z U I= o 1- z King County Department of Construction and Facility Management Pearl McElheran, Director King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 296 -0648 (206) 296 -0100 TDD (206) 296 -0186 FAX May 17, 1999 Deborah Ritter Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 ECE8 ED MAY 1 81999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RE: North Wind Weir Park - Permit Affidavit Deborah, Please find enclosed the notartized Affidavit of Installation and Posting of Public Information Sign r the North Wind Weir park project. incerely, Mic r, ozano, Project Manager cc: Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord • CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 AFFIDAVIT OF IN STALLATI01 AND POSTING OF PUBLIC - F'ORVIATI01 SIGNS) State of Washington County of King. City of Tukwila. 1 (Print Name) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the Tukwila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice of Completeness. I certify that on 5 ' 14 •`l'( the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section 18.104.110 and other applicable guidelines were posted on the property located at l(oSS W. LAta?.C,dti401... . t L(T & so as to be clearly seen from each right -of -way providing primary vehicular access to the property for application file number 1r.16. oe�4 -- -111 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this /7— day of • r pOTAR y ▪ S.. it BOG .•;' 14:.4.1.5.:. .••G ;``. , ii WASH` Affiant (Ap•lic. Signature) 4zA,c, NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington residing at � r.�tvt My commission expires on 9-U4< -2 / 6-/ zoo z �w 6 UO. t CO °' UJ al —I I--! C0 IL w O, = a. w z� O. Z~ • uj 2 U� O U'. w w; I- 0 U. w z: OH z A F F I D A V I T O F D I S T R I B U T I O N z, `,l/,e�co�y/ /36( l� 0 hereby declare that: E Notice of Public Hearing D Determination of Non - significance O Notice of Public Meeting fl Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance LIBoard of Adjustment Agenda O Determination of Significance Packet and Scoping Notice Li Board of Appeals Agenda ['Notice of Action Packet flPlanning Commission Agenda Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet J Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit LI Official Notice Other N0--- was mailed to each of the following addresses on cet7Lckeeli, Ki CO d lar : Name of Project File Number qO q C)O5- 1''77 7'g natur 'l i c-Ae-e( z '0 O 0 • W= J F— CO LL: wO. 2 < 1 d. _. z� h0 •Z H. 2 o, rri 0 0 W w. U'. —0 wz 0 (n O ~. z 1 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF APPLICATION DATED MAY 14, 1999 The following application has been submitted to the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development for review and decision. APPLICANT: King County, Facilities Management Division LOCATION: North.Wind Weir Park 11013 West Marginal Place South, Tukwila FILE NUMBERS: L98 -0054 (Shoreline Substantial Development Permit) PROPOSAL: Development of a park on a 3 -acre parcel of undeveloped land adjacent to the Duwamish River. Park will include an estuary for intertidal habitat, a Native American interpretive display, canoe access, walking paths, benches, picnic tables and visitor parking. OTHER REQUIRED SEPA Determination (King County is lead agency) PERMITS: Hydraulic Project Approval, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Section 401 Water Quality Certification Nationwide Permit, Washington State Department of Ecology Section 404 or Section 10 Permit, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Flood Control Zone Permit, City of Tukwila Land Altering Permit, City of Tukwila These files can be reviewed at the Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA. Please call (206) 431 -3670 to ensure that the file(s) will be available. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT You can submit comments on this application. You must submit your comments in writing to the Department of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on June 11, 1999. If you have questions about this proposal contact Deborah Ritter, the Planner in charge of this file at (206) 431- 3663. Anyone who submits written comments will become parties of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 R City of Tukwila April 30, 1999 John W Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section Division of Capital Planning & Development Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 RE: North Wind Weir Park at 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 (Shoreline) Dear Mr. Lozano: Your application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit on the above - referenced project has been found to be complete as of April 30, 1999 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. Essentially, this means that you have supplied the required items listed on the application checklist for this type of permit. z 6 0 O 0 No J = F- U) w w 0 �Q =d Fw Z= E- h- 0 Z I. U • D - 0 O H We are about to commence our technical review process, which is the next phase in the processing of your i 0 Shoreline permit application. Although your Shoreline application has been found to be "complete ", the items u.. =- you supplied may have to be revised or amended. The City may also require that you submit additional plans z and information to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City and to finalize the o review process. E O The next step is for you to install the notice board on the site within 14 days of the date of this letter. You received information on how to install the board with your Shoreline application packet. We are enclosing a laminated copy of the Notice of Application to post on that board. After installing the board with the laminated notice, you need to return the signed Affidavit of Posting to our office (blank copy attached). As we advised in our January 22, 1999 letter, the Planning Commission will determine the required number of parking spaces for the park. This review is a Type 4, special permission decision, which will require a public hearing. Please submit your special permission application packet including the required checklist items at your earliest convenience. Once that packet has been deemed to be complete, we can schedule the first available public hearing before the Planning Commission. Once the Notice of Decision has been issued by the Commission you will know the number of required parking spaces and the impacts, if any, this requirement has on your proposal for the Shoreline permit. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 206 -431 -3663. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 z Michael G. Lozano April 30, 1999 Page 2 cc: Donald Benson, URS Greiner Lynn Lewicki, King County, SEPA Coordinator Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord Joanna Spencer, Tukwila Public Works Nick Olivas, Tukwila Fire Department Gary Schulz, Tukwila Urban Environmentalist Don Williams, Tukwila Parks & Recreation Bob Abbott, Tukwila Police z HZ' re w. J 0, O Or uJ w= �u.'. wO 2 g ¢. if?. w zF I-- O Z 1- U� 10 -!. 0 ww H U' •z,_ U z CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION AND POSTING OF PUBLIC III- FORVIATION SIGN (S) State of Washington County of King City of Tukwila I (Print Name) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the Tukwila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice of Completeness. I certify that on the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section 18.104.110 and other applicable guidelines were posted on the property located at so as to be clearly seen from each right -of -way providing primary vehicular access to the property for application file number A.ffiant (Applicant Signature) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of , 19 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington residing at My commission expires on z W et 2 J0 0 O` . u)0 (I) W' W =' t J 1.—, U) Li. W O ga co =a �w Z z� o zI- uj co 0 H w w; I V; L11.1 z; 0 V, z 0 I- VTACHMENT B CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGNS Public Information Signs are intended to make the public aware of land use and development actions which are being considered by the City and to facilitate timely and effective public participation in the review process. SIGN INSTALLATION AND SPECIFICATIONS Sign Size and Placement The sign(s) shall be -4'x4' in size, placed no closer than five (5) feet from the right -of -way at the mid -point of the more heavily traveled public street fronting the property (see Figure 1). A minimum of one sign is required at each project site. Additional signs may be required for larger sites or for properties with several street frontages. The signs) cannot be located within the clear vision area (site triangle) depicted in Figure 2. The sign shall be prepared using the official templates provided in this packet or attachable letters. Hand lettered signs are not acceptable. Signs meeting the established criteria may be obtained from any professional sign company. Signs Now in Tukwila (206) 271 -5465 and Fast Signs in Seattle (206) 368 -7331 are two sign companies providing this service. You may consult the yellow pages to obtain quotes from other sign companies. Sign Content Include the following information on your sign(s) (see Figure 1 for correct layout). • The title "Notice of Land Use Action ". • Type of land use or development action which is proposed. • Name of the proposed project. • Address of project site. • Name of the Applicant. • City of Tukwila logo (copy attached). • City of Tukwila address and phone number. • A graphic or written description of the site boundaries, and space for the Notice of Application and Notice of Public Hearing. •.- Additional information as the Director of Community Development may determine to be necessary to adequately notify the public of the pending land use application. , 7/2196 0 c 0) U p O o. Z O a0 o n U E 4) u) a U N Cn ca U) c vn n cct o c =v Y mc a) cc -I U x ..- d O m CU d N N y CO _m m m U C C�) C .c �- w O 'C J •r.. , t Z m °� 13 _iX xCIt D Cl C7x __ X • r d C) 11 y = t — C '- t J_ m C —..� Y C LL =m.=wU) = o V .0 d J ) . U a CO ►. J 11 1 11 NOTICE OF LAND USE ACTION i . 3 3 x m = N „ ' '3N 9171. 3'N 1-4 9P l a) N o -o O — 0 a 0) - 0 .c▪ t - Q) cn 0 0 O 0 C CV t Baker Street Figure #1 RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT The applicant shall be solely responsible for the construction, installation, maintenance and removal of the notification sign(s) and the associated costs. The sign(s) shall be erected no later than fourteen (14) days after the Department of Community Development has issues the Notice of Completeness and will remain erected until the date specified by the Department. The applicant shall sign an affidavit, stating that the sign (s) were installed and posted in accordance with all City codes and ordinances. The affidavit of posting shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development by the applicant within fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the notice of completeness . If the sign is made illegible, removed or otherwise destroyed prior to the date of the final public hearing or final action by the City of Tukwila, the applicant is responsible for the immediate replacement of the sign. Failure to maintain the notice board in good condition is cause for the discontinuance of the review of the application until the notice board is replaced and remains in place for a specified time period. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Department shall provide the applicant with all information necessary for the installation of the public notification board. These materials include a copy of the City logo, size and material requirements, and illustrated examples of a posting board. The Department will also determine the type of decision being rendered for this application and specify to the applicant the duration of the posting period. The Department shall post the Notice of Hearing on any posted notice board(s) erected pursuant to TMC 18.104.110 at least 14 days prior to any public hearings on Type 3, 4 and 5 decisions, open record appeal hearings on Type 2 decisions and closed appeal hearings on Type 4 decisions.. No signs or sign supports which obscure vision between the heights of 3 and 10 feet within 40 feet of the intersection of streets or driveways will be allowed. SIGN SIGN I.1 ■ 40' Figure #2 7/2/96 4' y o u k mot4 o i n k - b x C ,.,`nee +hers .uu ► � � `emu. C\ 4 r6xrn.s ±D k. 1� at3+-e cQ This (A)A pcdoL4 �r,otie_ ��e��b�l ►� uo�en ' ►� e,ms . � 4 8" Dia WIL'i, 1908 Type of Actic Project Name Site Address: Applicant: 2.75" (Lettering, Red) OTICE OF LAND US, ACTION .5" (Lettering) Site Map (11" x 14 ") Boxes included on sign) Notice of Application (8.5" x 14 ") (8.5" x 14 ") (8.5" x 14 ") 15" (Lettering) TO SUBMIT COMMENTS OR OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE PROJECT PLANNER AT (206) 431 -3670 Tukwila Planning Division 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 1.0" (Lettering) :..:.' Figure #3 • . I DECISION TYPE $\owl For any project requiring a Shortine Substantial Development Permit ON -SITE POSTING PERIODS DURATION OF POSTING PERIOD ,For projects triggering SEPA revlaw, posting shall take place within 14 days after notice of completeness until the later of (1) 14 days after the Issuance of decision, or (2) the date of any administrative appeal hearing. CThe Public Notice Board shall be posted for a minimum of 30 days. r i REMOVAL OF POSTING BOARD Applicant Is responsible for removing the posting board In a timely matter In accordance with the time limit described In the "Duration of Posting Period" section. NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 6/27/96 • City of Tukwila Fire Prevention 444 Andover Park Fast Tukwila, W08188 206 - 575 -4407 H-14 Commercial and Residential Fire Department Access Road with Cul- de-sac turn around UFC Division!! Sec. 10.201.10.206 City Ordinance 1632 Fire Department Access Road with Hammer Head turn around UFC Division 11 Sec. 10.201.10.206 City Ordinance 1632 0 N 20' Radius Typical z W' re u� UO U 0, W = F— WO ga S2 a = F- = W Z 1- O Z F-, p O F-- wW --o w Z I. 1.= ~. Z �De •ora - fitter - Re: %din • eir Park firFnaroun • �, Page 1 From: Deborah Ritter To: Nick Olivas Date: 4/21/99 1:34PM Subject: Re: Wind Weir Park fire turnaround This project is different because the only structure in the park is the existing restroom (made of concrete blocks and tin roof). It is located in the middle of a large open area, away from the shoreline and trees. If there's nothing to burn down, why require an engineered turnaround for the Fire truck? The more likely Fire Department vehicle to be needed at the site would be an aid car (responding to 911 calls). CC: Jack Pace • -z Ce 0: 00. • wW w O' E ua D. N a W 1- O: Z WW O -! ;0 1-. •W W> • H�. • lLa • .. z, w 0 • I- Z Ritter - Re: rriin • 1- eir Par From: To: Date: Subject: narou re ` nd chi Page 1 Nick Olivas Deborah Ritter 4/21/99 6:04AM Re: Wind Weir Park fire turnaround The requirements for a turn around for this project are no different than for any other project. The space needed to turn a fire truck around doesn't change from project to project. The diameter of a cul -de sac is 81 feet; you should be able to obtain a hammer head detail from Tammy. CaII me if you have questions. »> Deborah Ritter 04/16/99 10:28AM »> As you know, there will be a public hearing regarding the number of parking spaces required for this park. This hearing will probably be held at the end of June. Since the issues of parking and fire access are related, I will be including your turnaround requirements in the staff report for that hearing. Could you give me your detailed requirements for this particular turnaround? These requirements could drastically change the design or even feasibility of the project. If that happens, we want to give them (and the Planning Commission) as much warning as possible. z �z• . re w .J U O 0: co J • t—. w0 u_ ? � w z� 0. z ►—:. Lu w U ;O nc; 0 1- w W r- . 2 0 c 0 z MEMO TO: File FROM: Deb Ritter DATE: April 19, 1999 RE: North Wind Weir Park Shoreline Application (L98 -0054) Completeness Routing Bob Abbott (Police) Gary Schulz (Environmental) and Don Williams (Parks) have all verbally approved this file for completeness. . � Debora itter Wm• eir mar fireturl • and • Page 1 From: Deborah Ritter To: Nick Olivas Date: 4/16/99 10:28AM Subject: Wind Weir Park fire turnaround As you know, there will be a public hearing regarding the number of parking spaces required for this park. This hearing will probably be held at the end of June. Since the issues of parking and fire access are related, I will be including your turnaround requirements in the staff report for that hearing. Could you give me your detailed requirements for this particular turnaround? These requirements could drastically change the design or even feasibility of the project. If that happens, we want to give them (and the Planning Commission) as much warning as possible. CC: Jack Pace z r4 U O: U) J w w 0' gQ = d. t—= Z� 0 Z F- LU �• o o co I- LL' u H U L 0;. .Z' W U 0 H. z I De • ora =fitter - Re `forth find weir Par. :L98-0054 Page From: Deborah Ritter To: Nick Olivas Date: 4/8/99 8:48AM Subject: Re: North Wind Weir Park - L98 -0054 This stage of review is only for completeness. On 9/24/98 you asked for a site map showing the surrounding street(s) to "assess Fire Deparment access and the possible need for a turnaround." During technical review, we'll get your specific requirements for a turnaround at this site and related circulation issues. When everyone agrees that the file is "complete" they will go before the Planning Commission to get approval for the number of parking spaces they're proposing. The layout of the parking area will probably be affected by your specific turnaround requirements. CC: Don Williams, Gary Schulz, Jack Pace, Joanna Sp... Debora Ritter - 'ort ind eir Park - 98 -0054 r From: Nick Olives To: Deborah Ritter Date: 4/7/99 5:11 PM Subject: North Wind Weir Park - L98 -0054 They need a turn around, one is not shown. .z = cc JU: 'U O> w =: J � • 0 /2 d: W F- _ 1--10; • zt U ,„ W W 2 � • U, • W 0; LLIZ U U' • 0 1' O Z City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number Lc\ o054 LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM TO: ❑ Building WPtrnning 21 Public Works ?Fire Dept. jz, Police Dept. Parks /Rec Project: +() `) A W- -\12.-- ar_k Address: 104S U\\e5-- rnar i c\oS2 ?ack u. h Date J transmitted: - a - q CI Response CO MIA 1CS fit, y - us, - q `1 requested by: �(' d S- \ 1 - c\0 Staff 1,A' , Date response received: coordinator: �.Q YJ -(fz COMMENTS Q 7 ce.cQ14,ong.\. r cDcmA \r, mck,t et-u)l-QA"-AMN (.see Ao,A€4 -cQ 4 _ cac* l?i \\ GL_ QA-k-) «� c� �� q0 bt ? \af) 4-\ \'C\ it.t-,s1CO- C\Ca_. A(Z)`,\c v, U.) neF , yet k , is t P 4.0 ❑ Plan submittal requested ❑ DRC review requested Plan approved 03/14/94 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM TO: ❑ Building L%7 PlInning lZ Public Works la Fire Dept. Ix Police Dept. 54 Parks /Rec Project: +t--\ "` 1 ' n \-e- ark-, Address: kl�43 IAes� ,mar IR G� � P `act �d w h Date J transmitted: - a - Response (gip requested by: -pE \MrlesS scP,V‘ Li q -1ln - 9 s-- \ 1 - c\c\ Staff coordinator: 00 2, --era Date response received: COMMENTS onal lSSvecQ c& Can, CCkt, R. ria vo . \u 1"-e,01-\4 Cal Ct \s U ► e,03 p_ `J W-ef laCC1 02 KO Qt,( Q 4.0 ❑ Plan submittal requested ❑ DRC review requested Plan approved VacLood Roc cord Landscape Architecture • Planning • Urban Design 231 Summit Ave. East Seattle, Washington 98102 206-323-7919 FAX 206-323-9242 March 26, 1999 Mike Lozano, Project Manager King County Facilities Management 500 4th Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 • RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA APR 0 1 1999 PERMIT CENTER RE: NORTH WIND'S WEIR PARK Mike: Enclosed please find the following for resubmittal to the City of Tukwila for the Shoreline Permit application: • 6 copies Survey (Sheet: Permit 1) • 6 copies Shoreline Profile Cross - Sections (16 Sections labeled A through P, 8 -1/2 "x11 ") • 6 copies Plan View location of shoreline profile cross - sections (Sheet: Cl also labeled Permit Sheet 2) • 6 copies Detail sheet for estuary construction (Sheet: C2 also labeled Permit Sheet 3) - to supplement Permit 2 • 6 copies Site Plan (Sheet: Permit 4) • 6 copies Storm Drainage and Erosion Control Details (Sheet: Permit 5) - to supplement Permit 4 • 6 copies Grading and Drainage Plan (Sheet: Permit 6) - to supplement Permit 4 • 1 copy 8 -1/2 "x11" reduction of the above The items in bold are those items specifically requested in Ms. Ritter's letter of January 12, 1999. The other items are provided as a supplement, giving more detailed information about estuary construction, erosion control measures and the storm drainage plan. Per my discussion with Ms. Ritter, it is not necessary to resubmit the entire set of drawings, as these have already been submitted to the City and have not undergone any significant changes since the date of submittal. In addition I've attached one copy of the following items to this letter, as the site plan references certain materials and methods that are identified in the specifications: • Site locations and boring logs for 4 test pits in the vicinity of the estuary. This information shows the type of soil that will be exported from the site. z w 6 JU o O0, UN) w w= J w• O Li. Q =• a. I- al Z= I- O Z I- U 0. O O I- ww Z. w • i 0 z • Two pages from the earthwork portion of the specifications identifying the various types of fill that will be imported to the site. • Phone memo that provides additional information on storm drainage design considerations. This should provide the information requested by the City to allow them to complete their review of the permit application. Please advise if additional information is required. Sincerely, Connie Reckord attachments Cc: Don Benson Deborah Ritter ; z Z w U - 0; UO U) w W =' J u_. W O, g u.Q a �_ z� I-0 Z F-. LU w U O � U O O I-;. W W U. S — ~O Z: U = 0 z King County Department of Construction and Facility Management Pearl MIcElheran, Director King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle. WA 98104 (206) 296 -0648 (206) 296-0100 TDD (206) 296 -0186 FAX February 17, 1999 City of Tukwila Permitting To Whom It May Concern: Parking Need Analysis for North Wind Weir Park ATTACHMENT D RECEIVED CITY OF TU ILA MAY 1 3 1999 PERMIT CENTER The North Wind Weir Park site with a County trail which parallels the park boundary, provides a somewhat unique parking lot analysis situation. In addition to serving as a trailhead parking facility, the lot also serves the park users. There are two classifications of trailheads which are used to provide parking at County trails. Minor trailheads typically provide five to tear vehicle parking stalls. Major trail heads provide anywhere between twenty-five and forty stalls. Demand and access of a trail determine the need and size of the trailhead. The analysis and final determination of the parking lot size for the North Wind Park was based on the park size and type of use (passive), anticipated demand from trail users, and the fact that the site is a somewhat difficult site to access. There is no scientific formula available for determining the size of a trailhead parking lot or a parking lot for the North Wind Weir Park site. However, based on past design and experience, the County believes that the proposed parking lot will serve the needs of the public, both the park and trail users. Michael Lozano, Project Manager King County Department of Construction and Facilities Management • Z Z w JU 00. tn0 co w w =. N w0 2 ga z a; � z� 1— 0 Z w U 0' - 0 H w w', H U' -4--o ..z U =. o~ z City of Tukwila John W Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director January 12, 1999 Michael G. Lozano Project Manager Parks CIP Section Division of Capital Planning & Development Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Re: North Wind Weir Park at 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 (Shoreline) Dear Mr. Lozano: We have received and reviewed your documentation for the above - referenced application, which you submitted to us on January 8th. These materials were in response to our letter of incompleteness dated October 9th. We have the following comments. SHORELINE PERMIT APPLICATION Your application for a Shoreline Permit has been found to be incomplete. In order to continue processing your application there are additional items that must be submitted to the Department of Community Development. These items are itemized below. Items Required by Department of Community Development: 1. Six copies of a survey containing all of the items listed below (these items appear on the Shoreline Application Checklist, provided to you on September 18, 1998). Please amend an existing plans sheet or create a new sheet. clearly identified as the survey. v • ✓'• ✓. Survey at a scale of 1" - 20' or 1" = 30" with north arrow, graphic scale and date. The license stamp of the surveyor with the surveyor's original signature. Property dimensions, lots size and names of adjacent roads. Existing top of bank, landward catch -point of levee, riverbank toe, Mean High Water Mark and base flood elevation (100 -year flood)./ For work riverward of the Mean High Water Mark: distance work extends into the river beyond Mean High Water Mark - distance to federal projects and navigation channels 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 z w 00 co w= F- u_ IA 0 ga co =d Z= zF- w • w U 0 O -. F. LLI 20 H= O wz O I— z Michael G. Lozano January 12, 1999 L98 -0054 (Shoreline) Page 2 Limits of the 40 -foot River Environment and 60 -foot Low Impact Environment. z • Existing watercourses and wetlands (if any) with required buffers (TMC ~, 18.45.040). 1 z �-� Existing grades at 2' contours, extending at least 5' beyond subject property's 6 boundaries, with a notation of the slope of areas in excess of 20 %. U O ' cnw w= H: 2. Six copies of all shoreline profile cross - sections at minimum 75 -foot intervals along the in O' site's shoreline. This includes the perimeter of the intertidal estuary. which will alter the . . existing shoreline. Sheet C1, submitted January 8th, does not show profile cross- u. sections at 75 -foot intervals along the perimeter of the estuary. The profile cross - sections • Ci must show the following items (these items appear on the Shoreline Application Checklist, • w provided to you on September 18, 1998): z �. 1— O • Existing top of bank, landward catch -point of levee, riverbank toe, Mean High w Water Mark and base flood elevation (100 -year flood). o, Proposed structures /improvements. p H' ww • For work riverward of the Mean High Water Mark: ▪ v. L O - distance work extends into the river beyond the Mean High Water Mark. z Cu co - distance to federal projects and navigation channels. 0 1. z • Limits of the River Environment, 60 -foot Low Impact Environment and High Impact Environment. �• Existing and proposed ground elevations. ✓• Plan view location of shoreline profile cross - sections. 3. Six copies of a site plan containing all of the items described below (these items appear on the Shoreline Application Checklist, provided to you on September 18, 1998). Please amend an existing plans sheet or create a new sheet clearly identified as the site plan. Same scale as survey, with north arrow, graphic scale and date. The license stamp of the architect. Property lines and names of adjacent roads. • Existing trees over 4" in diameter by size and species and any trees to be saved. Existing to of bank, landward catch -point of levee, riverbank toe, Mean High Water Mark and base flood elevation (100 -year flood). Limits of the 40 -foot River Environment and 60 -foot Low Impact Environment. Michael G. Lozano January 12, 1999 L98 -0054 (Shoreline) Page 3 Existing watercourses and wetlands (if any) with required buffers (TMC 18.45.040). z /• Existing grades at 2' contours, extending at least 5' beyond subject property's w or 2 boundaries, with a notation of the slope of areas in excess of 20 %. 6 �• U O Construction limit lines and areas of clearing /grading /filing o co ✓• w =. u O v. • notations identifying composition, volume (cu. ft.) extent (acres) and . v. notations identifying source, composition, volume (cu. ft.) and extent (acres) of any fill material. proposed disposal site of any extracted material. Erosion control measures and tree /buffer protection measures (e.g. barricades, = w fencing). F-- _ z Location and gross floor area of existing and proposed structures with required z setbacks. LLI ?. U�. co Lowest finished floor elevation. 0 _ 0 1— Location of driveways, fire lanes, parking, loading and service areas, with parking = 0 calculations and location and type of dumpster /recycling area screening. H H u- 0 ui z Location and type of site lighting, including parking and pedestrian areas. —_ Location of site furniture, such as benches, bike racks; location and type of any O '— proposed public outdoor art. Location and type of any trails, parks, plazas or other outdoor open space provided for employees or the public, existing and proposed open space easements and dedications, including any trail easements. Dike /riverbank maintenance easement (min. width 30' riverward from catch -point of levee). Location of closest existing fire hydrant; location and size of utility lines; location and size of utilities or street/sidewalk easements or dedications. Conceptual storm drainage plans with storage, detention and water - quality improvements (see Utility Application requirements for Storm Drainage Review). Other relevant structures or features, such as rockeries, fences. V4. A high quality 8 -1/2" x 11" reduction of Items 1 through 3 above. : ': Michael G. Lozano January 12, 1999 L98 -0054 (Shoreline) Page 4 Items Required by Fire Department: ✓5. The required site plan (referenced in Item 3 above) must show all surrounding streets so the Fire Department may assess fire truck access as well as the possible need for a turn- around. OTHER MATERIALS: 6. A 4' x 4' public notice board will be required on -site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received. z z, 6 o: w JU UO CO o. U) 11J WI F. N u_ wO As a courtesy, we are providing you with the following information. Although the item listed below g is not required at this time, you may wish to begin collecting this information. A more complete g listing of items will be provided to you during our technical review. u.. Uc. Per TMC 18.56.050, the required number of parking spaces for this park shall be =- determined by the Planning Commission. A Parking Needs Analysis will be required in z F- -connection with their review. z O Upon receipt of these items, the City will continue processing your applications. These 2 applications will expire if we do not receive the additional information within 90 days of the date of U this letter (April 12, 1999), unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 18.104.070(E) of o the Tukwila Municipal Code. If you should have any questions regarding the within, please do not w w hesitate to contact the undersigned at 431 -3663. - O. .Z. Cu O Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Donald Benson, URS Greiner Joanna Spencer, Tukwila Public Works Nick Olivas, Tukwila Fire Department Gary Schulz, Tukwila Urban Environmentalist Don Williams, Tukwila Parks & Recreation Tukwila Police Department Lynn Lewicki, King County SEPA Coordinator z City of Tukwila Department of Community Development John W. Rants, Mayor January 22, 1998 Michael G. Lozano Project Manager Parks CIP Section Division of Capital Planning & Development Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Re: North Wind Weir Park at 11013 West Marginal Place South Special Permission Application for Parking Steve Lancaster, Director Dear Mr. Lozano: As we mentioned in our January 12, 1999 letter, the required number of parking spaces for the park will be determined by the Planning Commission. This review is a Type 4, special permission decision, which will require a public hearing. We have enclosed a special permission application form and a checklist for your use. I apologize for the form's unfinished appearance and for the notations I have made. We are currently in the process of revising the special permission packet but did not want to delay your receipt of the necessary forms. We recommend that you submit your special permission packet as soon as you have all of the required attachments (this could be as early as your receipt of a letter of completeness for the Shoreline application). Once the special permission application has been deemed to be complete, we can schedule the first available public hearing before the Planning Commission. Once the Notice of Decision has been issued by the Commission, you will know the required number of parking spaces and the impacts, if any, this requirement has on your proposal for the Shoreline permit. I reviewed this information with Don Benson yesterday. Should either of you have any questions regarding the within, please'do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at 206 - 431 -3663. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Donald Benson, URS Greiner (w /encl.) Joanna Spencer, Tukwila Public Works (w /encl.) Nick Olivas, Tukwila Fire Department (w /encl.) Gary Schulz, Tukwila Urban Environmentalist (w /encl.) Don Williams, Tukwila Parks & Recreation (w /encl.) Tukwila Police Department (w /encl.) Lynn Lewicki, King County SEPA Coordinator (w /encl.) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 ; COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Public Works Department and the Department of Community Development. Please contact the Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived, or should be submitted in a later timely manner for use at the public hearing (e.g., revised colored renderings). Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow starting project review and vesting the applicant's rights. However, they in no way limit the City's ability to require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. Department staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 -431 -3670. COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST TABLE Information Required. . May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both PublicWorks and Planning Information Waived PbWk /Ping . . Office::Use Only Comments & Conditions APPLICATION FORMS: 1. Application Checklist (1 copy), indicating items submitted with application. 3. Fee ($ 200 ). PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: 6. King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property within 500 feet of the subject lot �C (- Pf'�V 1 O U S (V� 5 t/LI. m\*--C C. 7. Two (2) sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents or businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property (Attachment A). Note: Each unit in multiple - family buildings —e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks —must be included) 8. A 4' x 4' public notice board will be required on site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received (Attachment B). PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS 10. The following information should be given on the plans: O Vicinity map showing locati n of the sire and names of adjacent roads ($ Co CS) ❑ -. •' :: : -• > c:,O ,v1 rr C n nc..0.• -o ,n , I, , 1S Kr. y Sts 6 cc^ , e b ES) .,: -- :, • -- - - - - --- -- --•• -. - / . C q - -- - -- - - .. • . ❑ 8 complete sets of plans and 1 set of PMT'S reduced to 8 -1/2" x 11" which contain the information below: ❑ Site plans of the entire development and boundaries of , affected lots t'c C tc c ? e' c �(lc.S aC\0.k �S 1S SPSC.DOC -VU 12/22/98 ii AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERNIISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING Z The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: w ft 2 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. U O 2. All statements contained in the applications are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. w =. J 1-: 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. w O 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter u Q. upon Owner's real property located at for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. _ z1 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the z O private property during the City's entry upon the property unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. U (j)' O 6. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) days, shall be cause to cancel the -' application(s) without refund of fees. = w Hu. EXECUTED at (city), (state), on , 19 ti. Z —I 0 (Print Name) (Address) (Phone Number) (Signature) On this day personally appeared before me to me known to be the individual described and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he /she signed the same as his /her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS SPSC.DOC•VU 12/22/98 DAY OF , 19 NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State My Commission expires: 2 200' ► Urban Environment 100' High Impact Ernironment 60' LCIW Impact Environment 40' River Environment Mean High - Water Mark River 200' Urban Environment 40' 60' • 100' +-� Law High Impact Environment c O W dC 111 11 HL 111 11 11 JI 1l u u 11 Not To Scale City of Tukwila Shoreline Management Environments Figure 18 -1 Z ~w -J C.) O 00 CO I J LL Wo LL Io =• w z F-. �o zi- w U • � o -C/2 o F- W W. • o wZ 0 z King County Department of Construction and Facility Management Pearl McElheran, Director King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 296 -0648 (206) 296 -0100 TDD (206) 296 -0186 FAX NORTH WIND WEIR PARK January 8, 1999 The following have been involved with the development of North Wind Weir Park. (Page 1 of 2) Muckleshoot Tribe: Glen R. St. Amant Senior Habitat Specialist Fisheries Department Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 39015 172nd Ave. S.E. Auburn, Wa. 98002 Roderick Malcom Senior Habitat Biologist Environmental Division Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 39015 172nd Ave. S.E. Auburn, Wa. 98002 Walter Pacheco Community Service Coordinator Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 39015 172nd Ave. S.E. Auburn, Wa. 98002 Chantal Stevens Environmental Division Manager Fisheries Department Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 39015 172nd Ave. S.E. Auburn, Wa. 98002 CITY OFT UEKWILA JAN 0 8 1999 PERMIT CENTER w W � J0 O 0 t ND W = J H. • w w0. u. < =d I•— _ Z �. �0 Z r. w 2 U o.. ,0 u'; o 2 ci ! u- O, O z Duwamish Tribe: Cecile A. Hansen Chairperson Duwamish Tribal Council 140 Rainier Ave. S., Ste. 7 Renton, Wa. 98055 -2000 cc: Duwamish Tribal Council Suquamish Indian Tribe Charlie Sigo Curator and Suquamish Tribal Archivist The Suquamish Tribe P.O. Box 498 Suquamish, Wa. 98392 Margaret Duncan Environmental Specialist The Suquamish Tribe P.O. Box 498 Suquamish, Wa. 98392 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JAN 0 8 1999 PERMIT CENTER 1._W J U: U0 U0� U) W CO w =: w0. w¢ =a I- w z� tea. zF: M 0 ES U�. o LU = U, 1- z 1.11 0 Please contact Michael Lozano, Project Manager, DCFM at (206)296 -4240 with any questions - related to the above. O z. URS Greiner Woodward Clyde TRANSMITTAL FORM DATE: 7 TO: De b RI -1-i'c r A i 5i t4 P/ wivi r FROM: URS Greiner Woodward Clyde et oP Tukwila De I-. aF 611in. ,p,,,,66 dad 1501 Fourth Avenue, Suite 1500 (0-30 D 5aw81.66i,ukr Batt lrvdi d 100 Seattle, Washington 98101 -1662 ) —14W - 90100 BY: 1) 00 geht.5otrl ATTENTION: PHONE: (206) 343 -7933 FAX: Co),R�c ) 343 -0513 SUBJECT: j, bU i n d Weir pry J" / J 0 8 - rda,Qt.(a F'1e 1J . G96- -005 4 651 txt) N iTc 7. WE ARE TRANSMITTING: THE FOLLOWING: FOR: Herewith Prints or Mylars Review and Comment Under Separate Cover Construction Drawings Approval Specifications Signature NUMBER OF COPIES: Shop Drawings Your Use and Files Sets Change Order Quotation Sheets Approved Bills Payment Documents Legal Descriptions As Requested Letters Action Noted Below Shm -dia. Pemu4 ApplietAtA Materials REMARKS: Deb : • Fncfos e d are cent c 5 o F 51441-4444 P.et nd- 41911.6474A and a ut 5 fl, ou IJcrik Wind Wei/1- Pik rrv, I'ea(' fo a /1013 W3f Hav f P(ac6 Se24,A jh 1"u,MrMa. ID t6 ar6 qr ih?is1 please c & race of 20.6) 343-7933 or Ma46 lot to a+ 120,6, 296 - 424o, Ode: Even -11441k Rae 15 Wet Ial etot f m, p1( I heasu amt d wad 1dub, hese4 earArsof � to — 'n+ Cm/144'e deed 4,-a no F wad 51` A , �4s S UMW �Gte- %6of 1 5 i rs - `f !.u`s is � P 061/vi , asd k- . We y au�h kS i Slue be Go/Yd w wlfk.Wu- . erw 't' vv 55. � p DISTRIBUTION: 1 SINCERELY YOURS, m fit% c c k,1 e to za+ty, k'in y Co. l pf. Cens-fr. i F.. rri . Cexnti e Ieec4'rd, Macleod peG4p(d URS Greiner Woodward Clyde S kale girl\ursgwc tranrminal doc\I2A6.96\SEA RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA CITY OF TUKWILA JAN 0 8 1999 SHORELINE Department of Community Developmerf SUBSTANTIAL 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA g878 CENTER DEVELOPMENT PERMIT Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 (P- SHORE) I..: PROJECT BACKGROUND A. NAME OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT: North Wind Weir Park B. LOCATION OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT: STREET ADDRESS: 11053 West Marginal Place South ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: Several (owned by King County) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Attached Plans SE 1/4 4 23N 4E, W.M. Quarter: NE 1/4 Section: 9 Township: 23N Range: 4E, W.M. (This information may be found on your tax statement) C. CONTACT: (Primary contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent) NAME: Mike Lozano, King County Facilities Management Division ADDRESS: Ki • Coun Administration Buildin• Room 320 PHONE: 206 SIGNATURE: LtinfL, to DATE: 1.6. 9 c1 \ \S EA2 \W ORDPROC\ W CIA \71916 \Tukwila. doc \6- Jan.991S EA . .. .. 1 z ~ W o:2 .10 00 U 0 J F- cn u. w O. 2 u.Q I-w T z� I-o w~ w U 0 O U O 1- W w. 2 1- U. ~O. w .. z U= O ~ z D. PROPERTY OWNER DECLARATION The undersigned makes the following statements based upon personal knowledge: 1. I am the current owner of the property, which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. I understand that conditions of approval, which the City and applicant have jointly agreed may not be completed prior to final approval of the construction (e.g., final building permit approval will be incorporated into an agreement to be executed and recorded against the property prior to issuance of any construction permits. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington and the United States of America that the foregoing statement is true and correct. EXECUTED at Tukwila (city), Washington (state), on , 1999. Mike Lozano, King County Facilities Management Division (Print Name) King County Administration Building, Room 320 (Address) (2 6) 296;4240 (P qne NUm (Signature) Use additional sheets as needed for all property owner signatures. \ \SEA2 \W ORDPROC\W CIA171916 \Tukwila.doc \6- Jan- 991SEA 2 E. CURRENT ZONING OF PROPERTY: MICH (Manufacturing Industrial Center - Heavy Industrial) F. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY: Vacant G. SHORELINE ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNATION: Urban H. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING LAND USES: (Within 1,000 feet in all directions from the development site.) In general, the land use closest to and surrounding the site is either vacant land, roadways, or the Duwamish River. Land within 1,000 feet and west of the site is mostly vacant or roadway, with residential land near the 1,000 ft. edge. North of the site is vacant land and an industrial business. East of the site is the Duwamish River, and on the east side of the river are commercial /industrial uses along with a Boeing Corporation office. South of the site is vacant land and the river, with a few residences and an apartment complex along West Marginal Way to the southwest. I. TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST & FAIR MARKET VALUE of the proposed development: (Include additional future phases of development contemplated but not included in current proposal.) Approximately $340,000 (1998 dollars) J. BRIEF NARRATIVE DESCRIBING PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: The proposed North Wind Weir Park project involves development of a park on an approximately 3 -acre parcel of undeveloped land adjacent to the Duwamish River. The park will include benches, picnic tables, paths, canoe /kayak access, a Native American interpretive display, and an estuary (for intertidal habitat). K. PORTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY ALREADY COMPLETED: (If any portion or phase of the proposed activity is already completed on subject site, indicate month and year of completion.) Restroom - Constructed during Phase I (completed in 1997). Green River Trail also constructed during Phase I and completed in 1995 L. PROPOSED STARTING DATE: Winter 1999 (pending receipt of funding). ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY: Fall, 2000 (If project will lie constructed in stages, indicate dates:) M. TYPE AND EXTENT OF RECONSTRUCTION OF RIVERBANK (IF ANY) AND PROPOSED RIVERBANK VEGETATION: A small area along the riverbank will be excavated to create the on -site estuary. Vegetation proposed along the estuary edge includes a mix of deciduous and evergreen shrubs and trees (See Plans). N. IF PROPOSED ACTIVITY TO CAUSE FLOODING OR DRAINING OF WETLANDS, INDICATE IMPACTED AREA (acres): N/A \\SEA2 \W ORDPROC\W CIA \71916 \Tukwila.doc\6 - Jan -99 \SEA . . 3 \\SEA2 \W ORDPROC\W CIA \71916 \Tukwi la.doc \6 -Jan- 99\.SEA 4 O. ACCESS PROPOSED (if any): The proposed park will have access from TYPE AND EXTENT OF PUBLIC West Marginal Way S. and West Marginal Place S. (Address: 11013 West Marginal Place S.) P. SETBACK OF PROPOSED PARKING /LOADING /STORAGE AREAS AND PROPOSED SCREENING: (setback high mark.) The proposed parking lot is located approximately 160 feet (nearest measured from mean water from the existing mean high water mark and approximately 58 feet from the proposed mean high point) water mark after construction of the estuary. C. Q. HEIGHT AND SETBACK OF ALL PROPOSED BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES: (height measured from average grade level to the highest point of the structure, or mid -point of pitched roof, setback measured from mean high water mark.) N/A R. WILDLIFE AND FISH HABITAT IN AND ALONG RIVER: The proposed MEASURES PROPOSED TO PROTECT would enhance fish habitat along the Duwamish River. New vegetation established along the estuary and in the park would create wildlife habitat and discourage public access to the river. Existing estuary vegetation will be preserved where possible. \\SEA2 \W ORDPROC\W CIA \71916 \Tukwi la.doc \6 -Jan- 99\.SEA 4 11. A. TO BE COMPLETED BY LOCAL SHORELINE: OFFICIAL. NATURE OF EXISTING SHORELINE: (Describe type of shoreline, such as stream, lake, marsh, floodplain, floodway, delta; type of beach, such as erosion, high bank, low bank or dike; type of material, such as sand, gravel, mud, clay, bulkheading, if any.) rock, riprap; and extent and type of B. RESIDENTIAL VIEWS OBSTRUCTED BY STRUCTURES OVER 35 IN HEIGHT: (In the event that any proposed buildings or structures exceed a height of 35' above average grade, indicate the approximate location of, and number of, residential units, existing and potential, that will have views of the shoreline obstructed by the proposed development) C. CONDITIONAL USE OR VARIANCE REQUIRED: (If a conditional use is required, state in full that portion of the Master Program which provides that the proposed use may be a conditional use, or, if a variance is required, that portion from is being which the variance sought. \\SEA2 \W ORDPROC\W CIA \71916 \Tukwi la.doc \6 -Jan- 99\.SEA 4 III.; OTHER:PERMITS REQUIRED FOR.THIS- PROJECT Indicate permits for which you have applied or will apply to the federal government, the State, City of Tukwila and other agencies; include permit application date, whether the permit is pending, approved or denied, and the permit number: ❑ Tukwila Conditional Use Permit ❑ Tukwila Variance Permit ❑ Tukwila SEPA Environmental Checklist SEPA Lead Agency: King County SEPA decision date: Approx. Feb. 1999 ❑ Tukwila Design Review ❑ Tukwila Preliminary Plat Approval PERMIT # APPLICATION DATE DATE APPROVED Approximately January, 1999 TBD ❑ Tukwila Flood Control Zone Permit (per Flood Ord. #1462) TBD TBD TBD ❑ Tukwila Storm Drainage Permit (per Ord. 1755) O Tukwila Land Altering Permit (per Ord. 1591) TBD TBD TBD ❑ Archaeological Excavation Permit (WA DCD /Office of Public Archaeology) ❑ Section 106 Review (WA DCD /Office of Public Archaeology) ❑ Coastal Zone Management Certification (WA Dept. of Ecology) Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) (WA Dept. of Fish & Wildlife) TBD September 1998 TBD ❑ Approval to Allow Temporary Exceedance of Water Quality Standards (WA Dept. of Ecology) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ❑ (NPDES) Permit (WA Dept. of Ecology) (Nationwide Permit) (WA Dept. of Ecology) ❑ Aquatic Lease (WA Dept. of Natural Resources) Q Section 401 Water Quality Certification Nationwide Permit (WA Dept. of Ecology) TBD September 1998 TBD • Section 404 or Section 10 Permit (Army Corps of Engineers) TBD September 1998 TBD ❑ Other: TBD - To be determined \\S EA2 \1VORDPROC\W CIA \71916 \Tukwi Ia. doc \6- Jan -99\S EA 5 IV: IMPACTS ON SHORELINES POLICIES A. SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM POLICIES APPLICABLE TO PROJECT: (List the Tukwila or King County Master Program sections, goals and/or policies, including page numbers, which apply.) Applicable City of Tukwila Master Program policies (pp. 7 -9) include: Public Access Element (le, 1f; 3a, 3b, 3c); Recreational Element (2-4); Shoreline Use Element (1b, lc, 1d); Conservation Element (3); Historical /Cultural Element (1 -6). Applicable King County Policies (pp. 2 -14) include those listed under Shoreline Use, Public Access, Conservation, Recreation, and Historical /Cultural Elements. B. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES APPLICABLE TO PROJECT: (List the Comprehensive Plan sections, goals and/or policies, including, page numbers, which apply.) Applicable City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Policies (pp. 9 -10) include: Shoreline Development (Al, A2, A3, A4, A7, A9, A10, All, Al2, A13, A14). Project criteria within Manufacturing /Industrial Center Zoning that is met include (C -1, C -2, C -3, C -5). .OTHER PERMITS REQUIRED. FOR THIS PROJECT All projects in the Shoreline Zone must be consistent with Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan and Shoreline Master Program policies (or King County's Shoreline Master Program if project located north of the 42nd Avenue bridge). In addition, all structures requiring a building permit (except single family development of 4 or fewer Tots) located in the Shoreline Zone must undergo design review with the Tukwila Board of Architectural Review (BAR). The BAR's decision is based on design guidelines contained in the Zoning Code (TMC 18.60.050) and the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan (see DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION). The SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM POLICIES and Comprehensive Plan's SHORELINE DESIGN POLICIES are summarized below. Note that more than one category may apply. In some cases, the goal for the use or area is noted to provide context for the design policies. NOTE: a) If your project requires a building permit you must meet additional criteria in DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION. b) If your project requires a variance, you must meet additional criteria in VARIANCE PERMIT APPLICATION. c) If your project requires a conditional use permit, you must meet additional criteria in CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION. TUKWILA SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM POLICIES (King County shoreline policies follow) A. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT 1. Commercial industrial development along the shorelines should not favor outside interests at the expense of the local population. 2. Locate commercial /development in areas with low potential for recreation or other public areas. 3. Preference should be given to commercial /industrial development that will provide an opportunity for a substantial number of people to enjoy the shoreline. \\SEA2\WORDPROC\W CIA \71916 \Tukwila.doc\6 - Jan- 99\SEA �' 6 NORTH WIND WEIR PARK PROPERTIES WITHIN 500 FEET Property (Parcel No.) Section/Township /Range Owner /Address 0065 4 -23-4 James R. Robbins 11037 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0070 4 -23-4 Daniel J. Brown 11031 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0075 4 -23-4 Tammera C. Neville 11025 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0080 4 -23-4 Russell E. Aquino 11019 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0085 4 -23-4 Robbie R. Jackson 11015 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0090 4 -23-4 Ismael P. Mosqueda 11005 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0095 4 -23-4 Richard W. West 11006 Roseburg Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0100 4 -23-4 Robert M. Hitchens 11012 Roseburg Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0165 4 -23-4 Kathleen L. Howard 10871 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 • 0170 4 -23-4 Cheryl Carter 10875 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0175 4 -23-4 Sara S. Zentner 10879 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0180 4 -23-4 Walter E. Chenier 2608 S 110th St Seattle WA 98168 0185 4 -23-4 Edward J. Walker 10878 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0190 4 -23-4 Robbie R. Jackson 10864 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0195 4 -23-4 Gordon H. Walters 10860 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0200 4 -23-4 Harold F. Lanz 10854 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 0205 4 -23 -4 Damon L. Pipken 10850 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 \ \SEA2 \WORDPROC\WCIA \71916 \Property Owner List.doc \6 - Jan-99 \SEA 1 Z _ • ~ w' 6 _tO U 0 U o' W ='. J 1- • w W O u- Q. =a w Z1._ 1- O' w w O U • O I— = U Lt. 1•–: O • Z U to z NORTH WIND WEIR PARK PROPERTIES WITHIN 500 FEET Property (Parcel No.) Lots 1-6 and Unnumbered Lots north of S. 1 10th St. 57 Section/Township/Range Owner/Address 4-23-4 King County Admin Bldg Rm 500 Seattle WA 98104 4-23-4 Katherine M. Desimone 26055 SW 170th St 130 4-23-4 .),(11.11• TV /A 7 0 WV Seattle City Light 700 5th Ave, Suite 2808 Seattle WA 98104 114 4-23-4 H&M Associates (Michael R. Mastro) 510 Rainier Ave S Seattle WA 98144 118 4-23-4 H&M Associates (Michael R. Mastro) 510 Rainier Ave S Seattle WA 98144 148 4-23-4 H&M Associates (Michael R. Mastro) 510 Rainier Ave S Seattle, WA 98144 Lots 0005-0065 (Project) 4-23-4 King County Admin Bldg Rm 500 Seattle WA 98104 278 (Project) 9-23-4 King County Admin Bldg Rm 500 Seattle WA 98104 155 9-23-4 The Boeing Company PO Box 3703 M/S IF-09 Seattle WA 98124 48 9-23-4 John F. Tamburelli 11232 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 98 9-23-4 Edward W. McGee 11204 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 135 • 9-23-4 River Heights Apartments 11301 26th Ave S Seattle WA 98168 Note: Six buildings, 156 units I: \Projects \WCIA \98\71916 \Property Owner List.doc \7-Jan-99 \SEA 2 < • Z LLI re 2 6 —I 0 0 (/) LL1 •LLI --I 1— LL uj 0 g I a z 1-0 z 1— LLJ uj m '0 •=1". 0 I— W uj I 0 . z Cu co C.) 17: o - z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director December 30, 1998 Michael G. Lozano Project Manager Parks CIP Section Division of Capital Planning & Development Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Re: North Wind Weir Park at 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 (Shoreline) Dear Mr. Lozano: Per our letter to you dated October 9, 1998 (copy attached) your application for a Shoreline Permit was found to be incomplete. Upon receipt of the required items identified in that letter, the City will continue processing your application. However. please be advised that the application will expire if we do not receive the required items on or before January 9, 1999. Under Section 18.104.070(E) of the Tukwila Municipal Code, this cancellation date may be extended up to an additional 120 days if the applicant submits a written request for an extension prior to cancellation. Any request for an extension must meet the following conditions. as stated in that section: The request must clearly demonstrate that the delay is due to circumstances beyond the applicant's control (such as the need for seasonal wetland data) or unusual circumstances not typically faced by other applicants, and that a good faith effort has been made to provide the requested materials. If you . should have any questions regarding the within, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at 431 -3663. Sincerely, 0--ee Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Michael G. Lozano December 30, 1998 L98 -0054 (Shoreline) Page 2 cc: Donald Benson, URS Greiner Joanna Spencer, Tukwila Public Works Nick Olivas, Tukwila Fire Department Gary Schulz, Tukwila Urban Environmentalist Don Williams, Tukwila Parks & Recreation Tukwila Police Department Lynn Lewicki, King County SEPA Coordinator z _ HW JU UO CO W Di I J W 0= g a. wa; I— W. Z Z �o Z 1- W 2 j U� 'O -' 0 f- W lJJ H 1; LL �� ul Z'. F-Z� 0 F-: City of Tukwila Department of Community Development October 9, 1998 Michael G. Lozano Project Manager Parks CIP Section Division of Capital Planning & Development Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Re: North Wind Weir Park at 11013 West Marginal Place South Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 (Shoreline) Tukwila File No. L98 -0055 (Design Review) Dear Mr. Lozano: John W. Rants, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director We have received and reviewed your documentation for the above - referenced applications, submitted to us on September 16, 1998 by Donald Benson of URS Greiner. We have the following comments. DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION On September 30, 1998, I advised Mr. Benson that a Design Review will not be required on this project. This is due to the fact that the proposal (as of today's date) contains no structures that will require building permits. We have enclosed a refund of the Design Review Fee in the amount of $900, payable to King County. If your proposal changes to include structures that will require a building permit, then a current Design Review application and associated fee will be required at that time. SHORELINE PERMIT APPLICATION Your application for a Shoreline Permit has been found to be incomplete. In order to continue processing your application there are additional items that must be submitted to the Department of Community Development. These items are itemized below. On September 18th, we forwarded to you our Shoreline Packet, which contains current copies of the forms and criteria referenced below. Items Required by Department of Community Development: 1. Four copies of a current, completed, application for the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. 2. Six copies of a surrounding area map showing existing land uses within a 1000 -foot radius from the site's property lines. Please indicate the radius and existing land uses on the face of the map. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Michael G. Lozano October 9, 1998 L98 -0054 (Shoreline) L98 -0055 (Design Review) Page 2 3. Six copies of a survey containing all of the items described on the Shoreline Application Checklist. Please note that the license stamp with the surveyor's original signature must appear. If you have a question about any of these items, please contact the undersigned. 4. Six copies of all shoreline profile cross - sections at minimum 75 -foot intervals along the site's shoreline. 5. Six copies of a site plan containing all of the items described on the Shoreline Application Checklist. Please note that the license stamp with the architect's original signature must appear. If you have a questions about any of these items, please contact the undersigned. z HZ• . ww 6 U OQ • w J t- U w w0 gQ 6. A high quality 8 -1/2" x 11" reduction of Items 2 through 5 above. = d Z= 7. Six copies of Applicant's response to Shoreline Permit Questions as stated in the current Shoreline Permit Application Packet. z 0 8. King County Assessor's Maps showing the location of each property within 500 feet of the v subject property. The boundaries of the subject property and the 500 foot radius are to be 0 — shown on said maps. o 1 W w. = - U. 9. Two sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents and o, businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. w z 10. Six copies of all attachments referenced in the Environmental Checklist bein g prepared by i King County in connection with this project. H 11. Six copies of the current, completed, Property Owner Declaration (found in the application packets). 12. Six completed copies of the "Other Permits Required For This Project" sheet, located in the Shoreline Permit Application Packet. 13. The landscape /planting plans must bear the license stamp and original signature of the landscape architect. Items Required by Fire Department: 14. The required site plan (referenced in Item 5 above) must show all surrounding streets so the Fire Department may assess fire truck access as well as the possible need for a turn- around. OTHER MATERIALS: 15., A 4' x 4' public notice board will be required on -site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received. Michael G. Lozano October 9, 1998 L98 -0054 (Shoreline) L98 -0055 (Design Review) Page 3 As a courtesy, we are providing you with the following information. Although the items listed below are not required at this time, you may wish to begin collecting this information. A more complete listing of items will be provided to you during our technical review. A. The Public Works Department will require a River Bank Stability Analysis prepared by a geotechnical engineer demonstrating that the river bank is stable or identifying specific actions that will make it stable. z • re J U. 00 D WI B. Per TMC 18.56.050, the required number of parking spaces for this park shall be cn u determined by the Planning Commission. A Parking Needs Analysis will be required in w 0. connection with their review. 2 Upon receipt of these items, the City will continue processing your applications. These applications will expire if we do not receive the additional information within 90 days of the date of = w this letter, unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 18.104.070(E) of the Tukwila z !—. Municipal Code. If you should have any questions regarding the within, please do not hesitate to i O contact the undersigned at 431 -3663. z t- uj 0 m c) C3 I- V w' g:IO . z: — =. O I-' z Sincerely, n'crak--o Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Donald Benson, URS Greiner Joanna Spencer, Tukwila Public Works Nick Olivas, Tukwila Fire Department Gary Schulz, Tukwila Urban Environmentalist Don Williams, Tukwila Parks & Recreation Tukwila Police Department Lynn Lewicki, King County SEPA Coordinator ==- - •.... 2 CITY OF TUKWILA TREASURER'S CHECK 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD. PH. 206 -433 -1800 TUKWILA, WA 98188 ay to the id; eoltii, Order 14-P � tC ci. L no/16o Mbar*. 1.800.673.3555 Dnte / 0/7/ q 8 19- 10/1250 3322 $ 9cv.W CITY OF TUKWILA For /�LQJl1'C,PtI.r %t F- l.(.1 t-A- �.0 cf . . A Ptit i y-YU&L.. Dollars LI NP 03/14/04 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number I q - 0054 Sroi.2.\1O LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM TO: ❑ Building El Planning ❑ Public Works ❑ Fire Dept. ►_r Police Dept. ❑ Parks /Rec Project: D 1 W. n 6! Wei 2._. pcw- ___ Address: `,- , Date transmitted: \ 0 - CJ — ec Response - -�Q.,GV re¢..t - requested by: 1(7 - Z,q, - Ct g Staff coordinator: . \C---PA43 1r-�`t `12- Date response received: COMMENTS )‹ moo` CccM-\t( R_ ' /\L` ��v 4,� d t c ,u -e/Qf l n 0 1 0, &AV. crn Cam. °axe. e CkA CLQ 0\ CO Wiit W A \S-V__, ‘e (AA ,Aerl (it c.LI) tx)',\\ _c4_,(\f\ ok_ 0.-C• \N (-0 dt So ;-cam vv-e c e O1�cv___ Corm n9/'I1� ) 1N-N4 ❑ DRC review requested ❑ Plan submittal requested ❑ Plan approved Plan check date: Comments prepared by: Prepplication Che: 'list CITY OF TLIKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division- Permit Center 6300 Sonthcen(er Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PRE - APPLICATION FILE NO. PRE97 -028 PROJECT: NORTH WIND WEIR PARR 6/19/97 2:30 P.M. 11013 West Marginal P1 S MEETING DATE/TIME: SITE ADDRESS: The following comments are based on, a preliminary review. Additional information may be needed. Other requirements/regulations may need to'be met. POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME PREVENTION SECURITY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Rest rooms: a.. Recommend that the rest rooms not have false ceilings. b. All walls and partitions should be constructed of or paneled with materials designed to be highly resistant to graffiti markings. c. The restores should be locked during hours of darkness. 2. Signage: a. The entrances to the park should be well posted with park rules and hours of operation. b. Park patrons should be-encouraged, by signs, to report suspicious activity or damage to the facility c. Due to the inherent danger of the river, signs should be posted warning park patrons to stay back from the river banks. d. The parking area should have posting warning park patrons not to leave valuables in unattended vehicles. 3. Communication: Due to the remote location of the park, a pay phone should be installed to facilitate park patrons who seek help or want to report criminal activity. The pay phone should not accept incoming calls and should have digital pager prefixes blocked. 4. Landscaping: Sticker -type plantings (possibly natural blackberry growth) should be maintained along the river edge to discourage park patrons from getting dangerously close to the river banks. R. W. Abbott 061797 MEMO TO: Laurie Anderson FROM: Deb Ritter DATE: September 30, 1998 RE: Refund of Design Review Application Fee $900.00 King County Per Jack Pace, a Design Review is not required on this file. Although the project will require a Shoreline Permit, a building permit will not be needed. As a result, design review does not occur. This file (S98- 0055) has been voided by Kelcie. Please cut a check in the amount of $900.00 payable to King County and return to me at your earliest convenience. I have attached a copy of the applicant's receipt. Thanks. Date: 29- Sep -98 16:47:18 DEBORAH (DEBORAH RITr) To: DON, OLIVAS- N,JOANNA,GARY- B,GARY- SCHULZ Subject: North Wind Weir Park Message -1d: 160F113601000000 Application -name: MHS Importance: HIGH Design Review will not be required on this project. Even though a Shoreline Permit normally triggers the requirement for design review, it will not be required as a building permit will not be issued. Please review only Shoreline Permit application for completeness and techical review. z ~ z 0 00 0' • W W =; W 0 2 u. Q:. = a. Z F- 0, Z H: Up 0 I -'- W ~O' • Z 0 (j) `. 0 z From: Gary Barnett To: Joanna @tuk- mai1.6300 -po, Deborah @TUK- MAIL.6300- PO,... Date: 9/29/98 9:57am Subject: North Wind Weir Park- completeness comments due 11/30/98 -Reply Joanna and I took a quick look at application. The one thing I recall that needed to be included, but may not on the checklist, is a river bank stability analysis. The analysis is to be done by a geotech to demonstrate that the river bank is stable or identify specific actions to make it stable. This has been a topic of much discussion in the past I'm told between KC Parks and KC Natural Resources (Andy Leveque). Andy wants the river stabilized, the parks people don't have the money. Tukwila City code for shoreline permits requires the stability analysis. We, the city, will need to make a decision in context of the SMA, the KC code that I'm told applies to portions of the city annexed from KC in the early 1990's, our Parks director who wants the park built and other factors yet to be discovered. I think PW can say from what I've seen and heard through the grapevine, the bank is not stable in an engineered sense. In a practical sense it is according to some opinions. The rub is that the "unstable" portion is a tire wall that is in proximity to the Seattle water transmission main. Seattle Water wants no action to affect the pipe. KC Resouces doesn't want to leave it be and has asked KC Parks to "fix it ". 60A,1 n c C©m 'akc,ue - %cit- S*0.3loa Ale? orkcrice HZ �QQ w Wes. JU o o co W = J F- U) LL,. Wo g< =• d I-W Z= W l- w. U O - ! , o W W. —o w Z H It o z URS Greiner September 21, 1998 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA SEP23199a PERMIT CENTER Mr. Mike Jenkins, Planner City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: North Wind Weir Park (Tukwila, WA) Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) Dear Mr. Jenkins: URS Greiner, Inc. 2401 4th Avenue, Suite 1000 Seattle, Washington 98121 -1459 Telephone: (206) 674 -1800 Facsimile: (206) 674 -1801 Offices in Principal Cities Nationwide For.your reference, I am enclosing a JARPA sent to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and State Department of Ecology for the North Wind Weir Park project. The various permits and approvals from these agencies will be coordinated with the City of Tukwila. If there are any questions or additional information is needed, please contact me at (206) 674- 1811 or Mike Lozano at the King County Facilities Management Division at (206) 296 -4240. We look forward to working with you. Sincerely, 1rn -.tom Don Benson, AICP cc: Mike Lozano, King County Facilities Management Division Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord 71916 \9809.025.doc z �w re JU o lA Di co W; W =r W • O. • a' =a W Z =, I-- 0 Z 0 0 I–`. w w F=- U - O: w Z. (. i =' O ~r z Agency Reference #: SEPA Lead Agency: Other: Agency Use Only Date Received: - JARPA APPLICATION FORM- - for use in Washington State — PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN BLUE OR BLACK INK Based on the preceding checklist, I am sending copies of this application to the following: (check all that apply) ® Local Government: for shoreline ® Substantial Development ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Variance ❑ Exemption; or ® Floodplain Management ❑ Critical Areas Ordinance (Substantial Development, Flood Zone Control Applications Separate) • Washington Department of fish and Wildlife for HPA • Washington Department of Ecology Approval to Allow Temporary Exceedance of Water Quality Standards ® 401 Water Quality Certification Nationwide Permits E Corps Engineers for Section 101 or Section 10 permits) 7191619808.00M Application Page 1 of 4 Section A - Use for all permits covered by this application. Be sure to also complete Section C (Signature Block) for A permit applications. 1. Applicant Kind County Facilities NIannement Division Mailing Address: King County Administrative Buildin" Room 320 500 4th Avenue, Seattle. WA 98104 Work Phone: (206) 2964240 Home Phone: ( ) N/A Fax Number: (206) 296 -0192 If an agent is acting for the applicant during the permit process, complete #2 & #3. 2. Authorized Agent Don Benson, URS Greiner. Inc. Mailing Address: 2401 4th Avenue, Suite 1000 Seattle. WA 98121 Work Phone: (206) 674 -1811 Home Phone: ( ) N/A Fax Number: (206) 674 -1801 3. Designation I a of Authorized Agent, if applicable: her y designate Donald Benson (URS Greiner. Inc.) to act as my agent in matters related to this pli ti permits ( ). I understand that if a Federal permit is issued, I must sign the permit. Signature o Appl ant Date 4. Relationship of ap licant to property: el Owner ❑ Purchaser ❑ Lessee ❑ Other 5. Name, address, and phone number of property owner(s), if other than applicant: N/A 7191619808.00M Application Page 1 of 4 Location where proposed activity exists or will occur: Street Address 11013 West hiarrinal Place South City, County, State, Zip Code Tukwila, WA 98188 Water body Duwamish River DNR Stream Type (if known) Tributary of Puiict Sound Legal Description: Tax Parcel No.: See Attachment A SE i/4 NE 4 Section 9 23N R4E. W.M. Township Range 23N R4E. W.M. 7. Describe the current use of the property, and structures existing on the property. If any portion of the proposed activity is already completed on this property, indicate month and year of completion. The property is undeveloped and unused except for a restroom facility constructed in July 1997 (Phase I of project). Is the property agricultural land? ❑ Yes ® No Are you a USDA program participant? ❑ Yes ® No 8. Describe the proposed activity, and the activity's purpose. Include expected water quality and fish impacts, and proposed actions to reduce the duration and severity of those impacts and provide proper protection for fish life. Complete plans and specifications should be provided for all work watenvard of the Ordinary High Water Mark or Line, including types of equipment to be used, and for all work if applying fora shoreline permit. If additional space is needed, please attach a separate sheet. See Attachment B Preparation of drawings: See Appendix A - sample drawings and checklist for completing the drawings. One set of original or good quality reproducible drawings must be attached. NOTE: Applicants are encouraged to submit photographs of the project site, but these do not substitute for drawings. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS REQUIRES DRAWINGS ON 8 -1/2 X 11 INCH SHEETS. Larger drawings may be required by other agencies. 7191619808.002\ Application Page 2 of 4 9. Proposed Starting Date: Fall 1998 . Estimatcd duration of activity: 9 mos. — 1 near Will the project be constructed in stages? ® Yes ❑ No • 10. Will any structures be placed: a. waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark or Line for fresh or tidal waters? ❑ Yes ® No b. waterward of the Mean High Water Line in tidal waters? ❑ Yes 0 No 11. Will fill material (rock, fill, bulkhead, pilings or other material) be placed watenvard of Ordinary High Water Mark or Line for fresh or tidal waters? ® Yes ❑ No a. If "yes" in fresh water indicate volume in cubic yards: Approx. 1.358CY ( Duwamish River has tidal influence) b. If "yes" in tidal water indicate volume in cubic yards waterward of the line of mean higher high water: 12. Will material be placed in wetlands? ❑ Yes ® No If yes. impacted area (acres) , If yes: a. Has a delineation been completed? ❑ Yes ❑ No (If yes, please submit with application.) b. Type and composition of fill material (e.g., sand, etc.): c. Material source: d. List all soil series (type of soil) located at the project site, & indicate if they are on the county's list of hydric soils: Soils information can be obtained from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), fonnerly Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 13. Will proposed activity cause flooding or draining of wetlands? ❑ Yes ® No If yes, impacted area (acres) 14. Will excavation or dredging be required in water or wetlands? ® Yes ❑ No If yes. volume: Approx. 2.550 (cubic yards) excavation in Duwamish River to create estuary a. Composition of material removed: Alluvium b. Disposal site for excavated material: At an approved disposal site off the property. Some will be reused as fill. c. Method of dredging: No dredginw. lust excavation and fill 15. List other applications, approvals, or certifications from other Federal, state or local agencies for any structures. construction, discharges, or other activities described in the application (i.e., preliminary plat approval, health district approval, building permit, SEPA review, FERC license, Forest Practices Application, etc.) Also indicate whether work has been completed and indicate all existing work on drawings. • Type of Approval Issuing Agency Identification No. Date of Date Completed? Application Approved Yes or No Shoreline City of Tukwila - - - No Flood Zone Control Citv of Tukwila - - - No Land Altering City of Tukwila - - - No Landscape Irrigation City of Tukwila - - - No SEPA Lead Agencv: Kina County SEPA Decision Date: Concurrent with permits 71916\9808.002\ :^ Application Page 3 of 4 . Has any agency denied approval for the activity described herein or for any activity directly related to the activity described herein? ❑ Yes ® No If yes, explain: ection B - Use for Shoreline & Corps of Engineers permits only: 7. Total cost of Project. This means the fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc. Approximately S340,000 18. Local government w /jurisdiction: City of Tukwila 1 P4 Shoreline Environmental designation: Urban Zoning designation: MIC -H For corps permits, provide names, addresses, and telephone numbers of adjoining property owners, lessees, etc., (See Attachment C) EASE NOTE: Shoreline management compliance may require additional notice - consult your local government. Section C - Complete for any perrnit_covered by this application Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the activities described herein. I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this application, and that to the best of my knowledge and belief, such information is true, complete, and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the proposed activities. I hereby grant to the agencies to which this application is made, the right to enter the above - described location to inspect the proposed or complete work. N' •'�' Chi., .c�,�'i -: Sl at e of logic l r t or Authorized Agent (REQUIRED) 20 9/ /5)6 Date Signature of Akpli«r t • uthorized Agent (REQUIRED) Date This application must be signed by the applicant. If an authorized agent is to be designated, the applicant must also sign at Item #3. 18 L S.C. §1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly falsifies, conceals. or coven up b any trick, scheme, or device a material fact or makes any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document kno ing same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than S 10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both. Application Page 4 of 4 ATTACHMENT A NORTH WIND WEIR PARK LEGAL DESCRIPTION JARPA APPLICATION The proposed park is located adjacent to the Duwamish River in Tukwila, Washington at 11013 West Marginal Place South. A vicinity map and plans are enclosed. The legal description is as follows: Gordon's Addition No. 2 as recorded in Volume 36 of Plats, page 42 in King County, Washington, EXCEPT that portion conveyed to the State of Washington for highway purposes: Together with that portion of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M in King County, Washington, lying westerly of the Duwamish River and easterly of said Plat; Together with the North 51.74 feet of the following described property: All that portion of Government Lot 1, Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington lying east of the W.W. Beck County Road, westerly of the Duwamish River and northerly of a line bearing N 69° 31' 18" E from a point in the Easterly margin of said W.W. Beck County Road which point is 775.31 feet southeasterly as measured along said Easterly marginal line from its intersection with the North boundary line of said Section 9, EXCEPT that portion thereof conveyed to the State of Washington for highway purposes. 7I9I619808.002l ATTACHMENT B NORTH WIND WEIR PARK PROPOSED ACTIVITY AND PURPOSE JARPA APPLICATION The North Wind Weir Park project involves development of a park on an approximately 3 -acre parcel of undeveloped land in Tukwila, Washington. The park will include a parking lot, benches, picnic tables, and paths as well as provide canoe/kayak river access. A restroom facility has already been constructed. A small area in the park near the Duwamish River will be developed for intertidal habitat (estuary) and a site will be developed and dedicated for a Native American interpretive display. The proposed estuary will be surrounded by a wood (post and rail) fence. An irrigation system will also be installed in the new park. On -site drainage (parking lot and restroom roof drains) will be handled via a bioswale with Type I catch basins in the parking lot and on the downstream end of the bioswale prior to drainage outflow to the Duwamish River. The Green River Trail extends along the western boundary of the park (see attached plans). The anticipated impacts include the possibility of erosion and sedimentation occurring during project construction and dewatering. A temporary erosion control and sedimentation plan and other BMPs will be in place prior to and during construction and dewatering will be controlled in accordance with DOE approved measures for the appropriate water quality permit. Construction of the estuary to enhance fisheries habitat is viewed positively by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Construction of the estuary will involve removal of excavated material (est. 2,550 cy) and placement of fill (est. 1,358 cy) at the edge of the Duwamish River and below the OHWL. Some of excavated material will be reused as fill. Overall quantities on the site would include approximately 6,000 to 6,500 cy of material to be excavated and approximately 2,608 to 2,708 cy of fill. The equipment involved will probably include: a track - mounted excavator; a front -end loader; dump trucks; and an angle dozer. A set of plans for the park have been submitted to the Corps of Engineers, the State Departments of Ecology and Fish and Wildlife, and the City of Tukwila. 7191619808.002\ „ cc w 0 00' W= J H: U) wo a. = o. w z� 10. z I- al DJ 0 o -i 0 I- w w. 1- 0� • 0, uiz. 0 z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director September 18, 1998 Michael G. Lozano Project Manager, Parks CIP Section Dept. of Construction & Facilities Management King County 500 Fourth Avenue, Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 -2337 Re: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Tukwila File No. L98 -0054 Design Review Tukwila File No. L98 -0055 North Wind Weir Park at 11013 West Marginal Place South Dear Mr. Lozano: We have received and reviewed your documentation for the above - referenced applications, submitted to us on September 16, 1998 by Donald Benson of URS Greiner. From your submission packet, it appears that you do not have the correct application forms and related packets. As a courtesy, and in an attempt to save you some processing time, we have enclosed the correct packet for both the Shoreline and Design Review application. We are currently reviewing your applications for completeness and will provide with a formal response to that review at a later date. In the meantime, you may wish to review these enclosures. The enclosed application forms, checklists and Property Owner Declarations in those packets should be provided at your earliest convenience. The required items for each application are listed on their respective Application Checklists in each packet. Please go through these checklists carefully. If you believe that certain items do not apply to this project, please contact the undersigned to find out if a particular item may be waived. Please be advised that the "Applicant's Response to Shoreline Permit Questions & Design Policies" as well as "Applicant's Response to Design Review Criteria" must follow the format provided in the enclosed packets. Please respond to the questions and criteria as indicated. Additionally, the Assessor's Map and mailing label information appears to be incomplete. Please follow all of the guidelines shown in the "Address Label Requirements" section of the packet (Attachment A). 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 4313665 /06,141,t Michael G. Lozano September 18, 1998 Re: L98 -0054 & L98 -0055 Page 2 We look forward to working with you on this project. If you should have any questions regarding the within, please do not hesitate to contact me at 431 -3663. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Donald Benson, URS Greiner Joanna Spencer, Public Works Nick Olivas, Fire Department Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist Don Williams, Parks & Recreation pr w` rY J O 0. c0; Ill I w ui WO. u. � ' a w I- Z� Z o' w uj O c• o' 0 I--' WW H U u_ 0 .Z' W O~ Z File Number CtObLs ►ctrl D.�,urec) City of Tukwila Department of Community Development LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FO A''i TO: ❑ Building N. Planning / Public Works 5;bFire Dept. ❑ Police Dept. & Parks /Rec ��cZy Project: Address: 1bC'k -\ LD ncQ We I(Z. 1 1013 W • Ylrla.1 Date transmitted: 6l - tCC - �� g Staff coon b coordinator: }�P., ) L Response CT 64, requested by: -}-C (`ZIJIeto Date response received: COMMENTS \< ACA Ow(lr%' - 1 S athe_kp ; \ ,r, 6\ s q be I•ec,c() on P•-{} ( t (,ham ACCC .cQ> Cb c ce f` a 'UDC no+ uAcciC w r1\ 1.0\fLoQ IS2.4e■r T1) a rett-c14; c t+41, u ( ) . W 1\\ ct, aotattrnac, 1•*0 1" c-o o Q.v Qct_ %10 vv-e y eAr �"U�2 a..:• . Lc-Z ons COM di Oct n 11\ r c; J V a Q,u is U ' ' 4- �n� D c a -} Yom_ 61-e, calrkp-n‹, . 4d-tiaa47 � �.c 4441z6feze. ❑ DRC review requested ❑ Plan submittal requested ❑ Plan approved Comments prepared by: Plan check date: Q7/14/04 URS Greiner September 21, 1998 Mr. Mike Jenkins, Planner City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: North Wind Weir Park (Tukwila, WA) Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) Dear Mr. Jenkins: URS Greiner, Inc. 2401 4th Avenue, Suite 1000 Seattle, Washington 98121 -1459 Telephone: (206) 674 -1800 Facsimile: (206) 674 -1801 Offices in Principal Cities Nationwide SEP 2 1998 {ti,i.s..�tp� p DE' "�i...ip...OPM tai d For,your reference, I am enclosing a JARPA sent to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and State Department of Ecology for the North Wind Weir Park project. The various permits and approvals from these agencies will be coordinated with the City of Tukwila. If there are any questions or additional information is needed, please contact me at (206) 674- 1811 or Mike Lozano at the King County Facilities Management Division at (206) 296 -4240. We look forward to working with you. Sincerely, Don Benson, AICP cc: Mike Lozano, King County Facilities Management Division Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord 71916\9809.025.doc Agency Reference #: SEPA Lead Agency: Other: Agency Use Only Date Received: - JARPA APPLICATION FORM - - for use in Washington State — rLCC►JC 1 i rC .1.0 116 1 ..u• . .,, ....,.,.. ,...............-- -- -- Based on the preceding checklist, I am sending copies of this application to the following: (check all that apply) a Local Government: for shoreline ® Substantial Development ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Variance ❑ Exemption; or ® Floodplain Management ❑ Critical Areas Ordinance (Substantial Development, Flood Zone Control Applications Separate) tEi Washington Department of fish and Wildlife for HPA ® Washington Department of Ecology Approval to Allow Temporary Exceedance of Water Quality Standards ® 401 Water Quality Certification Nationwide Permits ® Corps Engineers for Section 404 or Section 10 permit(s) Section A - Use for all permits covered by this application. Be sure to also complete Section C (Signature Block) for A applications. permit 1. Applicant Mailing King County Facilities Management Division Address: King County Administrative Building, Room 320 500 4th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 Work Phone: (206) Fax Number: (206) 296-4240 Home Phone: ( ) N/A 296 -0192 If an 2. agent Authorized Mailing is acting for the applicant during the permit process, complete #2 & #3. Agent Don Benson, URS Greiner, Inc. Address: 2401 4th Avenue, Suite 1000 Seattle. WA 98121 Work Phone: (206) Fax Number: (206) 674 -1811 Home Phone: ( ) N/A 674 -1801 3. Designation I appli of Authorized Agent, if applicable: her y desi ate Donald Benson (URS Greiner, Inc.) to act as my agent in matters related to this ti permits ( ). I understand that if a Federal permit is issued, I must sign the permit. Signature of Appl ant Date 4. Relationship of ap licant to property: n Owner ❑ Purchaser ❑ Lessee ❑ Other 5. Name, address, and phone number of property owner(s), if other than applicant: N/A 71916\9808.002\ Application Page 1 of 4 Location where proposed activity exists or will occur: Street Address 11013 West Marginal Place South City, County, State, Zip Code Tukwila, WA 98188 Water body Duwamish River DNR Stream Type (if known) Tributary of Puget Sound Legal Description: Tax Parcel No.: See Attachment A SE 4 23N R4E. W.M. '/ '/• Section Township Range NE 9 23N R4E, W.M. 7. Describe the current use of the property, and structures existing on the property. If any portion of the proposed activity is already completed on this property, indicate month and year of completion. The property is undeveloped and unused except for a restroom facility constructed in July 1997 (Phase I of project). Is the property agricultural land? ❑ Yes ® No Are you a USDA program participant? ❑ Yes ® No 8. Describe the proposed activity, and the activity's purpose. Include expected water quality and fish impacts, and proposed actions to reduce the duration and severity of those impacts and provide proper protection for fish life. Complete plans and specifications should be provided for all work watenvard of the Ordinary High Water Mark or Line, including types of equipment to be used, and for all work if applying for a shoreline permit. If additional space is needed, please attach a separate sheet. See Attachment B Preparation of drawings: See Appendix A - sample drawings and checklist for completing the drawings. One set of original or good quality reproducible drawings must be attached. NOTE: Applicants are encouraged to submit photographs of the project site, but these do not substitute for drawings. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS REQUIRES DRAWINGS ON 8-1/2 X 11 INCH SHEETS. Larger drawings may be required by other agencies. 71916\9808.002\ Application Page 2 of 4 , „ ,,,„, , 9. Proposed Starting Date: Fall 1998 Will the project be constructed in stages? ® Yes 0 No 10. Will any structures be placed: . Estimated duration of cavity: 9 mos. — 1 year a. waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark or Line for fresh or tidal wa b. waterward of the Mean High Water Line in tidal waters? ers? ❑ Yes ® No 11. Will fill material (rock, fill, bulkhead, pilings or other material) be placed wat nvard of Ordinary High Water Mark or Line for fresh or tidal waters? ® Yes ❑ No a. If "yes" in fresh water indicate volume in cubic yards: Approx. 1.358CY uwamish River has tidal influence) b. If "yes" in tidal water indicate volume in cubic yards waterward of the line of mean higher high water: 12. Will material be placed in wetlands? ❑ Yes ® No If yes, impacte area (acres) If yes: a. Has a delineation been completed? ❑ Yes ❑ No (If yes, please submit ith application.) b. Type and composition of fill material (e.g., sand, etc.): c. Material source: d. List all soil series (type of soil) located at the project site, & indicate if they are on the county's list of hydric soils: Soils information can be obtained from the Natural Resources Conservatio Service (NRCS), fonnerly Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 13. Will proposed activity cause flooding or draining of wetlands? ❑ Yes ® No If yes, impacted area (acres) 14. Will excavation or dredging be required in water or wetlands? lfyes, volume: Approx. 2.550 (cubic yards) excavation in Duwamish River t a. Composition of material removed: Alluvium b. Disposal site for excavated material: At an a roved dis i osal site off the fill. c. Method of dredging: No dredaina. 'ust excavation and fill ® Yes ❑ No create estuary ro . rtv. Some w' I ere 15. List other applications, approvals, or certifications from other Federal, state or lo construction, discharges, or other activities described in the application (i.e., prel approval, building permit, SEPA review, FERC license, Forest Practices Applica has been completed and indicate all existing work on drawings. Date of Application . agencies for any structures, minary plat approval, health district 'on, etc.) Also indicate whether work Date Completed? Approved Yes or No Shoreline City of Tukwila Flood Zone Control City of Tukwila Land Altering City of Tukwila Landscape Irrigation Citv of Tukwila SEPA Lead A_encv: Kina County 71916\9808.002\ • SEPA Decision IP ate: Concurrent with ermits Application Page 3 of 4 Z ~w re J0 000 w= H W w0 u_? cod �w z= F- �o w~ ON 0 I- ww H--- 0. .Z W co 0~ Z 16. Has any agency denied approval for the activity described herein or for any activity directly related to the activity described herein? ci Yes ® No If yes, explain: Section B - Use for Shoreline & Corps of Engineers permits only: 17. Total cost of Project. This means the fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc. Approximately S340,000 18. Local government w /jurisdiction: City of Tukwila Shoreline Environmental designation: Urban Zoning designation: MIC -H 19. For corps permits, provide names, addresses, and telephone numbers of adjoining property owners, lessees, etc., (See Attachment C) PLEASE NOTE: Shoreline management compliance may require additional notice - consult your local government. Section C - Complete for any permit.covered by this application 20. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the activities described herein. I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this application, and that to the best of my knowledge and belief, such information is true, complete, and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the proposed activities. I hereby grant to the agencies to which this application is made, the right to enter the above - described location to inspect the proposed or complete work. N' • Si :1 a t e of • .. lc/ !tor Authorized Agent (REQUIRED) ►.r._.l .� _i Signature of A.pli•+ t • 4 uthorized Agent (REQUIRED) /8/98 Date Date This application must be signed by the applicant. If an authorized agent is to be designated, the applicant must also sign at Item #3. 18 U.S.C. §100I provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the States knowingly falsifies, conceals, or coven up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact or makes any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than 510,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both. 7191619808.002\ ATTACHMENT A NORTH WIND WEER PARK LEGAL DESCRIPTION JARPA APPLICATION The proposed park is located adjacent to the Duwamish River in Tukwila, Washington at 11013 West Marginal Place South. A vicinity map and plans are enclosed. The legal description is as follows: Gordon's Addition No. 2 as recorded in Volume 36 of Plats, page 42 in King County, Washington, EXCEPT that portion conveyed to the State of Washington for highway purposes: Together with that portion of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 4, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M in King County, Washington, lying westerly of the Duwamish River and easterly of said Plat; Together with the North 51.74 feet of the following described property: All that portion of Government Lot 1, Section 9, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington lying east of the W.W. Beck County Road, westerly of the Duwamish River and northerly of a line bearing N 69° 31' 18" E from a point in the Easterly margin of said W.W. Beck County Road which point is 775.31 feet southeasterly as measured along said Easterly marginal line from its intersection with the North boundary line of said Section 9, EXCEPT that portion thereof conveyed to the State of Washington for highway purposes. 7 191619808.0021 .: � ,.. z Z w JU! 00 co �. w Lu F- wO g Q. = a. �w Z I—O. Z~ w U �. CO 0 1- w W. S u" O w z OH z ATTACHMENT B NORTH WIND WEIR PARK PROPOSED ACTIVITY AND PURPOSE JARPA APPLICATION The North Wind Weir Park project involves development of a park on an approximately 3 -acre parcel of undeveloped land in Tukwila, Washington. The park will include a parking lot, benches, picnic tables, and paths as well as provide canoe/kayak river access. A restroom facility has already been constructed. A small area in the park near the Duwamish River will be developed for intertidal habitat (estuary) and a site will be developed and dedicated for a Native American interpretive display. The proposed estuary will be surrounded by a wood (post and rail) fence. An irrigation system will also be installed in the new park. On -site drainage (parking lot and restroom roof drains) will be handled via a bioswale with Type I catch basins in the parking lot and on the downstream end of the bioswale prior to drainage outflow to the Duwamish River. The Green River Trail extends along the western boundary of the park (see attached plans). The anticipated impacts include the possibility of erosion and sedimentation occurring during project construction and dewatering. A temporary erosion control and sedimentation plan and other BMPs will be in place prior to and during construction and dewatering will be controlled in accordance with DOE approved measures for the appropriate water quality permit. Construction of the estuary to enhance fisheries habitat is viewed positively by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Construction of the estuary will involve removal of excavated material (est. 2,550 cy) and placement of fill (est. 1,358 cy) at the edge of the Duwamish River and below the OHWL. Some of excavated material will be reused as fill. Overall quantities on the site would include approximately 6,000 to 6,500 cy of material to be excavated and approximately 2,608 to 2,708 cy of fill. The equipment involved will probably include: a track - mounted excavator; a front -end loader; dump trucks; and an angle dozer. A set of plans for the park have been submitted to the Corps of Engineers, the State Departments of Ecology and Fish and Wildlife, and the City of Tukwila. 7191619808.0021 • ATTACHMENT C NORTH WIND WEIR PARK LIST OF PROP RTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF PROJECT JARPA APPLICATION z Name Address Telephone No. W' re King County 500 King County Administration Building (206) 296 -4240 6 = S attle, WA 98104 o 0 : w= Desimone, Katherine M. 2:05 SW 170th St. (206) 243 -9349 co o LL S rattle, WA 98166 2 �. d Not listed ? I- o z�—.. o' (206) 248 -1769 p �',. o l- w P.O. Box 3403 z (206) 655 -2121 ui (/) U- H &M III Associates 510 Rainier Avenue S. (Mastro, Michael M.) Seattle, WA 98144 Tamburelli, John F. The Boeing Company 11232 26th Avenue S. Seattle, WA 98168 • MIS No. 1F-09 - 0 Seattle, WA 98124 z 7191619808.0021 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number be-�9n 2,uve) LeM - 00c3 4- LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FO ltr&. TO: ❑ Building El Planning L� Public Works Wire Dept. ❑ Police Dept. b Parks /Rec A2"1 Project: r\ *k L) Q We I R. Bi-r� Address: 11 O i. W • , Y11a,r ir�Q P�0... 1-. Date transmitted: �1 �� - Gj g Response Cr a requested by: -i � ( %et) 13, `� i0 3O 2.% °I� cii Staff � �1 coordinator: De AO ,(2 Date response received: COMMENTS OW c of - t S a -040 )I i1, 741. t-k, v1 G-- t•ec,,c() S &P-R- (A4646-t- oictc 616 rQ1.- CclUCi.viS 1f1 olt: ubzo2 b t uJ� 1¢ ‘r a ; c a,du,oQ' . 2A 1' a ct2A)1,sse.� c �, -mss m fItA- LcZtfo cogc)gi • •., 1 • A D c t144064 ice. ca-1s \() c.cx�c1 ��-� as 1 1\ ❑ DRC review requested LI Plan submittal requested 11 Plan approved Plan check date: '7075 -- Comments .re.ared b QJ //4/04 SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL LEVELOPMENT APPLICATION Page 3 If the application involves a Conditional Use or Variance, set forth in full that portion of the Master Program which provides that the proposed use may be a Conditional Use or, in the case of a Variance, from which the variance is being sought (to be completed by local official): To be completed by local official. 12. Give a brief narrative description of the general nature of the improvements and land use within one thousand (1,000) feet in all directions from the development site: / ! / The park will include a parking lot, benches, picnic tables, and paths as well as provide canoe /kayak river access. A small area near the Duwamish River will be developed for intertidal habitat (estuary) and a site will be developed and dedicated for a Native American interpretive display. T' /'! An existing restroom facility has been constructed as part of these improvements. The parking lot (11 stalls) to be located adjacent to the restroom facility, was determined by the King County Facilities Management Division to be sufficient parking for a park of this size, type and location. Fill (approximately 2,608 — 2,708 cv) will be added in the construction of the estuary and under the proposed park pathways and parking lot. Approximately 1,358 cy will be used Pi around the estuary (approx.52% will be on -site excavation material such as silts and sands ji 71916\9808.0021 and approx. 48% will be imported fill [i.e., gavels, quarry spalls] from a local quarry). The balance will be used for the pathways and parking lot and will be imported structural fill from a local quarry. Approximately 6,000 to 6,500 cy of material will be excavated on- site (silts and sands) with approximately 11 -12% to be reused as fill near the estuary, and the balance to be hauled off and disposed of at an approved disposal site. In general, the land use closest to and surrounding the site is either vacant land or the Duwamish River. Land use to the west and nearest the site is vacant. West of the vacant land, the use is residential (in King County). North of the site, the land use is vacant and includes a City of Seattle Transmission line easement. East of the site is the Duwamish River, and vacant land is located on the east side of River. Residential uses are located east of the vacant land. South of the site is vacant land and the Duwamish River. A few residences are located south of the River. • .` • SHORELINE SUBS). ATIAL DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, T w�('l9 8188 Telephdi : (206) 3680 1. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: The North Wind Weir Park involves development of a park on an approximately 3 -acre parcel of undeveloped land in Tukwila, Washington. 2. PROJECT LOCATION: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block, and sub- division; or tax lot number, access street, and nearest intersection) The project is located at 11013 West Marginal Place South. Quarter: SE 1/4 Section: 4 Township: 23N Range: 4E, W.M. Quarter: NE 1/4 Section: 9 Township: 23N Range: 4E, W.M. (This information may be found on your tax statement) 3. APPLICANT:* Name: Don Benson, URS Greiner, Inc. (Agent) Address: 2401 4th Avenue, Suite 1000, Seattle, WA 98121 Phone: (206) 674 -1811 Signature: Date: * The applicant is the person whom the staff will contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent, unless otherwise stipulated by applicant. AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP PROPERTY Name: King County Facilities Management Division OWNER King County Administrative Building Address: 500 4th Avenue, Room 320, Seattle, WA 98104 1 : (206) 296 -4240 I/WE,[signature(s)] Ik ,�,� swear that I /we are the owiaer(s, contract purchaser(s) of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing atements and answers contained in this application are true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and belief. Date: 1 ' [ (p ' i, 7191619808.0021 SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL L_VELOPMENT APPLICATION Page 2 5. Present use of property: Vacant land. 6. Total construction cost and fair market value of proposed project (include additional future developments contemplated but not included in this application): Approximately $340,000 7. List the master program policies (use program sections or page numbers) which are applicable to this development: w CC 6 0 in ° W = J 1- wO 5 a w F- Other Permits applied for include: JARPA (Army Corps of Engineers, State Department of z Ecology, State Department of Fish and Wildlife); and the City of Tukwila (Utility Permit — z O Flood Control, Land Altering and Landscape Irrigation). JARPA and other City permits were w w applied for in August of 1998. v o, o -. Nature of the existing shoreline. Describe type of shoreline, such as stream, lake, marsh, flood ° — w plain, floodway, delta; type of beach, such as erosion, high bank, low bank, or dike; material v such as sand, gravel, mud, clay, rock, riprap; and extent and type of bulkheading, if any (to be u_ completed by local official): . z U= O F- z The designation is Urban. 8. List any other permits for this project from state, federal or local governmental agencies for which you have applied or will apply, including the name of the issuing agency, whether the permit has been applied for (and if so, the date of the application), whether the application was approved or denied and the date of same, and the number of the application or permit: To be completed by local official. 10. In the event that any of the proposed buildings or structures will exceed a height of thirty-five feet above the average grade level, indicate the approximate location of and number of residential units existing and potential, that will have an obstructed view (to be completed by local official): 71916\9808.002\ To be completed by local official. " SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL L,dVELOPMENT APPLICATION Page 3 11. If the application involves a Conditional Use or Variance, set forth in full that portion of the Master Program which provides that the proposed use may be a Conditional Use or, in the case of a Variance, from which the variance is being sought (to be completed by local official): To be completed by local official. Z ~W cc _6 O 00 12. Give a brief narrative description of the general nature of the improvements and land use i° within one thousand (1,000) feet in all directions from the development site: w F- U)LL The park will include a parking lot, benches, picnic tables, and paths, as well as provide w canoe /kayak river access. A small area near the Duwamish River will be developed for g 5 intertidal habitat (estuary) and a site will be developed and dedicated for a Native u_ American interpretive display. = w An existing restroom facility has been constructed as part of these improvements. The F 0 parking lot (11 stalls) to be located adjacent to the restroom facility, was determined by w w the King County Facilities Management Division to be sufficient parking for a park of this n o size type and location. p N O I— Fill (approximately 2,608 — 2,708 cy) will be added in the construction of the estuary and v under the proposed park pathways and parking lot. Approximately 1,358 cy will be used u_ around the estuary (approx.52% will be on -site excavation material such as silts and sands, iu Z and approx. 48% will be imported fill [i.e., gravels, quarry spans] from a local quarry). The balance will be used for the pathways and parking lot and will be imported structural z 1— fill from a local quarry. Approximately 6,000 to 6,500 cy of material will be excavated on- site (silts and sands) with approximately 11 -12% to be reused as fill near the estuary, and the balance to be hauled off and disposed of at an approved disposal site. 71916\9808.002\ In general, the land use closest to and surrounding the site is either vacant land or the Duwamish River. Land use to the west and nearest the site is vacant. West of the vacant land, the use is residential (in King County). North of the site, the land use is vacant and includes a City of Seattle Transmission line easement. East of the site is the Duwamish River, and vacant land is located on the east side of River. Residential uses are located east of the vacant land. South of the site is vacant land and the Duwamish River. A few residences are located south of the River. ' MAILING MATRIX NORTH WIND WEIR PARK LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF PROJECT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION Name King County Desimone, Katherine M. H &M III Associates (Mastro, Michael M.) Address 500 King County Administration Building Seattle, WA 98104 2605 SW 170th St. Seattle, WA 98166 510 Rainier Avenue S. Seattle, WA 98144 Tamburelli, John F. 11232 26th Avenue S. Seattle, WA 98168 The Boeing Company 71916\9808.002\ P.O. Box 3403 M/S No. 1F-09 Seattle, WA 98124 ��.. z w ix JU 0 W 0 J w0 g Q; = d. I-- U-1 � 0 zI-- LL! Lu U0. (0tn� 0 I-i 2U ..z Z 0 F'?. z PgE97 /\/orfh W/ r) ail Weir Park Pc6tlic WorAs- PI-2/ I llacafi U/) F./00d done C'cr7 &-o/ n � CJ ve�bc(r�`7, S7/-ccbi /i2cLti0r-L - C- ,eo{ -ech r�lleric) LGnclscap� i rri� Park ecreafiOr) _ 001 rai. / W / s R en -o ire ,o v ,bock gees frQ'- a access.. 901 r / __.J_r7 r C7 /C%c) S (-)11--?ci V-cm 0 <Z JU 0 0' CO 0' W= w E ga I"a �w 2 Z LLI U0 0 = 0 F- ww • Z U CO' 5 1 O Z CITY OF TUKWILA Id: MISC200 Search Files by a Name Searching By - NORTH WIND WEIR PARK Name -> NORTH WEST NORTH WEST NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTH WIND NORTHCOAST Use Arrows, Press HANDLING SYSTEMS HANDLING SYSTEMS WEIR PARK WEIR PARK WEIR PARK WEIR PARK WEIR PARK WEIR PARK WIER WIER WIER WIER WIER HOUSE DEMOLIT WIER HOUSE DEMOLIT WIER PARK RESTROOM WIER PARK RESTROOM WIER SFR DEMO Ke I I RESTROOM RESTROOM RESTROOM RESTROOM yword: SNAME User: 1672 File(s): Activity Own /Occ File Relationship 06/19/97 Parcel Owner C /A /E /D File A CONTRACTOR PRE97 -028 PREAPP NRES RECEIVE C CONTRACTOR License: NORTHWH275JF A TENANT PW96 -0214 PW -SU OTHR ISSUED A PROJECT PRE97 -028 PREAPP NRES RECEIVE A TENANT PW96 -0146 PW -FZC OTHR ISSUED A TENANT PW96 -0147 PW -LA OTHR ISSUED A TENANT OTHR ISSUED A TENANT NRES ISSUED A TENANT RES APPROVE A TENANT RES PENDING A TENANT SFR FINAL A TENANT SFR FINAL A TENANT TSFR FINAL A TENANT TSFR FINAL A TENANT NRES RECEIVE A TENANT NCOM ISSUED PW96 -0148 PW96 -0149 P95 -0052 P95 -0053 PW95 -0228 PW95 -0229 PW95 -0327 PW95 -0328 P96 -0051 396 -0140 A TENANT P95 -0095 ENTERPRISES INC. A CONTRACTOR B93 -0285 SpaceBar to Select, F2 =Next 18, ESC =New Name PW -WM PW -HAUL PROJECT PROJECT PW -SSS PW -SSS PW -SSS PW -SSS PROJECT B -BUILD PROJECT B -BUILD one p 1-(J ec-F cl urribei RES PENDING ACOM FINAL & Filters "' P P P P P P z QQ 6 J U. O 0. co 0 w =' 1 I.. 0 =a in Z= t- O Z 1— U • 0 O � • 1- =U 1-- L 0. wz 0 to F— _ O 1- z City of Tukwila Pre- Application Process MEETING ATTENDANCE RECORD City of Tukwila Department of Community Development - Building Division Phone: (206) 431 -3670 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Pre - Application File Number PRE97 -028 Project: NORTH WIND WEIR PARK Meeting Date: JUNE 19, 1997 Time: 2:30 P.M. Site Address: 11013 WEST MARGINAL PL S Date Checklist Mailed: JULY 14, 1997 By: KELCIE J. PETERSON CITY STAFF PRESENT DEPARTMENTS X X X X X Building Fire Planning Public Works Parks & Rec Police Environmental Permit Center Other: CONTACT PERSON OTHERS PRESENT PHONE #'s 431 -3670 575 -4404 431 -3680 433 -0179 433 -1843 433 -1804 431 -3662 431 -3670 Name: Company/Title: Street Address: Name: Company/Title: Street Address: Name: Company/Title: Street Address: Name: Company/Title: Street Address: Name: NAMES/TITLES VERNON UMETSU, ASSOCIATE PLANNER PHIL FRASER, SR. ENGINEER DON WILLIAMS, PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR GARY SCHULZ, URBAN ENVIRONMENTALIST KELCIE J. PETERSON, PERMIT COORDINATOR APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT MICHAEL LOZANO Phone: 206 296 -4240 KING COUNTY FACILITIES KING COUNTY ADMIN BLDG 500 4TH AV #320 City/State/Zip: CONNIE RECKORD Phone: 206 323 -7919 MACLEOD RECKORD 231 SUMMIT AV E JOHN E NORMAN Phone: LIN & ASSOCIATES INC 939 THIRD AV #241 City/State/Zip: CHRISTOPHER ELDRED Phone: 206 441 -1500 LAMB HANSEN LAMB APPRIASAL, CHIEF APPRAISER 3819 FIRST AV 3360 City/State/Zip: SEATTLE WA Phone: SEATTLE WA 98104 City/ State/Zip: SEATTLE WA 98102 SEATTLE WA 98004 Company/Title: Street Address: Name: City/State/Zip: Phone: Company/Title: Street Address: City/State /Zip: City of Tukwila Pre - Application Process MEETING ATTENDANCE RECORD City of Tukwila Department of Community Development - Building Division Phone: (206) 431 -3670 Pre - Application PRE97 -028 File Number Meeting Date: JUNE 19, 1997 Date Checklist Mailed: Project: NORTH WIND WEIR PARK 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Time: 2:30 P.M 'Site 11013 WEST M4RGINAL PL S I Address: By: DEPARTMENTS iC I 1 1 Building Fire Planning Public Works Parks & Rec Police Environmental Permit Center Other: CONTACT PERSON OTHERS PRESENT PHONE #'s 431 -3670 575 -4404 431 -3680 433 -0179 433 -1843 433 -1804 431 -3680 431 -3670 CITY STAFF PRESENT Name: L<t.t-tAi, Company /Title: 4:t s Street Address: 4.1,A 3Z 0 ADO 71,4 AbE • uc.,,, r ∎uu , Ok e u, ezt-rx�. Conhie, r. aLe,e6t. VOtz- -0 21 t 711 li+4 E. 14 OS1 VIA LtN 4.Iq,ttu eteems, 9m9 Art It 241• � it rtsfvrM r &ce :1-e NAMES/TITLES Ve4.1./0 (/ G CJ A s o c, Pc. tI4L FaksLi SN rr Doh 1/14.4. Ohl in,L .-j, �v.�lJ "te �e ► Cie ,T Peq -er€ r' ro-0- Ccorci APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT Name: Company /Title: Street Address: Name: Company /Title: Street Address: Name: Company /Title: La.,,,,t1; 1 i c. el, , Street Address: Name: 9S14/ / 1, Are—., 36c) Phone:7e/co el. 24-43 City/State/Zip: - x 8810 q. 4111 2 337 Phone: City/State /Zip: �Y�- f b 0C_ Phone: ekregl `~g9 City/State /Zip: S'! 4 111 a4 Phone: 44/ -/Y-0z: Company/Title: Street Address: Name: ity/ ate /Zip: S.CccL`t(e., A).4- Phone: Company /Title: Street Address: City/State /Zip: Phone: City/State /Zip: Pre-ipplication CheLiclist CITY OF TLIKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division- Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PRE- APPLICATION FILE t�0.::' PRE9� 028. MEETING'DATEITIME: 6!19/97 2,30 P.M. The following comments .are based on :a preliminary review. Additional information may be needed. Other requirements /regulations may need to be met. BUILDING DIVISION The following is meant to be general information related to the requirements of the Tukwila Building Division for the processing of building permits. Specific code issues will be addressed through the normal plan review process after the permit is applied for. :1711 1. Comply with the Uniform Building Code, 1994 Edition, as adopted and amended by the State (Table 10- B, Section 1607, and Section 3003 of the 1994 UBC are not adopted). 2. Comply with the Uniform Mechanical Code, 1994 Edition, as adopted and amended by the State. "3. Comply with the Uniform Plumbing Code, 1991 Edition, as adopted and amended by the State. 4. Comply with the Washington State Energy Code, Chapter 51 -11 WAC, 1995 Edition. Energy code specifications and data must be included on the building plans. 5. Comply with Washington State Regulations for Barrier Free Facilities or Design (State amendment replaces UBC Chapter 11 in its entirety). ❑ 6. Apply for and obtain the following Building Division permits and approvals through the Department of Community Development Permit Center: • Building Permit • Rack Storage • Other: • Mechanical Permit • Demolition (building) 7. All applications and plan submittals must be complete in order to be accepted by the Permit Center for plan review. Use the Plan Submittal Checklist provided on the reverse of the application forms to verify that all the necessary materials and information has been supplied. 8. Plans submitted for approval must be stamped by a Washington State licensed architect or engineer and shall specifically contain the name of the person designated as the architect or engineer of record for the project. This person shall be responsible for reviewing and coordinating all submittal documents prepared by others, including deferred submittal items, for compatibility with the design of the building. (See UBC Sec. 106.3.4) 9. Temporary erosion control measures shall be included on plans. Normally, no site work will be allowed until erosion control measures are in place. Q10. Rockeries are not permitted over 4' in height. Retaining structures over 4' in height must be engineered retaining walls, and require a separate building permit. 11. All rack storage requires a permit and rack storage over 8' high must be designed for Seismic Zone 3. A Washington State structural engineers stamp will be required on plans and structural calculations submitted for rack storage over 8' high. 12. Construction documents shall include special inspection requirements as specified in UBC Sections 106.3.5 and 1701. The architect or engineer's inspection program required by Section 106.3.5 shall be included with plan submittal documents when permit application is submitted. Notify the Building Official of testing lab hired by architect or owner prior to permit issuance date. The contractor may not hire the testing lab. ❑ 13. Structural observation shall be required as specified in UBC Section 1702. 14. Construction documents shall contain soils classification information specified in Table 18 -I -A of the Uniform Building Code on the copies stamped and signed by Washington State licensed architect or engineer in responsible charge of the structural design work. 15. Separate demolition permits are required for removal of any existing buildings or structures. 16. Comply with UBC Appendix Chapter 12, Division 11 - Sound Transmission Control. 17. Addresses are assigned by the Tukwila Fire Prevention Bureau. Pre- Application Checklist Page 2 BUILDING DIVISION 18. Obtain approvals and permits from outside agencies: ❑ ELEVATORS are regulated by State Department of Labor and Industries. Permits and inspections for elevators are obtained through the elevator section of that agency (reference RCW Chapter 70.87). Phone (206) 248 -6657. ELECTRICAL PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS are obtained through the Department of Labor and Industries. Phone (206) 248 -6630. PLUMBING PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS are obtained through King County Health Department. Inspections: (206) 296 -4732; Permits: (206) 296 -4727. ❑ King County Health Department must approve and stamp plans for PUBLIC POOLS /SPAS and FOOD SERVICE FACILITIES prior to submittal to the Tukwila Building Division. Phone (206) 296 -4787. CI FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS plans are reviewed through the Tukwila Fire Department. Phone: (206) 575 -4404. ❑ 19. ❑ 20. Checklist prepared by (staff): (1(0)C C ji)� Date: l,7 * IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT NEW CODE EDITIONS WILL BE ADOPTED BY THE STATE AND CITY EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1998. THE CODE THAT IS IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF PERMIT APPLICATION WILL GOVERN. z W. Q: g. �U 00 co o W= W• O Q, Z= F- I- 0 Z F- w uj U 0' ON 0 I- W LU H- -; 0_ Z W U2 0H z Pre-Tipp lication ChLTkljst CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division- Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PRE - APPLICATION FILE NO:PRE97 =0 8`` 0,19/97 2:10 P: t MEETING DATE/TIII NORTH WIND.; WEIR PARK' • 11013' West Mar i.nal P1 S ITE�ADDRESS. ; ` : ` g The following; comments are based on a preliminary review Additional information may be needed Other requirements /regulations may need to be met. ENVIRONMENTAL• 1) Areas within the Shoreline Zone that are cleared for development will be subject to the Tree Ordinance (Tree Regulations - TMC Chapter 18.54). A required landscape plan will consist of tree retention and tree planting per the standards of the Ordinance. Only trees existing within the 200 -foot Shoreline will be subject to the Tree Regulations. Recent changes to the City's Zoning Code have exempted black cottonwood trees except those trees within the river environment and low impact environment (100 feet of the Shoreline) that are 12 inches or greater in diameter at 4.5 feet above grade (DBH) (Shoreline Overlay TMC 18.44.110, 15.) . 2) Landscape plans will be reviewed for appropriate plantings in existing shoreline areas and the new tidal estuary. cb--fr2 62 0777 )A.V 1 01\ Pre -1 _pplieation CheJclist CITY OFTUKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division- Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PRE - APPLICATION FILE NO PRE97 -028 PROJE NORTH WIND.WEIR,PARK MEETING DATE/TIME:: '`. 6/19/97 2 30 1"..11. 11013 West Marginal P1 S ITE ADDRESS: ' The following comments are based on a preliminary review. Additional information may be needed. Other requirements /regulations may need to be. met..: Et PLANNING DIVISION - Land Use Information 1. Comply with Tukwila Municipal Code (zoning, land use, sign regulations, etc.) 2. Obtain the following land use permits /approvals: Boundary Line Adjustment/Lot Consolidation Binding Site Improvement Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit Design Review Design Review - Interurban Environmental (SEPA) Planned Mixed Use Development Planned Residential Development ❑ a Rezone Shoreline Management Permit • K /r/ E Co, Tree Permit tl AS7CSI2_ PLAN Oct 723 Short Subdivision Sign(s) Subdivision Unclassified Use Variance Other: Pcnte Coo-fm. 3. Zoning designation: M 1 C - W Site located in sensitive area? ❑ Yes Wait 1f foUro 4 "/iS 4. Minimum setback requirements: - Font: 2 o /16 gide: SQ Side: 50 5. Maximum Building Height: Height exception area? o Scsr PAIL/<,/,(c 'No wesr .eaf: 20 /j O ❑ Yes KNo 6. Minimum parking stalls required: fez PcN c Court • Handicap stalls required: 7. No more than 30% of required parking stalls may be compact. No landscape stalls are permitted, although no wheel stops prior to hitting the curb will be requi R 8. Minimum landscaping required: t t: ( aide: -Sim: 5 9. Landscape plans must be stamped by a Washington State licensed landscape areas require a landscape irrigation system (Utility Permit Required). overhangs into compact red. est. Rear: / S8a- f3 architect All landscape ❑ 10. Roof -top mechanical units, satellite dishes and similar structures must be properly screened. Provide elevations and construction details as part of building permit application submittal. 11. Trash enclo an s age areas must be screened to a minimum of 8' in height. Provide elevations and construction details as part of building permit application submittal. ❑ 12. Building permit plans which deviate from that already approved by the Board of Architectural Review may require re- application for design review approval. 14. S((oL' e/2ve6797`c� L i ✓A(cc J t 15. P� E�'� PAI2 --1 -/ �� C 1■/ 6%37)5 A-A/ �1 C YS(S AS �A s (.S Po/ SPA C gS. ;1e 16. lKCo2 6)02A 77t(C C J(�S eS? oclt (9 -7o6 of S'C.EPer- s!/c to" rel) ❑ 17. 'toy- rec-r R geu /2 -E7), Corf FOR ,..(A r L 5 ' A t S7Aa i eA cw' ❑ 18. FC,c) ° I-(A A/t °b Go RQ'& ,f 19. lac-1( 0 /VS ero Sf7Dc -3 X(5 i /1 /C d- PR- o Po CO7 / fA( /C - MA z', S. ❑ 20. Checklist prepared by (staff): rf oN U1 6"TSv ... Date: a/ 7177 Pre -i pplication Checiclist CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division - Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PRE- APPLICATION•FILE'NO: PRE97 -028 6/19/97 2 :30P MEETING DATE/TIME: } The following comments are based on a preliminary review. Additional :information may . be needed. Other requirements /regulations may need to be met. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT Landscape architect should check site visibility where secondary trails meet the main river trail for safety. Parking lot should have lighting for safety and general use. Grassed areas should be irrigated. Appropriate signage in the parking area; such as, "Dogs must be on a leash" should be installed. Coordinate this with the Parks and Recreation Department if desired. Pre -1 .pplication Che..klist CITY OF TLIKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division- Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 The following comments `ere based on a preliminary. review Additional information may -be needed.'. Other requirements /regulations'hiayneed-to be met.: POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME PREVENTION SECURITY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Rest rooms: a. Recommend that the rest rooms not have false ceilings. b. All walls and partitions should be constructed of or paneled with materials designed to be highly resistant to graffiti markings. c. The restores should be locked during hours of darkness. z ~w 6 00 0 Ili J F- N 2. Signage: W o a. The entrances to the park should be well posted with park rules and hours g of operation. b. Park patrons should be encouraged, by signs, to report suspicious activity = W _ or damage to the facility I-- z c. Due to the inherent danger of the river, signs should be posted warning ~ p park patrons to stay back from the river banks. w uj d. The parking area should have posting warning park patrons not to leave valuables in unattended vehicles. o o F- 3. Communication: W W H U; Due to the remote location of the park, a pay phone should be installed to u o. facilitate park patrons who seek help or want to report criminal activity. The pay w z phone should not accept incoming calls and should have digital pager prefixes v i blocked. o f-' z 4. Landscaping: Sticker -type plantings (possibly natural blackberry growth) should be maintained along the river edge to discourage park patrons from getting dangerously close to the river banks. R. W. Abbott -061797 lire -.P- implication L'herklist CITY OF 2 t/KWILA Department of Community Development Building Division - Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PRE - APPLICATION FILE NO., .PRE97 -o28 PROJECT: NORTH WIND WEIR PARK 6/19/97 2:30 P.M. 1013 West Marginal P1 S MEETING DATE/TIME.:} SITE,ADDRESS: The following comments are based on.a preliminary review. Additional' information may-be needed. Other requirements/regulations may need to be met., PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Project : ,v�1.0▪ . 1.°./ P .Addres • 1103 W Date: . (, 4▪ /.9.7.. By; ?h.' Fie .5 EX Pre -Ap (3.7.-a28 SEPA Shoreline BAR REVIEW COMMENTS: Availability Letters: Shortplt BLA ROW Vacation Permits Water ... Sewer 1. Water:. .'.r. .$?� „r01�.�. ... Assessment ... Double Detector ... Fire Loop /Hydrant ... Proportionate Fair Share /No Protest Water Agreement 2. Sewer- ... Proportionate Fair Share /No Protest Sewer Agreement ... Grease Interceptor designed to Uniform Plumbing Code Appx. H 3. Surface Water: .5 !ow. wsaor., (a!�r. �?0�.1 tR&S% Pc/4 . i° 0..14).,..1411.. 44 LL NEE .717 f3.E 0.Q .�E itYdEkE.DPeS. Th'6: ,1a2V:- e o , Identify drain system condition for 1/4 mile downstream. • Design to KC Design Manual + W1 l7rri/V, fiA,V'(n'L ▪ Biofiltration or Coale ping Plate SepAarator . V Riverbank Stab i tL.o �F� ©QO l�/t �, .1(. -C)i.l crio u Po[./ c/�'.s ,DE,sic, AJ /ft!�.A-Cco�0. j � gyp. /vF 6. K SG�38f���- ��u /I�EL.iv.S 1 d ewy 5b' sys e , s-e �.; -)1:5. �s 02- oviekst ��' (Aoop C. s pj 4. Hydrologica eotech: . .. v<4 «. r3tui ors. - 1N?Ze?T!�i4L P(„ j�}.N.P.A. G .R • . • • 5•077� Uf itC • 57 p..rtiC' AAzL ; •Pi il E D 1 o6 e 1"HH E•A 5 T oTEi /B/oL06/5r ,-4 -/.o C / v.4. ' E= N��rNEED 7v 4- SS"(le" "c Sidi.r�- 67,C Air-Ea 0i,¢ 4. ... Trip generation & Distribution for AWDT, & AM, noon, PM peaks ... Channelization /access: • .. Frontal /Sidewalk: (TMC11 . 64 . 020 rgmnt for: 25,000 ft, 25% of value, or $250,000) ...CBD Treeplan: ... Undergrounding: •..Curb cut /Access: 6. R /W- Easements• 7. Developer's Agreement. 8. Turnover- 9. Other: 1/21-46'77 &). R4. cg." . N z 4 . TU. . 2R. All maps & plans to use NGVD datum. PERMITS TO BE OBTAINED: ... Water: ... H2O Meter - Exempt ... H2O Meter - Permanent ... H2O Meter -Temp ... Landscape Irrigation ... Sewer: ... Side Sewer ... Sewer Main Ext (Private /Public) Metro Business Declaration Form Metro Discharge .� Land Altering : . >KOGJ � 1N LJog c 421-14-007"777s • Drainage- ,— . U FZC: FUce .42445.'. /•N ,R /,v.F,3y-‹ Floor Elevation: ... Street Use • .V Hauling. $2,000Bond, $1,000,000 Ins., Route Map & $25 Fee Req'd ...Oversize Load $5,000Bond, $1,000,000 Ins., Bus.Lisc. /$50 Fee, Route Map, $25 Fee ▪ PSAPCA (demolitions) : .7p i'VOld e. (...oil : chJ -� ye)/ e-dul e, /.609/ ai 8E5 (,e CITY OF TUKWILA Permit Gel.. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FOR STAFF USE ONLY .e -App File No.: PR &-q7 .Oa5 Date Received: (P "5- 9 7 Meeting Date: (p' 1 9' R 7 Time: 7:30 P M ROJECT SUMMARY - PROJECT INFORMATION Project/Name: Qom vAut, \,cl rja.{Ztc, Site Address: / / U / 3 Wes- V70r91,,a/ PI 5 Description of Proposal: 1 vELor SrR`- It1To rpepsiu c r -tc, (A4LUDtk -t t 11.1'Ca -1z-r of . l- ,t7T.T, F 1c1W.i (AT, 1uT4.1, LA1.SpS�p01 ,, Assessor Account No :?1136() _COOS Acreage of Site (gross): + Anticipated period of construction: From btu L -G` oq g To Will the project be developed in phases? Mlo ❑ Yes If "Yes ", describe: Identify existing easements on site: woeickuc, ow, \,46,, -rc„ IR)u,, &_ sew ., , .BUILDING.INEORMATION Project Value: Current Assessed Value of Building: Total Building Square Footage: Type of Construction: (1994 UBC) Please indicate the square footage of each floor, broken down by building use(s); use another sheet for additional floors. BUILDING USE OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION SQUARE FOOTAGE 1st Floor Ql� . 3z. <00 4.714 AU E , Phone: Z�L , 4.2 4.0 Prepared by: ‘C,6,6,-(7-c.,e, , f(,4q, agla4_, Z 337 Date: TOTAL 2nd Floor TOTAL 3rd Floor TOTAL Number of parking stalls proposed: Regular: Compact: Handicapped: Storage or use of flammable, combustible or hazardous materials on premise or area of construction? ❑ No ❑ Yes If "Yes ", explain: PREAPSUM.DOC 7/9/96 z w 000 w= J F- U) w0 u-Q =• a Z• = WI- uj O• N 0I- wW 2 O .. z w U= O ~ z PROJECT INFORMATION Contact Person: 1_41c 1-ti . p Company: 11),i(.,‘ `ouuTy ii' t jl& Address: k , G. A.nlaiu • gL.n(.1 Ql� . 3z. <00 4.714 AU E , Phone: Z�L , 4.2 4.0 Prepared by: ‘C,6,6,-(7-c.,e, , f(,4q, agla4_, Z 337 Date: PREAPSUM.DOC 7/9/96 z w 000 w= J F- U) w0 u-Q =• a Z• = WI- uj O• N 0I- wW 2 O .. z w U= O ~ z CITY Or, TUKWILA Permit Cer ►..:r 6300 Southcenter Boulevard,Suite 100, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 H -8 Pre - Application: Procedure / Plan: Submittal Checklist: The pre - application meeting is for you and City staff to preliminarily review your project prior to submitting applications. This helps you to learn about and discuss our regulations and plan submittal requirements, to provide early discussion of any major issues, and to facilitate the plan review process. PROCEDURE The Development Review Committee (DRC) meets every Thursday afternoon. Two time slots are available for pre - application meetings on a first -come first -serve basis, 2:30 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. The meeting takes approximately one hour. Your pre - application and submittal requirements must be presented at the Permit Counter eight days prior to the meeting (Wednesday, 5:00 p.m. deadline). Submittals will not be accepted through the mail, over the fax or by a messenger service. The pre - application plan submittal checklist is a guide. However, the more information submitted, the more complete our assessment can be. Our meetings are informal. We usually begin with our questions and /or major issues we see. Your design team is encouraged to participate (i.e., architects, engineers, project coordinators, etc.). Staff from Building, Planning, Public Works, and Fire will be present at the meeting. Parks and Recreation and the Police Department will provide comments pertaining to your pre - application submittal. We take notes during the meeting. Within one week following the meeting, a summary of all comments prepared in checklist format will be forwarded to you or your contact person, along with a packet of permit applications, plan submittal requirements, selected ordinances, and general information. If you have questions or want to participate in this process, please feel free to contact the Building Division or Permit Coordinator at 431 -3672. Pre - application plans (8 sets) should contain the following: ✓ Site Plan Requirements. Distance between structures and property lines ✓ Working Drawings Structure - General layout Width of any adjacent public right -of- way(s) Exits and exiting pattern Designated landscape areas Uses and dimensions of all spaces Easements (including railroad, Puget Power, etc.) Parking layout Truck loading area designations Access points and traffic circulation pattern Footprint of existing and/or proposed structures Significant natural features (water, slopes, vegetation, etc.) Identify sites proximity to river environment if less than 200' from river Topography map (for slopes over 15 %) "Additional Requirements (Please check the appropriate boxes identifying what was included on your plans, ' and attach checklist to your pre - application submittal.) PREAPRO.DOC 7/9/96 . ;- CITY OF TUKWILA Id: ACTP170 Keyword: QACTM User: 1672 06/05/97 Activity Maintenance - Associated Parcels FLOOD ZONE CONTROL Permit No: PW96 -0146 Tenant: NORTH WIND WEIR PARK RESTROOM Status: ISSUED Address: 11013 WEST MARGINAL PL S Line Parcel 1 284380 -0005 2 284380 -0010 3 284380 -0015 4 284380 -0020 5 284380 -0030 6 284380 -0035 7 284380 -0040 8 284380 -0045 9 284380 -0046 Location 11013 WEST MARGINAL WY S 11029 27 AV S 11013 27 AV S 11019 27 AV S 0 11004 27 AV S 11008 27 AV S 0 10 284380 -0055 11024 27 AV S 11 284380 -0060 11028 27 AV S 12 284380 -0065 11036 27 AV S Enter Option: A= Attach Parcel C= Change Note /Date D= Detach Parcel I= Inspect Parcel P= Parcel General Information F2 =Next 12, F3 =First 12, ESC =Maint Menu, F8= Keyword H ry 00 w= LL, w o` LL u d F=- Z F- 0,. Z F-; U ui ❑ Ili al LL0 Z LlJ OF BOAS, Inc. Broadway Station P.O. Box 20275 Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 323 -1343 February 24, 1997 Ms. Connie Reckord MacLeod Reckord Landscape Architects 611 Summit Ave. E. Seattle, WA 98102 Re: North Wind Weir Park Restroom Cultural Resource Investigations Dear Connie, RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JAN 0 8 1999 PERMIT CENTER On February 19, 1997, the undersigned Principal Investigator and George Bishop, senior field archaeologist of BOAS, Inc. conducted archaeological field investigations at North Wind Weir Park. The following constitutes a letter report regarding our pedestrian site survey of the Park, placement of shovel /auger probes in the proposed Restroom construction area, and development of a Treatment Matrix for cultural resources should such be discovered within Park boundaries. Survey The entire area of the Park (100 %) was inspected. It is apparent that at least five home sites were once located on the Duwamish River side of 27th Avenue S. None of these home sites were eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. All structures but one have been removed in the recent past. The driveways of the house sites, house depressions, a retaining wall, fencing, and plantings are still readily visible. The remaining structure is a small shed or cabin of indeterminate function, also determined not eligible to the Register. The former home site area contained numerous mole burrows and associated tailings. The soils in the tailings ranged from humic, to sandy, to mixed sand and humus. The tailings were inspected for signs of prehistoric cultural materials but none were observed. Historic materials predating the home sites were not apparent. The Duwamish riverbank was inspected at the base of the shed, at the northeastern corner of the Park.. There was no clearly visible stratigraphy in the eroding bank at this location. The,area to the west of 27th Avenue S has the appearance of having been graded. This apparently was also an area of home sites, removed at an earlier time. The northern portion of this area, to the north of the restroom site, is covered with sparseiy vegetated gravels. The area to the south of the restroom site is overgrown with denser weeds and grasses. There were fewer soil exposures in this portion of the Park and no surface evidence of cultural deposits. ® p.,d.■ P•a. ShoveVAuger Probes In the Restroom Area The plan of investigations was to place shovel probes, 30 -40 cm in diameter, and to a depth ® 100 cm, within the footprint of the restroom and along pipeline trenches to be associated with the facility. The probes were to determine if any potentially culture bearing strata were present. A secondary task was to assess the depth of the water table at the location. The shovel probes were to be extended with a 4" ( @10cm) hand auger as needed to confirm the presence of sterile subsoils. Four shovel probes were to be placed within the restroom area, two each along the proposed water and sewer lines. The greatest auger depth was expected to be in the area of the new sewer lift station, since construction plans called for an excavation 10 feet (©300 cm) in depth. The contractor had marked the location of the restroom and the trenches. Probe locations are shown in Figure 1. Probe stratigraphy is shown in Figure 2. The first shovel (SP1) probe was placed at the site of the new sewer lift station, north of the restroom. After removal of a large quantity of rock, concrete fragments, and industrial waste (machined steel and lead items) to a depth of 55 cm., the probe became impenetrable to hand tools, due to ever larger fill material. The project PI determined that, in order to locate areas of undisturbed sediments, it was necessary to first determine if the project site had been heavily disturbed. Hence, auger probes were placed within the footprint of the restroom site, with the intent to expand these to shovel probe diameter if undisturbed sediments were discovered. Auger probes (AP2, AP3, SP /AP4, AP5), placed within a relatively confined area (within 2 -3 meters of each other) indicated that the restroom site had been disturbed /filled at some time in the past. All soils appeared mottled and mixed with gravels or clays. An apparent water pipe was encountered in AP4. The auger probe was expanded to shovel probe size to the depth of 42cm, to remove fill around the pipe. Augering at AP4 continued through additional disturbed sediments to a depth of 135cm. SP5 contained a thick layer of charcoal, what appeared to be burned earth and possibly small fragments of brick (or burned clay). The water table varied considerably in this area. It was located between 60 cm and 120cm in depth. Additionally, the undisturbed subsoils under the disturbed /fill material in AP2, 3, and 4 appeared to include channels. Also, AP2 and 5 were terminated in dense blue -grey clay slack water deposits containing partially carbonized plant remains (organic). Augering at AP2 was terminated when a log was encountered; AP3 was terminated due to increased cobble size; AP4 was terminated in clays containing marsh type organic remains; and AP5 was terminated when the auger no longer brought up anything but water. SP6 was excavated to the 55cm depth of SP1. As in SP1, fill including concrete pieces was found to a depth of 55 cm. However, It was possible to auger probe under the fill materials in SP6 to banded sediments of blue -grey sands and clays, until marsh type organic remains were encountered in the clay. There were no intervening sediments between the fill material and the blue -grey sand and clay. Water table at this location was at 135cm. AP7 and 8 were placed along the water main the south and west of the restroom. This area also appears to have been disturbed. However, it also appears to contain more local sediments. A fragment of clay pipe was recovered from AP8 at a depth of greater than 60cm, however, it may have come from higher in the probe. AP7 terminated on a large rock at 95cm; the water table was not encountered in AP7. AP8 terminated in a dense organic mat; the water table was at 130cm. Conclusions The auger probe investigations indicated that all of the area of impact has been disturbed at some time ® M.O. ;NOW .: in the past and that the presence of undisturbed culture- bearing sediments is unlikely. Expanded shovel testing was deemed unnecessary. Additionally, it appears that some of the northwestern portion of the Park site was at one time channelled and has been filled. The southern portion of the Park, within the area of highest elevation, still may contain undisturbed sediments, although the area has been subjected to some grading. Potentially significant cultural resources were not found and are not expected to be discovered at the proposed Park restroom. However, because the southwestern quadrant of the Park has not been examined for subsurface remains, cultural resource potential in that quadrant still exists. Cultural Resources Treatment Matrix The Cultural Resources Treatment Matrix has been attached as a separate document. This report contains professional conclusions and recommendations concerning the potential for project - related effects on cultural resources. It should not be considered to constitute clearance with regard to the treatment of cultural resources or permission to proceed with the project described. This report should be submitted to the appropriate federal, state, and local review agencies and appropriate Indian tribes for their comments prior to the commencement of any activity that may adversely affect cultural resources. Astrida R. Blukis Onat, PhD Principal Investigator z �z UO c . • uJ WI 1.— U) LL- w 0 g a. cn =W zH' I- 0 z F.. O � O I -. WW'. I _• O l..z U= z `41%2011611 200' SE-MAO( FM* Tor' .,tI.-:.•, 70 LF. 1. 0---AP7 NEW E: PAR LLE STAkE Li ensoms wog' ...a, AMIN \SEWER LIFT STA SEE HEET C2 / %VT NEW 1 C SURFAZE /SP/AP6 WALK 1 • W.\ SP/AA V lel • - • Figure 1 North Wind Weir Restroom Location of Probes z 11- Z re LI-I 2 6 = _1 0 00 (0tD CO 111 WI -J u_ uj 0 5 ca I a w z ‚-0 Z Lu o o i- u, ELI Pz,0 r-: • ) p O I- 60cm AP #2 sod brown soil, gravel mix silt, sand 110cm AP #3 sod yellow brown soil, clay w /small gravel gravel, clay, silt mix larger gravel large cobbles COBBLES organics 128cm LOG SP /AP #4 f pipe 135cm. mottled clay, soil sandy soli w /gravel blue sand organics Auger Probes North Wind Weir Restroom 0 = water 25 NI Ell 1111 NM MI cm AR Blukls Onat SM Onat BOAS, Inc. 2/19/97 2/24/97 Seattle 120cm AP #5 sod yellow brown mottled sand, gravel burned earth charcoal mottled sandy soil. gravel sand, water Figure 2 55cm 95cm S P # 1 sod, gravel rock AP #7 sod brown soil. gravel mottled glacial till ROCK ROCK 155cm AP #8 dark brown soil mottled clay SP /AP #6 sod b gravel rock 1111 (Industrial) blue- gray clay blue- gray sandy clay 1-, Z re w 0o. t '.N pr W Z� ._ W o;. g 5 LL Q CO :D 2 C5 F- _; Z F- o` Z1 LIJ p' Wi 2V; L1.. �; • Z W U U)' o 1} 0 Z organics 1175cm organic mat In brown - blue clay :' CULTURAL RESOURCE TREATMENT MATRIX BOAS, Inc. Copyright 1997 This material is the property BOAS, Inc. This Treatment Matrix exists in this and several other forms, the latter specific to particular areas and/or projects. No portion of this or other versions of the Treatment Matrix may be used or disseminated without written permission of BOAS, Inc. • NORTH WIND WEIR PARK The project area called North Wind Weir Park has been archaeologically investigated through a surface pedestrian survey of the entire Park project, placement of a number of shovel probes in the area of a bridge crossing, and placement of auger probes in the area of restroom construction. A number of homes and outbuildings present at the Park site were removed after being deter- mined not historically significant and therefore not eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. Objects and plantings from these homesites are still apparent at the Park site. Prehistoric cultural resources were not recovered during any of these investigations. While it is the profes- sional opinion of the Principal Investigator that discovery of other significant cultural resources is unlikely in the areas investigated, it is always possible that areas containing cultural resources are present beyond the surface exposures visible and at greater depths than the subsurface probes. The Treatment Matrix would apply if cultural resources were discovered at any stage of project construction. Criteria For Evaluation The following criteria are used to identify archaeological remains of sufficient significance to warrant site monitoring or to halt construction. These criteria are based on the elements that would indicate possible eligibility of a site for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. If such remains are found, consultation will be initiated (see Project Communication and Consultation below) to determine eligibility and appropriate site treatment strategies, including possible data recovery. Clearing and Grubbing: Areas selected for sampling are bladed under the direction of an archaeologist, and the revealed surface is systematically surveyed. (Because significant cultural remains were not located at the North Wind Weir Park Restroom Site, monitoring is not necessary) Cultural remains found: Where clusters of four or more prehistoric artifacts are discovered upon vegetation removal, the location will be recorded as a site. Consultation with the federal, state, and local agencies with oversight authorities and appropriate Indian tribes will be initiated. It is recommended that the site be auger or shovel probed to discover the depth of the deposit, and systematically surface collected in the area of project impact. Artifacts should be collected using a four meter reference grid. If the site is exclusively within the plow zone, or zone of distur- 1 bance, further archaeological work will not be necessary. It is our opinion that for shallow, nonstratified sites, site recordation and collection and analysis of cultural materials should constitute adequate mitigation of project effects. Construction within the site area should be monitored. If the site has greater depth and appears to have stratigraphic integrity below the zone of disturbance, it is recommended that it be treated in the same manner as those sites exhibiting matrix with integrity indicated below. Construction: Construction operations will be monitored by qualified personnel. If it is learned through monitoring that there are stratigraphic indicators of site presence, construction techniques may need to be modified when these indicators are present. (Because significant cultural remains were not located at the North Wind Weir Park Restroom Site, monitoring is not necessary) No cultural remains found: If the stratigraphy shows an absence of significant cultural remains, it will be assumed that further examination of the construction at that locale would be without justification. (That is the case at the North Wind Weir Park Restroom Site) Cultural remains found: When cultural remains are found, they will be assessed according to the nature of the find and a number of specific criteria. When cultural remains are found, consulta- tion with the federal, state, and local agencies with oversight authorities and appropriate Indian tribes will be initiated. Construction will be halted temporarily and the site area will be tested to determine the nature of the site. Site treatment recommendations are as follows: Cultural remains present, but lack integrity: If cultural remains are discovered, but are disturbed, nonstratified, and lack integrity, they will be recorded as a site on forms acceptable to the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP). Testing will continue within the construction area to determine if undisturbed site materials are present. If no undisturbed deposits exist, construction will continue. It may be recommended that further archaeological work include recovery of artifacts from excavated materials set aside during construction. Non - structural archaeological remains present: Clusters of prehistoric artifacts, such as lithic, shell, bone, and wood objects; fire- cracked rock; charcoal; and shell strata, will be considered recordable sites. Historic materials also will be considered recordable sites if they appear to predate the houses removed from the project site. Construction will halt in the area of archaeological discovery and . The artifacts will be noted, recorded, and photographed, and samples of diagnostic objects and other materials will be collected. Stratigraphic associations of the cultural remains will be recorded and photographed where possible. If possible, samples will be collected for radiocarbon dating and for relevant paleoenvironmental analyses. Material collected should be sufficient to provide justification for a determination of eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places. Testing will continue within the construction area to determine site extent and depth. The collection of material through testing and its subsequent 2 analysis may be considered sufficient data recovery, or it may be determined that a more structured data recovery plan be developed and implemented. In the latter instance, an on -site determination of additional project impact will be made in consultation with the SHPO. Additional consultation with other federal, state, and local agencies with oversight authorities, and appropriate Indian tribes will take place. The preferred mitigation recommendation will be site preservation by avoidance. If this is not feasible, a data recovery mitigation plan will be developed in consultation with the parties noted above and will be implemented. Construction in the site vicinity will not proceed until data recovery is completed. Data recovery will include the use of standard archaeological techniques to excavate the remainder of that portion of the construction area until site material is no longer evident. Structural archaeological remains present: Prehistoric structural remains will be identified through the verification of at least one of the following kinds of archaeological features or strata (Note: these criteria developed for western Washington sites): Prehistoric: a. one or more large post molds or posts b. wooden planks in stratified deposits c. concentrations (10 or more) of smaller posts or post molds d. remains of mats and nets e. two or more finely packed, superimposed lenses of ash, fine gravel, charcoal, or crushed shell, or a mixture of these, each no more than 5 cm in thickness and at least 1 m in extent and with a level attitude f. one or more lenses of finely packed silt or clay (or silt or clay mixed with other materials) of variable thickness and at least 1 m in extent g. clusters of more than four hearths and scatter from hearths in association h. stratigraphy indicating a pit (not less than 3 m long), either straight or slanted walls and relatively level bottom with organically stained soil, gravel, crushed shell, or artifact -rich lower strata. The pit feature may be intrusive into or created by build up of surrounding strata. Historic: i. Foundation or flooring of packed earth, logs, brick, or wood. j. Wells, latrines, or other pits containing historic remains k. Clusters of large metal objects, piles of burned historic debris, or other indications of a historic dump Discovery of any of the above will constitute discovery of a prehistoric occupation site or a waterlogged deposit, or a 19th century historic deposit, with probable eligibility for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Upon discovery of such a site, an on -site determination of additional project impact will be made in consultation with the SHPO. Additional consultation with the federal, state, and local agencies with oversight authorities and appropriate Indian tribes will take place. The preferred mitigation recommendation will be site preservation by avoidance. If this is not feasible, a data recovery mitigation plan will be developed in consultation with the parties noted above and will be implemented. Construction in the site vicinity will not proceed 3 until data recovery is completed. Data recovery will include the use of standard archaeological techniques to excavate the remainder of that portion of the construction area until site material is no longer evident. Burial found: In the event a burial and/or grave location is discovered, all construction activity within a 1/8 mile radius of the site will cease. The appropriate Indian tribes will be notified immediately, as will the SHPO and all concerned agencies and individuals. If possible, the racial identity of the human remains will be determined. The identified burial location will be secured until a final decision has been reached to either preserve the burial in place and avoid additional impact or to remove the burial to a place determined during the consultation. Since it is possible that other burials may be located in the vicinity, determination of the extent of any burial areas will be done in consultation with the named groups and agencies. All parties will be involved in determining the treatment of the burial(s), but the wishes of the appropriate tribes will be given the burden of consideration in the event that the remains are Native American or if racial identity cannot be determined. All work will be done in a manner consistent with the Washington State Indian Graves and Records Act (Chapter 27.44, as amended) and with respect and consider- ation for the feelings and wishes of the appropriate tribes. Mitigation Options Mitigation strategies and options will depend on the nature of the materials found and the requirements of construction. Avoidance and preservation in place is the strategy of choice for sites with structural remains and for burials or grave sites. All work in the vicinity of a site to be preserved in place will be monitored to ensure that construction does not inadvertently impact the site beyond that leading to discovery. Data recovery may be recommended as an appropriate mitigative strategy for some sites. The development of a data recovery plan, stipulating specific strategies to be employed, is dependent on the nature of the site in question. Analyses and Treatment of Recovered Materials It is recommended that all recovered cultural materials be described in terms of form and plotted for location in space and time and that radiocarbon samples be submitted for dating. Additional literature search and informant interviews should be conducted to assess the effects of historic and recent activities on both prehistoric and historic sites. The appropriate tribes will be consulted regarding the identified cultural resources along the project route. Analyses and treatment of materials recovered will depend on the nature of the material. Categories of materials that may be present are lithic, bone, wood, shell, soil samples, radiocarbon samples, plant macro- and microfossils, and similar materials, as well as glass, ceramics, metal and other historic materials. Perishable materials will be maintained in a condition at least as stable as the environment of discovery. For example, if saturated materials are discovered, these 4 z 00 CO 0 W 111 �w w° H O 52' ww F-U U. ui z. U0 OF z will be kept wet until treatment and analysis can occur. All analyses will be accomplished by appropriately qualified individuals. Curation Cultural materials and data collected during testing or construction monitoring will be stored at a designated site, under BOAS, Inc. supervision, until such time as analyses have been accom- plished and ultimate disposition has been determined. Arrangements for permanent curation will be made in consultation with SHPO and the concerned tribes. If possible, materials will be curated in the local area. Materials will be appropriately accessioned and, with the exception of human remains and grave goods, may be made available for researchers for further study. Reporting Within eighteen months following completion of the project, including monitoring and any data recovery or other site treatment, a final report will be submitted. At a minimum, the report will contain a discussion of the strategies employed in testing, monitoring, and site treatment; the results of the testing program; the results of the monitoring program; the results of data recovery or other mitigative strategies; analytical strategies employed; sources and individuals consulted; and other relevant data. The report will conform, both in content and in style, to the guidelines promulgated by the OAHP and the Department of the Interior. Project Communication and Consultation BOAS, Inc. will be in constant communication with construction personnel. Contact arrangements will be made in advance to ensure that there will be no delay in implementing archaeological recommendations to step construction work in a given area. If more than one crew is working, field phones will be available for crews to keep in touch with both the Principal Investigator (PI), in the event that s /he must be elsewhere. The PI will communicate on a daily basis regarding the progress of the project and will keep the project proponent advised of project progress on a weekly basis, or more often if warranted. Copies of all project - related cultural resource studies will be made available to the appropriate Indian tribes. Tribes will be informed when construc- tion and monitoring work is to begin, both by letter and through personal contacts. In the event that cultural material is discovered, tribes will be notified of the discovery. Tribes will be apprised of the conduct of the project and final conclusions resulting therefrom. Specific consultations regarding occupation sites and burials were discussed above. Tribal representatives will be invited to inspect the project work at any time. E Consultation with SHPO and other agencies with jurisdiction will be initiated under the circum- stances noted above. Communication will be both by telephone and in writing, as needed. Proposed treatment plans for burials or sites will be submitted in writing. Telefaxed materials will be followed by mailed originals. No mitigative work will be done until concurrence on a treatment plan is reached between consulting parties. 5 BOAS, Inc. Broadway Station P.D. Box 20275 Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 323 -1343 z January 20, 1997 r4 00 co U Connie Reckord w MacLeod Reckord Landscape Architects 611 Summit Ave. E. co u-. Seattle, WA 98102 gaw'¢ Re: Green River Bike Trail, Phase II; BOAS Project No. 9501.3 = d w Z= F- 0. z�- w As we discussed by telephone earlier this week, BOAS has made the following v o recommendations regarding proposed actions at the site of North Wind Weir. O — o f-. w 1. Assume that North Wind Weir is eligible for inclusion in the National Register F=- v. IL O ..z w U =. 0 H. Dear Connie: of Historic Places. It is our professional opinion that the North Wirid Weir site meets the criteria for consideration as a traditional cultural property and most likely is eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places under that category. The site is documented in the ethnographic literature in at least seven versions derived from members of a number of Puget Sound tribes. In spite of the differences in the various versions, the story of North Wind's Weir is consistent in structure, events, and cultural context and significance in all instances. Although Westerners might consider the story as an attempt only to explain a natural feature of the landscape, in fact it serves to illustrate and explain relationships among the peoples of the region and the natural cycles of the environment in which they lived. Such stories are more than entertainment; they are teaching devices and historical - cultural explanations in much the same sense that the Old Testament is to many Westerners. If the tribes concur, the interpretive materials should include not only a retelling of the legend, but a discussion of the importance of the story in the culture of the region. The question of the property's eligibility is particularly important with regard to the legal requirements pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The Act applies because of the requirement for federal permits to construct the project; although compliance with the Act is the responsibility of the federal agency with jurisdiction —in this case, the Corps of Engineers (COE)— compliance efforts generally are made conditions of the required permits. By assuming that the property is eligible, the process of nomination can be avoided, although the information necessary to obtain a formal Determination of Eligibility would still need to be presented in the mitigation plan. ". ?,. z 2. Develop interpretive materials for the North Wind Weir site that include presentation of the story of the place and discussions of the role that story played in the traditional culture of the region and the role it currently has. Several versions of the story of North Wind have been documented; because the site is in the territory traditionally occupied by the Duwamish people, we recommend that the version of the legend originally collected from Duwamish informants be used as a basis for the interpretation. The Duwamish also indicated that the tribe would like there to be included a discussion of the people who originally occupied that territory, and we concur with that recommendation. We understand that interpretation also is planned for the area of the ethnographically recorded fishing station. This offers an opportunity to discuss the economic significance of fishing and the technology used in that pursuit. The interpretation at the fishing station could be used to reinforce the interpretation of North Wind's Weir and to tie the two properties together. 3. Actively include the affected tribes in developing interpretive materials for the North Wind Weir site. The Duwamish Tribal Council has explicitly requested to be involved in this portion of the project. I believe it is critical also to include Muckleshoot and Suquamish cultural representatives, as well. As you know, Muckleshoot representatives have not responded to our initial letter and follow -up calls, and, although I attended the meeting during which MacLeod Reckord provided information about the project to Muckleshoot fisheries representatives, they were non - Indian employees of the Muckleshoot Tribe. Consequently, I am uncomfortable with the assumption that Muckleshoot concerns and comments have been received. It will be important to involve Walter Pacheco, Muckleshoot cultural resources coordinator, in the final interpretive program design. Consultations with Suquamish representatives were held by telephone. Charlie Sigo declared an interest in participating in the development of display materials and asked that the tribe be kept informed. It should be noted that tribes commonly do not consider letters and telephone calls as adequate consultation. In fact, they rightfully note that being informed of intent is quite different from being consylted. Ideally, the tribes would be asked to prepare the interpretive materials themselves. Because three tribes are involved, this probably is not practical. However, the tribes definitely should be involved, and involved more actively than simply being asked to comment. The tribes should be allowed to have active input into the development of the interpretive materials at both sites, including signage text and art work, but particularly at North Wind Weir. In order to facilitate this input, we recommend that letters be sent to the tribes outlining the project schedule, the extent and nature of planned displays and materials, and the cultural elements that will be incorporated into the interpretive displays. The letters should request tribal comments and input into the further development of those materials and ask whether the tribe would prefer to comment by mail or phone or to participate in a group meeting for the purpose of refining the level of the interpretation. Because the tribes have - small staffs with large workloads, it is important to accommodate their preferences with regard to the nature and extent of their participation. This approach would also serve to ensure that Muckleshoot cultural resources personnel are involved in the project. The letters should be followed up with telephone calls. Even if no response is received, drafts of any materials prepared should be submitted for tribal review and comment. In fact, the letters might also ask the tribes at what stage in the development of display materials they would like to be involved in case they would prefer to comment on partially completed materials. The tribes should also be asked to review final design plans for the project. x w JU 4. Conduct appropriate archaeological studies, including subsurface testing prior v 0 to disturbance and archaeological monitoring of construction. u) ILI J I The site of North Wind Weir was not included in the cultural resources study undertaken cn u.. for the Phase I project area, as BOAS was contracted to survey only the proposed bridge w crossings within the Phase I corridor. However, following the demolition of the houses at the North Wind Weir site, BOAS conducted a preliminary site visit to assess the small structure revealed during building and brush removal. We did not conduct subsurface D. archaeological testing of the area, but no surface evidence of undisturbed archaeological F- materials was seen in the fairly extensive cleared areas. The riverbank exposures revealed ? F- that modern materials have been dumped over the bank, obscuring any evidence of z O prehistoric or protohistoric use. Just downstream, we noted an area adjacent to where the w w houses had been removed that is covered by a dense growth of berry vines. We were v a unable to ascertain whether this area has been substantially disturbed in the past. ,p Because of the significance of North Wind Weir and the potential for archaeological = v in manifestations of that significance, subsurface testing should be done in areas having the I 0. potential for largely undisturbed sediments. It should be noted that, although a great deal Z of land altering activity has occurred along that stretch of the river, significant v archaeological deposits have been found under worse circumstances; the Duwamish No. 1 P }—' Site not far downstream is an example of this. The fact that urbanization has cost us most z of the resource base in the greater Seattle area makes any surviving remnant all the more important. Testing, by its very nature, cannot ensure the identification of all buried cultural resources. Because of this fact and the site's great significance to the native peoples of Puget Sound peoples, monitoring of ground disturbance also is recommended. 5. Develop an archaeological monitoring design. In order to be effective, the monitoring must be done within a design that identifies possible findings, ranks these possibilities, and stipulates actions to be followed in the event that archaeological materials are exposed during construction under each of the anticipated scenarios. BOAS has a propriety monitoring plan that can be adapted to the situation at North Wind Weir. The monitoring design should receive prior approval by the COE, State Historic Preservation Officer, and the affected tribes. It is also important to include the tribes in the monitoring. Whether a single representative would be acceptable to all the tribes or whether tribal monitors from each tribe would be required is not an issue we can address. However, the significance of the site as a Traditional Cultural Property mandates direct tribal involvement. It is also important to remember that tribes cannot be #' a expected to bear the financial burden of activities they have not instigated. Consequently, the tribal monitors need to be paid, just as the professional archaeologist would be. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. By way of information, I have placed two more phone calls to Bob Peterson since we spoke last week. Both times I reached his voice -mail and left messages. He has not yet responded. Sheila Stump HSW Enterprises (206) 257 -0501 z w' JU; .0 0 • N0 ' W =, u Q: = d� W, z� Z 0 U0 .D ,'W W `H LL H U.] Z. • w 0 F' BOAS, Inc. Broadway Station P.O. Box 20275 Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 323 -1343 July 5, 1996 Connie Reckord MacLeod Reckord Landscape Architects 611 Summit Ave. E. Seattle, WA 98102 Re.CervED JUL 1 2 1996 MacLeod Reckord Re: Green River Bike Trail, Phase II; BOAS Project No. 9501.3 Dear Connie: The following constitutes our summary of activities and findings regarding that portion of our study concerned with the site of North Wind Weir. Summary of Study Activities In order to assess potential impacts to North Wind Weir, Rachel Stallings and I conducted a preliminary site visit. During that visit, we also inspected and photographed the small structure revealed during building and brush removal. Contrary to the verbal information we had received, the structure is not constructed of Togs, but is made of planed lumber, nailed with round nails, on a concrete slab foundation. The roof is of corrugated metal. The structure originally was painted white, with dark red trim around a door, corner trim, and windows, and blue trim around a wider front entrance and trellis entry cover. From a distance, the white paint remnants on the protected portions of the siding may have supported the illusion of chinked logs. The structure has five small windows, now boarded up, which probably originally all had six panes. There are no interior divisions. Walls are exceptionally thick (ca. 30 cm), at least on the side with the narrower door. Interior walls and ceiling are covered with plywood, probably added at some time after construction. No insulation was evident. An electrical outlet in the ceiling also may have been a later addition. The side of the structure with the wider of the two entries and the trellis -like entry cover also has a stapled wire framework on either side of the door to a height of about 3 ft to support climbing plants. The widest entry has been boarded up, but was not wide enough to have been a garage entrance. The origin and purpose of the structure is problematical. However, it appears to be fairly recent, probably dating from the 1940s or later. Only relatively recent debris was found in the vicinity of the structure. The care taken with the structure and the lack of interior divisions or other amenities suggests that it may have been a workshop or garden structure. On the basis of appearance and condition alone, it is our opinion that the structure is unlikely to have historic or architectural value. z I also conducted archival research and consulted with Dr. David Buerge regarding his H z researches about North Wind Weir, sources of information used to construct his writings, r and any additional unpublished information he may possess. Dr. Buerge was most -i v generous with his time and information; he also shared ideas about site interpretation. 0 o According to Dr. Buerge, the North Wind Weir legend occurs in seven versions, with the vui w principal characters having differing relationships to one another in the various versions. _I F_ Dr. Buerge has researched landform history as well in an attempt to understand why the N u_ various Native American legends are attached to specific places (admittedly a question only w O a non - Indian would ask); the results of these researches are tantalizing, and he suggests g 5 that the cultural history and natural history should be presented side by side, with no attempt to influence the public as to cause and effect. As long as no attempt is made to = a assert that the legend was the result of the natural environmental processes, the tribes t- i probably would not object to this approach. However, this issue should be explored ? 1- 1-0 further. a t- In an attempt to initiate contact with all three affected tribes, I sent letters to the tribes v 0 (see attached), followed up by phone calls to designated cultural resources personnel. The o � consultation with tribes was intended to determine the level of tribal consultation required w — to address the significance of North Wind Weir as a traditional cultural property. H v' u- O. The Duwamish invited me to present the issue before the tribal council at a regularly z scheduled meeting. I presented information about the project and BOAS' site visit, and o requested that the tribe provide comments about the weir site. Council members indicated p /- that the tribe wished to have the opportunity to provide input with regard to the project, Z and particularly with regard to the interpretive displays. I also accompanied MacLeod Reckord to a meeting with the Duwamish Tribal Council. The Muckleshoot representatives have not returned my calls or responded to my letter, so no individual consultation was held. However, I attended the meeting during which MacLeod Reckord provided information about the project to Muckleshoot representatives. Those representatives primarily were concerned with fisheries interests and were non - Indian employees of the Muckleshoot Tribe. Consequently, I am uncomfortable with the assumption that Muckleshoot concerns and comments have been received. It will be important to involve Walter Pacheco, Muckleshoot cultural resources coordinator, in the final interpretive program design. Consultations with Suquamish representatives were held by telephone. After several false starts and discussions with people having interests in the project other than cultural resources, I spoke with Charlie Sigo regarding the Suquamish Tribe's interests and concerns about North Wind Weir. Mr. Sigo's letter to King County (June 20, 1996) outlines the tribe's interests. Findings and Recommendations It is our professional opinion that the North Wind Weir site meets the criteria for consideration as a traditional cultural property and most likely is eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places under that category. The site is documented in the ethnographic literature in at least seven versions derived from members of a number of z Puget Sound tribes. In spite of the differences in the various versions, the story of North Wind's Weir is consistent in structure, events, and cultural context and significance in all 1_- w instances. Although Westerners might consider the story only to explain a natural feature 6 of the landscape, in fact it serves to illustrate and explain relationships among peoples of v O the region and among the natural cycles of the environment in which they lived. Such , (0 o stories are more than entertainment; they are teaching devices and historical - cultural co 1,11 LLI explanations in much the same sense that the Old Testament is to many Westerners. If 1- the tribes concur, the interpretive materials should include not only a retelling of the w o 1 legend, but a discussion of the importance of the story in the culture of the region. 2 J Neither the Duwamish nor the Suquamish indicated any objection to interpretation of the c story of North Wind Weir and, in fact, indicated that interpretation is desirable; = a Muckleshoot did not comment with regard to that issue. Duwamish also indicated that the z i tribe would like there to be included a discussion of the people who originally occupied that F- O territory, and we concur with that recommendation. Several versions of the story of North w Wind have been documented; because the site is in the territory traditionally occupied by 2 n. the Duwamish people, we recommend that the version of the legend originally collected v from Duwamish informants be used as a basis for the interpretation. o , W We understand that interpretation also is planned for the area of the ethnographically H recorded fishing station. This offers an opportunity to discuss the economic significance of �'_- 0 fishing and the technology used in that pursuit. The interpretation at the fishing station w z could be used to reinforce the interpretation of.North Wind's Weir and to tie the two v F- properties together. p 1 z Both the Duwamish and Suquamish Tribes have declared an interest in participating in the development of display materials. Ideally, the tribes would be asked to prepare the materials themselves. Because three tribes are involved, this probably is not practical. However, the tribes definitely should be involved, and involved more actively than simply being asked to comment. The tribes should be allowed to have active input into the development of the interpretive materials at both sites, including signage text and art work, but particularly at North Wind Weir. In order to facilitate this input, we recommend that letters be sent to the tribes outlining the project schedule, the extent and nature of planned displays and materials, and the cultural elements that will be incorporated into the interpretive displays. The letters should request tribal comments and input into the further development of those materials and ask whether the tribe would prefer to comment by mail or phone or to participate in a group meeting for the purpose of refining the level of the interpretation. Because the tribes have small staffs with large workloads, it is important to accommodate their preferences with regard to the nature and extent of their participation. This approach would also serve to ensure that Muckleshoot cultural resources personnel : • are involved in the project. The letters should be followed up with telephone calls. Even if no response is received, drafts of any materials prepared should be submitted for tribal review and comment. In fact, the letters might also ask the tribes at what stage in the development of display materials they would like to be involved in case they would prefer to comment on partially completed materials. Sincerely, Sheila Stump HSW Enterprises (206) 782 -8164 enc z �Z re w. -J C.) W WI J wO u.Q �a _. z1 �o z 1.1-1 LLI Mo 0 W W. O. z, :0 F' City of Tukwila Department of Public Works October 21, 1996 Mr. Michael Lozano, Project Manager Facilities Management Division King County Administrative Bldg, Rm 320 Seattle, WA 98104 John W Rants, Mayor Ross A. Earnst, P. E., Director RE: Vacation of W. Marginal Place S. Dear Mr. Lozano: The public hearing for vacation of W. Marginai Place S. within Gordon's Addition No. 2 was held on May 28, 1996. Numerous issues and conditions have been identified which must be resolved adequately prior to City Council passage of the vacation ordinance. These issues are listed as follows: 1. Seattle water line facilities within the existing right -of -way require relocation or an easement granted by King County to Seattle. 2. Seattle City Light facilities ' .rithin the existing right -of -way require relocation or an easement granted by King County to Seattle City Light. 3. The North Wind Weir Park project will require: a) compliance with SEPA b) a shoreline permit from the City of Tukwila c) City of Tukwila Planning Commission approval will be required for the number parking spaces (TMC 18.56.050) d) compliance with the City of Tukwila Tree Regulations (TMC 18.54) e) design and construction of a cul de sac for turn around of emergency, city maintenance, and other vehicles. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: (206) 433 -0179 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Washington Natural Gas A Washington Energy Company July 31, 1996 City of Tukwila 6200 - Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Wa. 98188 Attn: Tukwila City Clerk RECEDED AUG - 5 1996 cm( OF MP., cm( C PK Re: Vacation of portion of 27 Ave. So. from So. 100 St. to 350' Ss. of So. 100 St. Dear City Clerk: Thank you for the opportunity to review the above project. We have no objection to the vacation petition. There are no gas facilities within the effected area. .Please send a copy of the vacate notice if passed. If you need further assistance, please contact at (206)4473292. Sincerely, 521-e. Joe Jaanga Municipal Construction Planner WNG VAC. NO. 020 -96 jh /JJ. Washington Natural Gas Company 805 156th Avenue North East, Bellevue, Washington 98007, (206) 447 -0700 z _ 1- z w, la- J 0: ,00: w p. cn J w I' wO J w< -a iz.w z� I--0. Z r. uj U� O -; ca w` O w z. — 1 0 Z , 11- Z 0 U) a • W W -J E.. w 0 g • < • ° w z o 21— WW 0 Y2 0 I— W w 1- 0 LI 0 CLI 0 0 1- z !. MEMORANDUM TO: Jane Cantu, City Clerk FR: Ron Cameron, City Engineer 9) DATE: May 23, 1996 SUBJECT: W Marginal Place S Street Vacation Public Works has two comments regarding the proposed street vacation: 1. a cul -de -sac is needed in conjunction with the proposed park to replace existing cul -de -sac and provide satisfactory turn around for emergency, city maintenance, and other vehicles. 2. valuation of the R/W to be- vacated is based on King„County Assessor z w` 6 JU 0 WH w • O < a information as follows: I- _ z� a. tax lot area valuation ($) unit value z o parcel # (sq. ft.) impvmts total ($ /sq. ft) g Lot 3, Gordons 284380 -0015 5,600 0 30,000 5.36 Add No. 2 0 r` ww Lot 11, Gordons 284380 -0055 7,300 0 57,000 7.81 —• O Average Unit Value $6.59 / sf N area of R/W to be vacated = 19,592 sf ~' z File: 3.40.49 value = 19,592 sf x $6.59/sf = $129,111 . INFORMATION MEMO To: Mayor Rants From: Public Works Director Date: May 22, 1996 Subject:W Marginal Place S. Street Vacation ISSUE : Hold a public hearing to consider the petition submitted by King County for vacation of a portion on W Marginal Place S from S 110 St extended to approximately 370 feet south. BACKGROUND: This vacation request involves approximately the southerly 370 feet of right -of -way for W Marginal Place S that lies between the Duwamish River and W Marginal Way. The existing right - of -way is 40 feet wide, open with a two lane paved street and dead ends in a cul-de-sac at the southerly end. The only access to this location is from S 102 Street and W Marginal Place located 1,800 feet to the north. King County owns the property abutting the right -of -way which was platted in Gordons Addition No. 2 and is zoned Manufacturing/Industrial Center- Heavy (MIC/H). The right -of -way is within 200 feet of the Duwamish River. King County proposes to develop the vacated right -of -way and abutting property as North Wind Weir Park which will be part of the Duwamish and Green River Trail system. The total area of the proposed vacation is approximately 19,592 square feet (0.45 acres). Total valuation of the vacation area reverting to petitioner in accordance with TMC 11.06.050 and 11.06.060 is $129,111 based on an average assessed land value of $6.59 per square foot is determined from KC Assessor's records for the petitioner's abutting property. pp required in accordance with TMC 11.06.060. King County requests a waiver of all fees and compensation for this vacation. A notice of petition was posted and distributed to various utilities and City departments for comment. Public Works response indicates the need for a cul -de -sac to provide a turn around for emergency, City maintenance, and other vehicles. Seattle Water Dept has a 20 inch water line, vault, hydrant, and water meters in the existing right -of -way but has not responded with any comments. Dept of Community Development responded with no objection to the vacation; however, the park project must comply with SEPA and the City's Tree Regulations, will require a shoreline permit, and will require Planning Commission approval of the number of parking spaces. ALTERNATIVES: Hold the public hearing and refer matter to Committee of the Whole for recommendation. RECOMMENDATION: Hold the public hearing and refer matter to Committee of the Whole for recommendation. attachment: VICINITY MAP z IIIm JU U O> co ❑. w =. J � wO gQ = C! z� zI UJ U• � OD. w w • U`. Z Lb U Z� O ~i z The City will not require the petition application fee or compensation for the vacated right -of -way. Thus, the enclosed King County Warrant No. 0652899 is returned for your final disposition. Copies of the City's Shoreline Permit, TMC 18.56 and TMC 18.54 are enclosed for your reference and use. Please advise Brian Shelton of your schedule for meeting the requirements outlined above and contact Mr. Shelton at 433 -0179 if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, oss Earnst, P.E. Enclosures cc: City Clerk file: 3.40.49 z re 6 2 JO oOi w, W =. w 0. gQ = a. �-- _. z� �- o; zI- : LL! ul U 0' 'o w W:. I--. F. O ui z' o z 1=` u1 —/ C.) U O' W= y LL WO} LL < S Ci I— I-0 ZF i— 0 Z U co WW Us LL! Z! co O z Seattle City Light Gary Zarker, Superintendent Norman B. Rice, Mayor May 21, 1996 City Clerk City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Vacation Petition - West Marginal Place So. (P.M. #230404 -4) City Light has electrical distribution facilities within that portion of West Marginal Place South proposed for vacation and must secure an easement over it prior to the granting of this street vacation. Alternatively the petitioner may arrange with the City to relocate or remove the electrical distribution facilities off the vacated area. If you have any questions, please contact me at 684 -3327. Yours, truly, ep14en E. Hagen'; SR /WA Manager, Real Estate Services • An Equal Employment Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer City of Seattle — City Light Department, 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3100, Seattle, Washington 98104 -5031 Telephone: (206) 625 -3000 TDD: (206) 684 -3225 FAX: (206) 625 -3709 Accommodations for people with disabilities provided on request Printed on recycled paper : z ~W re 2 D. JU 00 U0. W LL: j N u_ Q U� I a. H w z zo w U 0. CO. 0 F- w_ H U: .z. w U =, z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM To: Jane Cantu, City Clerk From: Steve Lancaster, Director of Community Developmen Subject: Vacation petition for West Marginal Way S. Date: May 17, 1996 We have no objection to the vacation of 370' of West Marginal Way South in the location noted on the Notice of Petition. The applicant, King County Department of Parks, should note the following as they develop their plans for North Wind Weir Park (please note that this list is not inclusive). 1) Compliance with SEPA will be required. 2) A shoreline permit will be required. 3) Special Permission from the Planning Commission will be required for the number of parking spaces (TMC 18.56.050). The project is subject to the City's Tree Regulations (TMC 18.54). cc Brian Shelton 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 4313670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 z tr 2 w Uo to a mix! H W O. g Q, �W r Z Ul Z � Z E---- -- w U= Z Notice of Petition for Vacation of Street REVIT'; REQU.., D OF: ❑ Mayor's Office ❑ Planning Dept. ❑ Public Works Dept. ❑ Parks /Recreation Dept. ❑ Fire Department ❑ Police Department ❑ Puget Power ❑ Seattle City Light «WA Natural Gas ❑ U.S. West ❑ Water District ❑ Sewer District ❑ Metro ❑ TCI Street name or number West Marginal Way So. Description of property to be vacated Portion of street from So. 110th St. to approximately 370 ft. south Kroll Map Page # 304E Qtr: Sec: Twn: Rge: Name of Petitioner: King County Please respond by: May 10, 1996 Public Hearing date: Tuesday, May 28, 1996 - 7:OOpm RESPONSE Your comments may be limited to the following, if applicable: (21/We have no objection to the vacation. D We have utilities in the right -of -way. D We require easement prior to vacation. Signature 09`e-fru'ett' Tttie: I`��►- ltc_tpA1� d"xts'ie_ut.tlo(i RAJlrf- t- GOV S 10111151 S 117111 SI S 1■]13151 I •t IA N r. e110lp. DUHMAAvi 11 King County Facilities Management Division Department of Construction and Facilities Management King County Administrative Building Room 320 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 296-0648 (206) 296-0100 TDD (206) 296 -0186 FAX Ms. Jane Cantu, City Clerk City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Petition of Vacation of Street/W. Marginal P1. South Dear Ms. Cantu: February 26, 1996 IL Please find enclosed a Street Vacation request fee check in the amount of $120.00. This check is for the vacation request of W. Marginal Place South dated December 12, 1995. I was contacted by Mr. Brian Sheldon with the City of Tukwila Public Works Department and given an outline of the vacation request procedures including the appraisal requirement if the value of the property is estimated over $10,000.00. With the County purchase of the adjoining properties the road no longer serves a residential area and therefore no longer required. The County proposes to develop the road and the adjoining properties into a park. This area is an ideal park site because it borders the Duwamish River and it will also serve as a trail head for the recently completed Green River Trail -Phase I project. The County requests that the City consider the granting of a waiver for the compensation of the street ROW vacation. As stated above, the street no longer serves a purpose and more importantly, the vacation of the street is requested for the development of a park. It is also requested that the City waive the appraisal requirement. The City's consideration of the waiver request is appreciated. If you have additional questions please contact me at 296 -4240. incerely, Mi► -1 Lozano Probe t Manager ML:ld Enclosure cc: Brian Sheldon, Tukwila Public Works Craig Larsen, Director, Department of Parks and Cultural Resources ATTN: Jay Brown, Deputy Director Jim Greenfield, Administrator, Office of Open Space Bud Parker, Supervisor, Parks CIP Section, Division of Capital Planning and Development z ix W 6_ ...t U O 00 W = 1- wO 2 u. I � W Z= ▪ O Z f— w U � O D U 1-I W W' 11- O ui z = O I— z t IOV -14 —' 95 TUE 12:42 I II„K I NG CTY FAC I L MGT 1 ' i95 ' 11: 58AM TL `..A DCD % .,2f-1 I c&, MEMO TO: Jane Cantu, City Clerk FROM: Brian Shelton, Sr Engr DATE: January 16, 1996 SUBJECT: W. Marginal Place S. Street Vacation Petition King County submitted the attached petition without the $120 fee. Mike Lazano, King County, advised me today that he will have a $120 check prepared and submitted to the City with a letter requesting waiver of the $120 fee, appraisal, and compensation due in accordance with the TMC. I told him the City will await receipt of those items before processing the petition to set a public hearing. We will probably receive these items by next week or earlier. Attachments (letter & petition) cc: Ron Cameron cf: 3.40.49 (w /attachs) W aLC.n s.c- -rt W*1-i-Z-L5 Az .c..e sZ�� � /c. C s 0 _ z �z, J 0' 00 co o: cn w w= F-: U) w wO 2 ga id �w z� I-0. Z E— '011. 0 wW U -_i 0 z THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. SECTION � A NORTH WINDS WEIR PARK b.0 - 1.5 0 fie.. 111;111tfis 100 S.o RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA IN �.. APR 0 2 1999 PERMIT CENTER Q a z NEW PLANTING AT TOP OF BANK EXISTING TOP OF BANK EL. I S a EXISTING GRADE NO IMPROVEMENTS —5, 0 to V too L0 3. 4.2 RIVERBANK TOE 10 So (o0 10 Seattle, Washington NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 90 THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. ae0 SECTION - B NORTH WINV'SW.EI,R PARK 7 m 5 03 o . -- S.o- a. O NEW PLANTING AT TOP OF BANK EXISTING TOP OF BANK EL. I S $ t EXISTING GRADE NO IMPROVEMENTS 5.0 i L0 r S0 Ovsjr e.8 EXISTING TIRE WALL NO CHANGE THIS PHASE MHw 4.2. RIVERBANK TOE 60 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 90 Seattle, Washington THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. SECTION; NORTH WIND'S .'WEIR : PARK Iw a 2 5 as 0 m a m o- r NEW PLANTING AT TOP OF BANK EXISTING TOP OF BANK EL. (6, S ± EXISTING GRADE NO IMPROVEMENTS L.0 L 0 0 _!vv ..T. M -v. 6a NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 0 V D J 0 z • F" X u • Seattle, Washington THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. xs0 !Sp 0 :0.- 0.0 SECTION NORTH WINDS WEIR PARK tit oatecnizo!99 Date 9e■19 5 " S. O 1 NEW PLANTING AT TOP OF BANK EXISTING TOP OF BANK EL. 16.6 ± EXISTING GRADE NO IMPROVEMENTS 1..0 Q lG RIVERBANK TOE / I M a- yY 8.B N.4 4.2. NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. • Seattle, Washington >- l9 0 J 0 us 0 z I I— gg DZ 3 gi 41 I ® u 90 THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. S - E NORTH WIND'S WEIR PARK PROPOSED WOOD RAIL FENCE AND VIEWPOINT # 3 • • NEW PLANTING AT TOP OF BANK EXISTING TOP OF BANK EL. 15,5 . i EXISTING GRADE NO IMPROVEMENTS RIVERBANK TOE 0 La IOO -yr 8 MHw 4 8 2 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 0 7 6 oa 4� a wi Seattle, Washington THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH- POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. 2e,0 15.0 SECTION - F NORTH WIND'S WEIR PARK I. 14 li�R = T DA L GRPODE Apo AM MP" 11110 PROPOSED WOOD RAIL FENCE AND VIEWPOINT # 2 i 5 TUAf-Y PROPOSED GRADE AND NEW PLANTING so_- -- - - -_ __— -__.1 • vMHJ4.2 00-9R- NOTICE: R- e Q NEW PLANTING AT TOP OF BANK EXISTING TOP OF BANK EL. 1 15 ± EXISTING GRADE NO IMPROVEMENTS NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. /f /=11 1:--1 ll THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. 2 b. 0 S'EC.TEOhf � G • NORTH :WIND'S INEIIR PARK 7 5 at co 4 — 5, 0 to r GRADq 75-ifta 'CS MOuT 1-1 tiJ TE'R TI • EXISTING TOP OF BANK EL. I e.D ± GRAD OF DA E5To42y -, t-i 4.2 q %OD yr 8.8 Lo r 4.0 5.0 4" LAYER SAND AND GRAVEL OVER 12" LAYER QUARRY SPALLS 0 RIVERBANK TOE Seattle, Washington 9.0' NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 90 THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. u 1 O,,- 5 :0 SECTION - M. NORTH WIND'S WEIR BARK -s 7 5 0 A' o.0w —S NEW PLANTING AT TOP OF BANK EXISTING TOP OF BANK EL. 1 1.5 ± if I1) I O O- 9 'r Q MHw 42 EXISTING GRADE NO IMPROVEMENTS • RIVERBANK TOE 1.0 40 So 80 90 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. Seattle, Washington THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. ll l 5 :0 SECTION - I NORTH WIND'S WEIR BARK 7 6 Q' a trA ExI 5T G fZAt E �ooVY 8.6 m MV‘ +N 4 2 —5,0 a is 1 PROPOSED GRADE AND NEW PLANTING a L0 to NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. Seattle, Washington THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. SECTION -- J NORTH WIND'S WE1R PARK q 9 O a 7 z ku 2-SO O. 0 1 PROPOSED BIOFILTRATION SWALE sT.. SRADE • I oo -`- 8.8 PROPOSED GRADE AND NEW PLANTING rn: V M HEN �4`2 1 Seattle, Washington Z0 40 So .60 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 9 THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. IL 2b0 isp S.0 SECTION NORTH WIND'S WEIR PARK i 1 PROPOSED WOODRAIL FENCE /11_II1_111 (3.0.. PROPOSED GRADE AND NEW PLANTING EXIST;. GRADE • Lo 40 So (00— yr 0 n M H w q.Z, V NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 90 Qa 9 7 as 0 a Seattle, Washington THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH- • POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. .1 2s0 sa S.o SECTION - L NORTH WIND'S WEIR PARK 9 a A a 5 PROPOSED WOOD RAIL FENCE AND VIEWPOINT # 1 PROPOSED GRADE AND NEW PLANTING • (rI L (//:..-111 a.0 (1/ MOD AM OND EXIST G RADE • ..a ass sorm: ■ ∎ ems a® ammo mom ass am ••110 a." — 9.1 t 0 So 0 - IMMO NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. Seattle, Washington THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. 2ts 0 1510 SECTION _. -- N1 NORTH WIND'S WE! :R BARK 1 a 7 3 6 • PROPOSED WOODRAIL FENCE v S.o 0.0 —•510 00011 00111 E X 1ST GRAVE, ease. .0111.rsi PROPOSED GRADE AND NEW PLANTING �7 t oo_yr 8.8 Lo so So bo t �O 0 80 Seattle, Washington l7 0 -J 0 z i X" ■ ® u NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 90 THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. e 0 1 o: -. So CI.0 secrtaN NORTH W1NV'SWEIR PARK PROPOSED WOODRAIL FENCE -'5,O i 1 E oar osZ X)S.i..•GRA a alin• r.110 a aAIMi PROPOSED GRADE AND NEW PLANTING Q 10 -'1r 8.8 Lo 3e at 4 co Seattle, Washington 1 6o NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 90 THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. 2b. 1S.D 'SECTION . NORTH W1NUr5 1NE; R PARK ,�-- -- PROPOSED WOODRAIL FENCE I0:0 - -- 5 :0 (1.0.. EXIST. sy TE t1 Datepj /Zo /99 GRADE. • r/ S, D i 1b i . PROPOSED GRADE AND NEW PLANTING 7loo.yv 6,8 i MHW 4•Z V Seattle, Washington 1 2.0 0 SO 60 0 90 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER, THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH - POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. SECTION -- p NORTH WIND'S WEIR PARK �..: . 1.. FENCE PROPOSED WOODRAIL FEN LIVE STAKE PLANTING - (WILLOW CUTTINGS) ON 2:1 SLOPE tc 1,0 f NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. l J 7151 AVE 5 7710 AVE S 73A0 AVE 5 74111 AVE 5 • 1111 ,41111111 .J ■11, 111111 70tH A4 5 aft H MOM MIRO 11110P11 HH 111 • • Ft& • Nt- ,.. ..... ip 41 - I = ■ raid! :" SAN -Il11! Fl —/ IWnuu111M - 'i1A X II _IIIIIIIT 11 'I _11111111 _IWIIImIIIIII IIII 111111ial 11 I1111111111111111 IIIllhIIfIIIII IIIlIIIJIIlOIIJII11i IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIi IIIIUW; U' • TH AV[ 70111 AVE 5 J Z N • • • • • •• HIS IOW 1„ FOAP4 37111 AA I II X710 AVE 5 yInt MIAMI %1M AVE II 4 ni nN NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. N . RP RAP OWITALL LE..6.41 ir atP 39 If S-0005 Car, CD, 4, ill, - sEntiNG pav /1 fili El uR.T kAr TEMPORARY 1 1411.:4,:a1 I„yr CB /5 Rer77.116. M I LE-5.51 j I I I --1- y ti.sltiAR - jxf 11 , •,> ssZs'• 52 22f —25 1C0,0 rums .016 MOM 1501131120 000 • 0 /0.0 LEGEND P0CPOSID 0.10. 11111/11117 awes 6Z9M111325 033137 04±3 fl1 500 Al CRAWL IBM= 1.01.101 0351.1 ELM 41.1. LOCATIONS 13030.14006(0. all) ORO. 156000 U07 CLIENT AGENCY` PIO COUNTY NATURAL DEPARneEscrxm cu_TURAL AND 11040130415.00 522 AO.* srussr. ssos catEEALLIDIE51 I. 1115 PROJECT IS 00JT Cf THE NAVIGATION MIT OF DIE OMEN RIVER. 2. PROJECT IS LOCATED ISCO YARDS UPSTREAM OF TUE MIT AVE. BRIDGE REACH AND 200 WADS UPSIREAli CF SIP 6. 3. MERE IS NO COMM OR PROPOSED LEWE ON 1105 READS ICC DIE AMR. RIERITGRE NO LANDWARD rATCH-PCINT CF UWE IS 1340011. 4. REFER TO GOVEiDOSENTAL *12.75(1 KRIAns FOR 20 0 52 FURTHER INTEMMATICNAL DRAMINCS/SKETCHES SMC 01 7110 PRO.ECT bpstsmucnon PER2411 RE004REMENTS.1 IS ■ KIM COUNTY FACLITIES LIANAGBENT DIYISION-PAFKS CP 320 king °sully AdsnIntsINAlon 601134.g 5e0100 102213404103 98104 Telephone (206) 296,0642 Fox (206) 296-0166 knitAnktilEin MacLeod Reckord tesdauei streets 13110. 11.32 20.1/ MX MO 11110. INIV WHO MX =Ter .1.7. MIX .7.3• Mil IMP 2000 1117 2:50 10. 1117.7. 1010 10lX WI X 1110. 1110 mai> %IV USX 311.0 .117 2.017 2010 1117. 232.2 1110 1910 1.7 9322 NCI 437.3: 212.0 MX =V ISO X =sr 112r MIX 20 217.1. 101 IX 120 4' 1310 ■721. 1MLV CECIL 1.4 ORES. MEMORIAL PARK NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. :101.1V1 AMISH WATERIAY - ice= - -_ • � _-- NM EXTENDS APPROX. 12' -7" -' - -_ _ -' • _- - °�-- �- INTO RIVER BMOC N.H.11. _r = %'�'�5� - - i • —� _.,__:_._,....7.:::;.%----.1---- _ / /� 1 -.....1 r -yam' k 1 TTT 1 �C' Sc 1 1 ssI.1 �1r'' ALL TREYS WITHIN THI5 9Dl\NDAR \ \ \ \ • � TO 8^E- 1DVE0 fTYPIt \ 1 • 1 i {OTHER -TREES OJTSID\tH15 j + ) ' ! .....*(1. BOUNQARY TO REMAIN•FLig C a / I\ 1 I N a/ 1 1 ... i \ t 0 Alik.PEDESTRIAN/ /BICYCLE BRIDGE TO SOUTH 112TH STREET VORX EXTENDS APPROX. 21' -8" INTO RIVER BEYOND Y.H.W. • •\y • \ / I yam; Uzi • / i �' 2 \ /ice' tie / o • \ DTE- \ , 'ITOPOGRAAPHYESHOWN If 1 \. .C1ANGED SINCE TH15 1y �'e - ,JRVEY. ND GRADING _,I • '`''''-4.35 REOUIRED IN THIS ^� -� \\j *REA UNDER THIS it 1�\ \\ .9i ..ONTRACT II/ • -'\ \ -Vt \ \ \\\ \\ IN t .47JCC 1 - :1 .. r / / / • , 1 / / / % / \ ✓ / ..... / / /1 / / _A / 1 r 1E51 a �Y soul" NOTES- t.THIS PROJECT IS OUT OF THE NAVIGATION LIMIT OF THE GREEN RIVER. 2. PROJECT 15 LOCATED 1500 YARDS UPSTREAM OF THE 14TH AVENUE BRIDGE REACH AND .200 YARDS UPSTREAM OF SLIP 6. 3.THERE 15 NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE NO THIS CATCH- POINTVOFNLEVEEEISS SHOWN. rzm 1 certify that, only those parts of this map, which represent the retracernent of the plat of 'Cordon's Addition No. 21. recorded under recording number 284380. in volume 36. page 42 of plots. records of King County. Washington. and the survey of the underlying topography as it existed on or prior to June 1997. de in conformance w06 genera:y accepted survey practices. under my supervision at the requnt f King County Deportment of of and Reereatio7 rt�rc � Certificate Number 18737 ICON WAD a -a 1 1 1 1 1 1 e a n n sv sv m Iw▪ o worn DEPARTMENT CULTURAL AND Al ,per 841 N�1 IMO COUNTY FACILITIES YANAGEL IT DIVISION -PARKS CP .3.2.: 0•er Arsl•Itrs YtllW Poo pomssooma • MacLeod • Reckord AlwrCfa �rN.w NORTH WIND'S WEIR PARK ■ • r.r ry r WINS CROP SURVEY IMF 1 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. LOCATE MINI 1P610G rR19 AT WT. or 4/441 Mr/ MD /CRUST A5, 1QYiuDc60 f91t 071114LY CONSIVUORON•1417414127 00NS:111DTON 5020124Ct GN SALMI- Li. NOTE ALL C%157914 APB RW4V•PD OF 12P OF 154.11 metro 4o% TIT ArEilvai ouvi w -cum, c \\ •. % \ \ \ \\ 1�� -�� . \ \ \� \i" `/ 11 :1!Il \/i�i T j6 • C 1' \ F.". -,,,,;,.,,._:„.... ..---...-_,--;----=---------:- t.--- -.2: \1—N. \4..-: -----,----11 a MIME �E SOUTH 112Th SWEET VAAA 1 \ \ \ \;��' 1' \\ \4 \ �7 L.aYW -.l i • / $j/ 7/ • / • • • .: - ��. \\ 19n5N42a FI561 RIVLP 119N.. • • • • • . "isfi N taGt4 4. w r - PXIOfIIS F&4-0B14 MVOs T191n. raj@ 1.716 PROECT 6 OUT OF' RE N*YI6A710N LMT OF THE GREEN RISER 2. PROECT 6 LOCATED 1500 YARDS UPSTREAM OF THE 14Th /WE. BROX REACH ARD 200 YARDS IPSTJSA1I OF SLP 6. 1' ERE 6 NO EP057NG OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON 11ES REACH OF 11E RYER, THEREFORE NO L.IUOVMPD CATCH-PONT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. 1. FLL MATERIAL SOURCE AS PROVO® BY CONTRACTOR AID APPROVED BY OWNER COMPOSR10N PER SPEC MLLE 1300 CY. ExMENT 2 ACRES 5. CUT WTOEAL• COMPO5R10H PER SOAR REPORT: MLLE 6000 CY: UTERI 1 ACRE: DEPOSAL SITE AS APPROVED BY OWNER A16 CRY OF TUIWLA 6, SEE SHEET -PFSMT SHEET 5- FOR STORM DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL DETAILS. 7. SEE SHEET PERK SHEET 6- FOR COIPLETE STORY DRAMAGE AND UTLAE• PLAN L WEST YAAONAL WAY SOWN A1D 27111 ONE SOUTH APE 1HE 01811 STREET STR6DUDN6 MS PROPERTY. 099ND I7044d,440TWNA15N0 Wise T 0P a 347 NONr 4/1148 le/41 CLIENT AGENCY: KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES Y NTONB VO ANNE MUTUAL Mb KING COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DNISION -PARKS CIP ION Carry Altmon BONG S. Ont Seat WWoglm I1101 Fd I„"' 2160IE MacLeod Reckord Lmbcp ArtN1cb OA MI IMMO 1°L 2=w 41.101PLU.1 sous,. SITE MAP W /SURROUtDNG 5raaErs SO. ID 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cr R 70' .D >0 NORTH WINDSliUEIR PARK SiTE PLAN PERMIT 4 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. NO TICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. NOTE: uROL,00. ELEVATION OFILTER FABRIC FENCE We. OTIMBER CHECK DAM W/ OUARRY SPALL MAT ,daa, 100000 GL104 DS. AM= Mann NO %MK 007nDO MO Oaf NSW Of MEM O.K. FILTER FABRIC PROTECTION 0031 0,10.15 03000 r Dar ...n CATCH BASIN INSERT GENERAL NOTES: I. An .m.WIIa 1073. M P. AI.AO M RM PIM .003101. sett Memo. OSA= Or Ay >arantt+. a 00:00 MO .LL >b..t Ma1 r 1 WORM 10.11300. Olerr.4 W. Man or C0C0 000:01. MAI mom ro .bP . 0, 00000 0.: Fong •r. MOW.. •LL OINTERIM CB PROTECTION 00.4111013E 11011.3 1. u0prea4. W S dYE05I43 1 no62.. ..06.0 O.n W SOOT)< .4401500 .7 14.64 .e.... 416.6kons.N1.m4M b. a Mb•Oram1W.L 1 vMOPr.6W.6b1Mb.v .nnV.b.r6r Hvs. 51 . 33.41. 4. Aaata3 e.....6..INq .ra 2 Sr4q.Wd4 vCdw.W.6 Md. ...W ba.teb6.6 . 444.2.11.144......14110..6 nWtb..mre 41.111.444/41040.0 Ms. Ralch .r.4r.w ar.raa M.vrvr4 VLRFALL ro SnEAr. 0000 MO POLLU 44701 two ...w. end soars . Sr.. M lobo.. ° 0.401.0 41.1 .avm...bb.gw.ROeb.d Ca7m001040%7n pen.. rr r4.33160010 M.v4.6 ' 2 r.p11014•2O% 31503131.0E SCHEDULE 705. 031.001314 SC433. 0A5IOTJ0H)-AU9)ESSEOMIG CUSS PIPE CRS. CONCRETE: •371.0.14 GASS. 6041.4.1414111.4.14121 AST& WS CLASS N FOR 17,00 131 AST&Gn Cl.33 m FoR IrAND LARGER DUCTILE RON Nag 421510J3350 CWDiUGATED 1416.1 DEHJPI POLYETHYLENE POE ICPEPI 5400.1340E • TIE M. CATEGORY .035. 0RA0E P33 OR P3.. CU 331 C PER AST& 0-1240. 470 SYLL MEET 0.03NTO 10254. 0.411 ALLGALVAMZEOSTEEI 9MLLIIAVE AP.ASREATWNTL ALLOW 9041 NAVE CIAS511 TYPE 1 000103110 • 44114474ZIED STEEL CIAO 9A4G&EET1HERECURE ENn3FAA5Ni01a3174 ELAINOAr CUP ■0LL10E7 THE PEWREWNTS OFMSMTD TL146 TYPE GatitEr.3 =BOA= 1731• 2213.33 r 222301)2 .T•Sr 221331)2 17•7 301 TSi6' 301 CAW ••• 31•ECIFICS KU17•0I 4WD MO STEEL 5403 AND OAUCE D,.!E-wNTN 00110S 4.50E1,1113111 16 12 10 57 tr 21' 16 le 14 12 12 17 IS NOTE TYPE OF 4STE1INS USED 94011 DE AS POICATEOON THECON31RUCDON DONIENTS 17090 56010RA)I0MCWI*0L00103 T. Amvalol.e aaw 30434 ' 0 .445C7aaar•amwua+664 .a3. Perna. wed v.+^.4.0.91 A 4..... bourn a art ppa.aetbn. 44.46044.0711.....116. c 4 • 736p1na6...aw ESCa. 4.10..*5d3. ......t.a 007,..1 a Mr ESCLaer. M r.mwt a M apvMmrrm L. ea 3 T. 1.4.16 SM .gl..bvo-n Ontpn WdtwySagged . 414 P.. anon.. Dune. oanoru.. 0.5043.6,4461 dew. .es W tem.. 5Ney0q W dm.....0M..r„rmPm a.e.m.aam.m.. • 1123 ESC4a.. t. w mMPnmadmn . o...anaM..w rW..gw. gvoq.av . earn .rrr+6ab.....r..ar .1mareurnmer MT474es TN ESC n Ts punv.ne nrrun ..nv..a oho ams Corn Mc0n.rm. rerol..r ESC boat. Wd e070.4200 wow. anps.ra.aol.avwa.430a010L.v Iniw.nbu.v..sHbm 6 10. ESC orlon W be .4•4.1 h P4 Wva'mvm000 mono..a as nem..y loom ...7 a....a.Arraa..q. ). A.M.....gwaa.w...n. 340440.e.n.n. 017024 ... .ronaM...r.• rmmeaba.em a136.n.Wd.m wl.udn..o • Dex ...ESC e A... • .1r..°mq n.4...ra00.*w.000004401 mn EWdm......e.. T. ESC... Slaa.. 9 10.10. .b...ae.WdwMVEnvva.W.n.rm.ndmu. M 40.CA.4...731. 00/17 a*. 10. Aim.. Wratn. r Caw tor awrrw.d.....ebmw.0.0101030 dw1 Noar..vrleeawH.oM W ddarpabl.+.S ida..a4.47rar • .. stn .....a.r..r..m a a ,04100,tn. 1. ems..." mw,.w....d. 646410. W d 0000.... ow. aw. .our a a MPa.p Aaeew m.a..Aer Co 12 6/10764roer =mum Wm2l.x0.. . ran M44M4.4.4414...10.12.....• q cow. e&re nuc, 30 13 Am Peran.... mwa 104a4v0r.. wor3H0g0m 0Wd.ta6o Mrgwy W RPee.,ay. • :47110.arwlrr.elneen an.1.0m d rrpvey Mmryx.a.. Noma aeuesm lab ores. W • 0. woe a...., seem ban 14 Wren ..rgbler30bvey.rrrr4pe.It.w...1.. own... 4r14/.W• 100400ravmw.41.4..ue01.re..eM00•0.000104NNlpa... PO WV) 15 Mum.. menb*noon, es wrec..6 230.4,0 ss..er.rr.n.vn 6.a.rm a... aMs FILTER FAD= PENCE 14131E3 704r&.r3Wdpre ... 6 amer..P2rrN.Mbq.OMl.mbb...e wavy*045 , ...m.ea.rmeWd.1e,.bHFS.v+rr,.rw 1 2. Td Nt1101 mom. fence rd 004... a Mos. coo. aa..ww4 Tlr. too 0130 0064..454( 3. Av. a. Wd.,o.ra..gNre.ao.w..e.a.....P. m.qa... Prlb.16MNrSot. oe a. ar•tat.w.a.. r.amlwvWd 4 00S 4 lbN1.. egurelnure0.136 more moo. roe co,. surto S e 0.Td1..43.1b eavneb .aA.n. ol 6 o. Tne e... 4.4 .. pound surt.e. esnq eves ro .borclenOfW r4.re M. ooN ppo.W. a 44.7e0w111yK,.en61 03 I 0 Pea9•••0410 . Hry.e).... m:.n W 0. nr.ee.mrdmry OBIOFILTRATION SWALE TYP. CROSS SECTION 0 FLOATABLE MATERIAL SEPARATOR - 12- PIPE 5. A,F5. L. C PLA11 RIP RAP OUTFACE wo 11 (SLCIIOII -C Dor KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES MN.II TONER , 1.:1.. KING COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION-PARKS CIP 320 K.; Carry AOn:ro4R19tla . WWRr4r1 43101 T.I.1I44 RO6j2900348 Fel MS12430106 YE e Pd rd L.'n.*T e A,r1Oar: NORTH WIND'WEIR PARK 4 wane [mom re STORM DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL DETAILS PERMIT 5 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. TAOS CIIENiAGENCY: KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES KING COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION -PARKS CIP NORTH UJINDSWEIR PARK GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN VICINITY MAP JANUARY 8, 1999 NORTH WIND'S WEIR PARK KING COUNTY WASHINGTON KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT. OF PARKS AND RECREATION 41GB SLOTH TOWER ' 5062/40 AVENUE SEATTLE WA 96164 KING COUNTY DIVISION OF CAPITAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT - PARKS CIP 120 AND COUNTY AD W11$TRATION BU6D80 SEATTLE WA 98106 PHONE: 00612960648 522,(206) 29•0161 MACLEOD RECKORD LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 231 SUWU0 AVENUE EAST SEATTLE WA98IO2 PHONE: C96) 3234519 FAA: 1206)324.9232 PACE, INC. ant. ENGINEERS/ SURVEY 130 URN STREET SOUTH. SUNS 200 IRi1AN0 WA MD 7866)8425)127-2011 T22 (475)121.50.3 SUMMIT TECHNOLOGY CONSULTING ENGINEERS 415 SECOND 4VE0UE. SUTF 450 SEATTLE. WA 08106 FMCf4 1216; 62202:2 FAA I.2460 62243154 URS CONSULTANTS, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING 1100 OLNE WAY. SUITE 200 BEATTIE WA 96101 PHONE: 0 6) 6211830 FAA (21:61113-5900 HONG WEST & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECEW ICAL ENGINEERS 79100 • 667H AVENUE WEST MINNOW WA60236 PNOIE:)625) 243-0106 TAIL µ2S12111506 BOAS, INC. CULTURAL RESOURCES BROADWAY STATION P.O. BOA 20275 SEATTLE WA 98102 PHONE: (20611211363 FAX 0061326.4365 LINDA M. FELTNER GRAPHIC DESIGN P 0. BOA 3251 SEATTLE WA MCA PHONE {20613615]38 LEGAL DESCRIPTION _ .6_6-- 5.3..*i,i,i. Vt.,' at +Ai.,r..sy„- r 5re,lr rN- t.fu r,wrir. stage u.r. W l.a .,.....s2trm✓rA.., M,Y N-wvKli l,'iwr,l■ea rlr.lr PfW ::r. i- I.Yniw. f.T 11 M.r..+.Ira.e ,G,b.N [,u1r rP+i M 6s s INYIA to,.1kora ,.r5,.w..e..r.d SHEET INDEX K1 LEGENDS & NOTES L1 DEMOLITION & TESC PLAN L2 LAYOUT PLAN L3 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN_ L4 IRRIGATION PLAN 15 PLANTING PLAN C1, C2 INTERTIDAL ESTUARY 01, D2, D3, D4 DETAILS NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. - RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JAN 0 8 1999 PERMIT CENTER GENERAL NOTES m.awm.w r a,.esaB...n Gs a n.a. sw.ra. i Theasms..a..,.,aw.w+....c..rr...s..as®moucdaT1rwv. ., ...ea.:.a.eN. aan..1•4.aaror.b.am,a.c...a>....,Oar* appa..▪ aana:e • 11 mwwa wma.. <a tla.m Va.. aP.a•aq AadL'.W a Tx PxSM W esu ..n Ma ra mmAna an ntuagn iPa..I d A•, avw 1 Y Mae. WS..Nar l a 4. BOd.art' munrm41Or{1W =I WO,d.mxlrOonms5V Mal alwa 5 e0,dhw.O CBlt W mdS.nnevFO.n.radeowd rswaanYnaoP.aa. 6. .,S5. .rmasv. e. s1e Cry a TJ..a Com_ . ..a.s.+n baba .eadysnwspa .Wdn nada,vaa.+... - e. Ranchsee.e.u[lar.W....ay..ann.....onsasaCaapWMY•.ra spaa0al,a.tri nwrtlr.paWreasa L.sd TJ.a. •a.a.,a 0.rbcaoY.pan e. O▪ tla.anaxG5 t.a.drw.n. da.n e Nm..., .a...wdaW.4a.c mn0.- em01055%ry• C:e1:9194S4leu9•13 c.eSAV n 1.Ai.mvw IawLor,amdeamae Gla The etd=. a",ni to rd. cnsati tte pa., a :3. n.em.od swam .aa.ardx.y.wnr0,910.ea.awra«a.. n• lra la. M, 0n w4ih°a Ci nod. ma ov arye<WLda.,..arr a lust OneaaW. Mr uYl. in. Ova.. q.aaa N`a MPIM Y5500T 50809 sao1rm. a{R:3-TM«.L1 Kda. ..d.rva RESTORATION NOTES SEED ALL DIST JRSED AREAS NOT DESIGNATED FOR OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 2 RESTORE ALL AREAS USED FOR STAGMGNID ACCESS TO PART SRE AS REOWRED FOR SEEDED AREAS SURVEY NOTES r VI.. an wa <es e.. rimwimw"Wr i+ i • mama 4444 KM* Tun "0.1 DECLARATION: LA ..WtortItt des PLANT LEGEND': SHRUBS E5ISTHO TREES TO REMAIN 0 ,.0<..W.. a...0 .snm - A. ld..gi. •• Idaer -Oclubtlart^ :• am Gla,w N.A. / YLLr Wad LOC. .1411111041 -- P..dmM• SAM I00 --Am* 0egaa fe raga •~.I. BamLOCST•.., V..v.' 5..ubMl Ce.•mL' Mh D..ca OvadepatiseendOrdada , .T...0 '71 K GROUNDCOVERS u e-la II •A' BAS 10 :dal eAe I i 1 Ixi1 1x ®_-- l N....wtee<a• I0. t ant<WUXI,N.bd. rand KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES IMP/111099.14 400.14184.19 1 Vr• m 1 ......f'I .m.t n.e 1{ B ►T'1 1 `J .x I 1x1 NaLMte %WM.0 I la 1,41-sa B•e..a. X I 1.1.1 I1 tl'I.'N BL•.aa.i0l I 1, 1 :, :. ,r. B•B.aoA ixi ixfI• y• x:.-. e•x.m,. 111 Invl, II R-u N call.-^.r 5 T; Ix! MIn'rc. eaa.a.. rI I IS; _ SI I.r 1.N e•B.s.. Ix 1 Ixl -40lu-Ir. •ae..Ej jxj l I i I I.1 11110 eaear.<e IX lxjzlxj KING COUNTY FACIL!T1ES MANAGEMENT DIVISION -PARKS CIP 3NKna CMVAnn.et'FsonHalm Sae*. ww•gm 201% Tawlac 1202129eo64e Fax RGa13 ANH I arr I INL I ......la ,v.i roil .e t }s - Nny IAr.rw w .. a.. a...m,llxj X z I 1 11.4.111••44 x IP.... x i •a, •-.•a. 1, ..ate W SS I.+ i ., X I ix mti I.T w 100.0......E I 1 ! i ( ITN: . .- 1q x l ;X I ( rI1 11IW. b.. ( N 1 15a 4.. W L.. SIJo I Sal 'Si.. 't ON 9¢ u 1 I..e vestal Corot as x 1 i •i Y' , L1Yiasr.ler110 jx zJ ADD ALTERNATE #1 INCREASE SPK•IG OF ABOVE GROUNOCOVEFAABCTOSTAPSYLOS UVAy151! RINLMM.X TO IS O.C. TRIANO. BPACIIG. I DAL. CONT.. TOTAL OUANOTI NM PLANTS _ NOTH; WIND' WEIR F.-` RK Csul Am 01144.14. NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. LEGENDS & NOTES 0944 • K1 SKREF1CANT TREE REYQYAL SCREDULE Dan. of NA Rat N,an0er D1 6.1.3 Time Tn. - R,4r1ag1M Rr1a a Ramrod AARnIn Tram R A ad 2. 1 2 SIT 7 2 6 12 -15' 3 - 12 16.2r 2 • 12 Rw24 5 5 M . TOTAL 72 Tr. N..=1a6au1m6 A..011. 72 tae 6 wan. 25. Wow br E.0.11 and 64' NR3R 5. Lri6raM. S. Plrtrq Nn Ave L S. • Rein ...Hamm tr6ra curry. Omani a. marrow. TW danla.. 0 nm0+El 'Pee TALL. '36156 NAIP.l COMO. 101C0020- 'WCS;YtVCPR44' MMDL *HA L A14M4. -'011!- .2200 HPIi/ILK ,tea- 'EYtwnwYc.a., ww+TN T P C G M M 21A o.rr3 p09.1 04•0440 •.A ✓ 1m4.•f>1rlii/ 6112.4E-0l3 C.0•N.2: LEGEN )CLNa1:,tl. AL ALL11Nlr - Md CMCLULO"' f4yyfil!i *.1 54 LP CPV- AArAC2V6UrLOVe D,ri(i4WiCU0 4W. wr4t[,1S.r4" (OE N..11E+£ewVy Fi454441. sb F.C,W °D. Cifratrar LA. 1 - gwref46uP/G!/NC'.221iwNi AelFOleGLJ NCNB LI Anaeli 040420 tOCA,a1 fbve Fia(y ua; te-C., ar / u9of ESAT16 OWES TO RERAN 510111FIGNT TREES TO BE REMOVED SHAM TREE51 LARGE SHRUBS TO BE REMOVED AC. PAVEARAT MO BASE COURSE TO 5E REMOVED 0HN ELEV.. MINE ELEY. u 1 a -A -A MU FA5R4C FENCE SEE :3461F.O0A. DEMOLITION NOTES REMOVE All EXISTING MATERIAL AS REQUIRED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. 1IEMER SPECIFICALLY NOTED OR NOT. 2. SEE SHEET DT FOR TEMPORFRYEAO5I ON AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES CUENT AGENCY: KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES 1...11 TONER .1.0.011.E ATT33E Aw N1,1 KING COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION -PARKS CIP 7201015Cmq AOIMAMlsm Bukiq SHWA W s iron 55101 (2051 2950501 Fs. N (206]21150155 Mad_ecd Peckord La'rzsa Q?othETX CAork.-A1- 04•1917. AAA Aor.,11•441 •••01/4ar41.GY15T SCAT T•9 ar j -:1 -620 I *OA N2xi14EN SAGED ON 1.0.0 29 M-3A1 NOTE RAW D61W • 000 ^ 60 01(19 29 CARAA 2 a 1a 30 •n 50. 00 NORTH WINDSWEIR PARK 0LM DEMOLITION & TESC PLAN L1 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 'h•R15.GM6 /e6,22:0 nKtNFw9 tiwc tAaw N6 1 11194TRPR0 FL'MlL 19.N.5 (IlK A Fl a6 Vet M//\ -- Ire•.. * MIMED RXK.52N9Genwl i• oadFe`c°:M Mi .0 Fwd Ard1,4 Y&Me@LF 1 :•p 10 CET CI Fat Q. KCIC A 11 12.FR #rsoer tl[,r ,4uATr7r • CURVE A • INTERTOAI ESTUARY •�` SEE SHEETS C1 Alo C] y '� • -3.16* .5 • le fY 7. 55 L• `IC te' r 71..1MY6/NAlSW/ !; ` aWiOeILFAn A0Ar1A, 691DG -nu,17 ` w /dRY�.L'1AML D \ :W/rDFOSr1A:F,Lrea tRIfCW ., F1CI /pK Gfk.' LS AIVN6/2C' .PONT 'i {i' ��/✓ • 'ti �,. A• �� •3� -. ��y: Ate• - ' e F O Nd r rAnvs Teo `\\ 1 L..�� - -. ��- :MPanorc.! 4. :Y .AR4.wtE �. wI Ewa �XL.2.41[i Wsw.2• •w4L b66.•45 T TIP- pa yt., rl• �f..PL. T I �( . AL(4eNF I V TIW1]N5Nr _ �I . X16CiAR2r.L170! e•I.e.wtFemPert! d,; .c -G r< wt.11m0C.ePVI A>M�pa.., t! ' / -'=1:-`,4_;‘ fi l ` - -'!'' ` ..`�� . l% _ l 1:1;.:11:4: y z - I ti..- pE;� i _mac"-J gr. exileePPC40441:, '�- 6�ry y+rr?nre r ••ru,- . -- wTYY{bra G,,. Fe. 2Z— �1- „OLf b /O =o.... P WewaT Ai -rLnt, lFA+•Y. MIC - 0J C0 itt p -_ F l:reagB --T-/ /��\ ..___._ _ -FA.m tor.....( MI -!/G.x wBHFRVAO. c% 10/C /LM'..T•'e.f .A^,0 Set. 1 /TR').RD ''77k -I• i. STARE OA PAe1FlOCAT∎04OF THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS FOR APPROVAL MGR TO CON iTRUCRON. RAIL CENTERLNE AND TRAIL 5U8GMDE e. CURB CUT RAMPS G CATCH BASU6 D. FENCES GATES E SIGNS AND PAINTED MARKINGS F. MC/41C TABLES BIKE RACR.TR8SO RECEPTACLES. BENCNE5 G. OTHER REN5 AS NOTED ON DRAWINGS CURVE 5 T• .811' L. 79 42 AURA/ 64+Ge - AL06.1 A/W/VT AG. 1, Or, PrM - sMw.Wro.rree_ \J 2. ALLOMENSIONS ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB OR WAIL UNLESS OTHERMSE 11D CATED. 1 TRAIL STATIOIIING IS INTENDED FOR EASE OF COMMUNICATION DURING CONSTRUCTION PROCESS AND MAY NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT ACCURATE MEASUREMENTS A. TRAIL LAYOUT ANO GRADING SHALL BE HORIZONTALLY AND VERTICALLY 51100TH AND WITHOUT SHARP CURVES OR ABRUPT CHANGES IN GRADE 5 HORIZONTAL CURVE DATA ABBREVIATIONS. R. RADIUS TO CENTERLINE OF TRAIL A• DELTA ANGLE:THE INCLUDED ANGLE OF CURVE T. TANGENT LENGTH BETWEENPOIM OF CURVATUR 98 3 0 2 0 6 31 09 11 21 2 C 8 $ AND 01975CE BEl W EEN PONT OF TANGENCY MO POINT OF 00ERSECTONI L. LENGTH OF GURYE ALONG CENTERLINE PC • POINT OF CURVATURE PT. POINT OF TANGENCY 1C4C t•s Now Cmer. h..9 U. al Wort b MNmN Every ONW ELEV.44 NCR ELEV.52 ABOVE FNC0. 702 BASED CAI812.0'" -'9 0818.84 NOTE IA111 D11114 • 000 • 60 •CVD :9 ONLAI L 1 P :R IX •J 5C CLIENT AGENCY: KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES. 0890989104511 31112147 9091..9 ANNA KING COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION -PARKS CIP 320 ION sS W p 11101 15.009. (29612.80616 Q0612%0186 r tatol d n d 1L it Y y1,FJAYx NORTH WIN5sWEIR PARK . IAA" wow.. LAYOUT PLAN L2 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. _ 5.41 • _ ..••,.... ..--1,----„,___-- •:'..:1::::;=--,;:"......:,:. -1:',.„. • • P.,' 5"; e I • ...,•-•‘,... 4 5... s5,...!,' ----.. , - . s ....,1 , . , _..... N.., .1i,;;...r.--„„:„.!-::--77._77._:_------=--:::"•-••••••,...... \ -'• ,. — ..,..7 1.:-'': ..f.-,-.i.------1 .-.„--„.5...,,,,---7--,-=---:-_-----:, 7,... s i;•:_t.... „ ,., ,,,,,,,.. \...._._...„-_„;.;..„,,7_..,-,.--- --,---..".\,c\t,,,,,,..\ \-•,...z,,... , , . , - ,,. /L•015P OR S.O.O.5 • ,. .014(.4,01/ 7:295 ,a e • ; sce.541425 Ot O2 / . • \ . • : s\‘• '!‘• 1- " e.4 • '''''....refrAf." ,C•cnnn.75214;54c. —; , 0•1' /{//// • 1(4, • 17-1,1,nneee - •!!. . , 11(1.15[ e !' ! 19' • y ‘. • A- .1C1 I !\••- ir -` • I 't • . \ • . \ •-• . I ' • \‘. I- -•- \•,, • . "r•-• . -" :„„:t ,4- -- -, 1• );,:: , s- " -Fi -, wo- '-& / j..L):' '- 77: . /,'-'.;',-7/ !-------- ''''..------ .• " • / ,,.. ---2,•<_-,-2.-_-_-)7. 1.- ... ,-... ...._____._ „.•._ ..:.( ----, • e• ...•••••-'. , -r. . -.• \ ---' ./- f--,4. 1,::: .•- ) -I-- '.,/ •. ,;.... • --- _1,-/-'• %.- .'-- ''''....7./ ,f,'.,,-;=------2-7--: ' - • • fac , i•7-. '• onn, May in.no • : !" .1- • ' •• \ - • _- -- if." • • , ) • - - C.154201542O F.2•22,Grgn !CIS CORI - • -V s • ••%, ;„'„ ,.„ - • 7n,/, 6. 0 ca2. Lorhari"..4 09090910 (0( -2 DIRECTION OF nrron '• 9010459500940900 .."..-'";:---onnr t* nraora'ay.175. acc.C.en. .1n.9.5.C,*11,00 I -7;n2nrezecy. I eie•ecreinc-nre r Cane....-1,9 exar.1.0. el en/ i-00,4Vec.r,MCK1.11 1.0,411446 1--finacoraCC4. : --- • - • ean1001,13 C./ n, of I -0,,,f•Yoan, 47.047' I-146.racer; 1-.10,1noeve AVANT / •"t4,20(p5LIC GRAM. NOTES . TRAIL CROSSOLORE OR CROWN 15 2% uNLESS OTHERMSE roOTED. SEE FUN FOR ORIECTiON On PITCH. 2. AU 151,51L CURvES ARE 509ER ELEVATED AT 41,541.1512%. OR AS NOTED ALL TRANSMON5 TO BE EvEN AND 55100TH. VERIFY GRADES oF EXISTING STRUCTURES THAT AFFECT NEW CONSTRUCOON. 5. ADJUST ALL E.21.511NG MANHOLES Ald) UTILITY COVERS TO NEW FIN1551 GRADE 5 SEE 519f2 202 09 9490009 NOTES CUENT AGENCY: KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES 1101.1.510•Ell 3222/43,5/1751E BEAT2L2.55 9104 - KING couN-nr FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION-PARKS CIP 32010152 Coon Arranaln0C6 Rn52n; Oman. Vinery. 603104 7shectxre OUR 2954518 Fax (206)2960M I'vlac_,c. RE:c}c{ci A:019,CE, PROPOSED sPOT ELEVARONS TC5 TOR OF CURB BC. 9017004 OF Con STORM DFURNAGE PPE inn pun kr trap and 520 5555..555 WATER UtiE 0 CATen apse. nan . RIP RAP MOT.. CON ELEY. 5,4 ; • 2.• , r52•22 I ABOVE 2407.5AnCri DOM On Na1/0 29 0521.25 NOM 1A1N DOUR 5 ORO 5 60 5GO) .29 ROW .515 SC5.1 1. • 22 nr :a 30 5, 52' NORTH WIND.sWEIR PARK 15•55155, 051. GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN L3 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. • } , 1 9w5 r 7� • 5•" 5SEE2,.%�mil :lNi f 1 LCP 100311061.1 O,:'/K T M n [I?ihN PFM Clf077, Jt. 1 ' _ 1:27.4 %M9: T.'1 SO. pShMe[; 13 9n491.941- l�C r•c5 y rote lM1 k' CLIENT AGENCY: KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS. CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES 313•31/0 30.63 VD MIM MAME IIVA 1410 KING COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION -PARKS CIP • 11<p Casty 0 S Nage, Wa,4ae 981D1 T56)208 8 a814 El. . � R1a6T2•801•8 HEAD KEY Vie yep 55* 51..Mfln401e6N..Y Saab RI CM �,/ 1t7�C Tav5005vva01 55' 50 1r,v455a 4.66.100.0.: Ts' :�GAE Toroo00Sv,e.0 211 50 341,l36. zu. 131.1.0.no CrtnY_e 1.611005eru01 30' 60 643.3514,.03.3221411161 • • -. T6961305C0511 - S .13 0a,014.O55.0at02t012 ‘3 4n, a. • t. 37%.COWID IT 15 1.33.096,0110.61044.031 9 9 4 0 0 2 6.30333 LO.W 2 1: 35 1.92141. 1.6095.096.035 £ 3 o to • 76e130000OL'1S IS' 35 3012J02-a1.1.50,1000.71 • 0 • Ta4131.0C091.1EST. 41413', 33 013.0 SLOOP 4SSTm1215T 39331 Mac1 xi Peckad a Lo. 1:)r Aata, t. r.1.1 114. ININAN 12 141. 124 100 -15 11.700 00 ABOVE 11•0639611014 MOW a 1K2/0 :9 Wnu NOTE 41.131C3411.16 - 000 .60'L\9'9 0ATU4 VALVE KEY Vain 316. 12,4 Sue 5103pn 31 Ir tad :E 12 r 50 14 03 r 30 6.11 r - 30 a 5366 1 L_' _ 13 3 3350 1 N" 34 6 6243 r 33 3 '..0 TO r 00 • 6106 _ 30 9 3955 r 50 10 63 66 r 30 11 69.32 r 13 12 3919 _ 50 13 604 r 30 Pone roc doae.r al nerra..lrmaw 5.• Ant L3 • • • ran Award, • awa.me ID.. emend Vol.. 6 araa co,p•r 9434. I ..r. (501.120 050) Law. (O•• 200 PVC) __ l... . .d 5W15) OHM ELEV. a. WNW ELEV.32 O FAWN •••• b e.r.n NORTH WINDSWEIR PARK Oise „ IRRIGATION PLAN NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. L4 _/ /CCAPS;..z gA+xswK-D ea P'. AS y.'/ % wa+a.'oP<Ne iAN,DPr Nbl ate, cc. TP.Pw• . / revers (144.2 .oa c sa W.v o tlorew ••�- o r/SARS S.7D /LS I CUENT AGENCY: KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES eaoEYN1OM l aC.luac SUITE W. W04 KING COUNTY FACILMES MANAGEMENT DIVISION -PARKS CIP Cash AtrmNlnan&Wang Soma. Wasmoon 391St Tagrav 29&0101 ROO MODE NOTE SEE SHEET K1 FOR PLANT LEGEND Maijd Rd i R ?: r.R AThr it; r t .000E •srnMTC« wgo Cn pOJO 21 WWI WIT 14t1V CAW - 030 - d0 AGM 29 W0W 1 4 :0 80 NORTH WIND'WEIR PARK -' In. PLANTING PLAN L5 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 4U00 01771.05 , _ 7"--11.i., O� r _ U 7 \ •' I 111413 .,-- -,:: --�— a ` \ %•p,Ily `=ce �� " v (1.4••:,-'). c '' °af ...... ',ri] 24.440 109 17 1A1EN 0154107 SM J'OL» SET N., '` \ .. -\ \\ ? I/I \ �'1 �GJ/ i ( s i L....------ \t/ / / i / / \�/ /' / /1. /, % 11 / /t // / '. / \ / /- �/ / �+/ / ,N „`, .,`k /� .•�/ •/ / // / \--- q V �: / N ) /3 `/ / / N ' 2.,:,--' i// / :/1 / X3900'1 / % /' /� 1 -/ cars k066616'•e••.• i / / / / / / E t /rw. 140, TIE e.9 52 0.. 424 14.6 -3.3 -6.00 100-56 ROIL 66 NOTE: 63.10 19 04154 IAL. OAT. - 600 . 60 1040'29 0611/14 :LEGEND v:: , i i '( / / /) i / ` - �'!' . �' 1 ...I ! i�� —!� / / i s' ice'/ 1j l'' NOTE• MIS PROJECT IS OUT CF THE NAMGATION UHT OF THE MEN RIVER PR0.ECT I5 LOCATED 1500 YARDS UPSTREAM OF THE 14111 AVE. BRIDGE REACH AND 200 YARDS UPSTREAM OF SUP 6. THERE IS NO COSTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER. THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH -POINT OF LEVEE IS 9401134. NORTH SCALE: 1" = 20' l I I l I I 0 10' 20' 30' 40' 50' DATE: 12 -27 -1995 LAM CLIENT AGENCY: MG COUNTY D 113 AND PARKS, A 1106 5100 70917 SGAIII.C. 00 017790104 • KING COUNTY FACLRES MANAGBLENT DIVSCN -FARKS CP 320 King County Administration 8449079 Seattle. Washington 98104 TNptwn9 (206) 296 -0648 Fag (206) 296 -0186 III SUMMIT TECHNOLOGY 0AI61LTM9 D6'6EEPS. 11C rs • owns:: owns P0 NO ■061 MacLeod Reckord Lal -9Ep6 Atdlt6cb 100' my o "10+101 nr f1711/E(FE1 lato.s ® 016957 90115 6440 • 01AIO. EA>S15c w. ULV. 424 PR0005ID Y.. I1LV 434 LOCATIONS 100 M. 4E070 (EL 66) 06011 645215E tEPt 0 60 967 269 7 2040 '2.66• 527 3737 3107 2607 23110 254 0 2697 237.7 294.7 3067 317.3 175.7 3167 144.7 2907 112.5' 2567 1067 197.7 36.9• 067 '401 w7 657 1110. 2100 1657 2266' 2210 240.5' 2600 2006' 273.7 159.7 2x7 7510 950' 7615• 1327 7643' 137.5' 219.7 '327 2507 507 229.7 2126• 2257 247.7 217.7 2510' 600' 2x0' 1725' 1661E 67,4' NORTH WIND'S WIER PARK 722799 . d INTERTIDAL ESTUARY LAYOUT AND GRADING PLAN SHEET SHEET S 2 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 24. LAYER 4- Minus Ouorry SNP Blanket Xt.t._12- Layer in T- e/ / / /I�� "i / rna lOsy6r m9ania al Sand and Gravel (2 /ea0x 4 Layer Sand and Gravel 17 Loyer Impervious 72' Quarry Blanket SECTION A —A VER: r - 5' HORS T' - 20' 15 10 5 —5 SECTION B —B HER: 1' - 20' SECTION C —C VER.: r - 5' NOR.: r - 10' GOtbreuCTION SEaU[ME t. 10(1101 6901111 APOYFDIOCST AT 9105. 4.4. )423 13.3 0006 541 EICAVAICN BECAS. A 1534RFSEMIATIVE TROY 9035 9044, RE OM 97E A ALL 15185 00100 9AML EA01414000 2. STAKE OUT OE 0061PUC50* W15 BUM ANY p'Un*CAI awn. 3. INSTALL ALL AOAEMAhON CONTROLS •CS00C TEMPORARY 014604 WALL COMT0UCTION ENTRANCE 4. CLEM. CAW 030 00104E 000500 PER 06•031103 RAM. SIOCRPRE TOPSOIL 5. 4W51UU4044 SS¢ 5E 0* 6-0 SKIT �13C vAii 6 A 10 0P91BCCRAOC 6 PLACE MARRY 5941.5. T. 5CAINY 5tOPCS AM RACE TOPSOIL PLANT N10■5 AND 1n5505110 SONS. 8. PLACE 68909045 5085. 9. PLACE r9E 5015 W r9E SAM ern / 4 40* MG ME 5065 10. RE400 TEMPORARY *50 0.11010 Law 110E 040 RACE COAPR4 SARIS AS MIMEO. PLACE NO 949E 043N6 SAM AND GRAVEL 11. PLMT SEDGE GRAS. 200' URBAN ENVIRONMENT 100' 60' 40' HIGH IMPACT ENVIRONMENT LOW IMPACT ENVIRONMENT RIVER ENV1R0N. 2 SECTION 0 -0 VER.: 1' - 5' 110(1: r - 20' MEAN HIGH WATER MARK • / h 4146 \ \ \ \ \ \Y \ /\ \� \\\ \ \\ \ \ \ / \ \ \ \ \ \\ i \ \ /\ \�\ \ / \� "\ �V \ \��y �\ \ /.y%\ //. /✓j�\ \ � \ \ j \v \ \ \� \ \%,/ i\///// i \//1� \ \\ \ /.y \ \ \ /\ \/� 8.9 ware 52 GA WV 424 LLN -S.3 WAN 100-YR 4000 6d 1403 0•41.14 160.E 86080300 MAO OM KW '29 DATUM .1811: DATUM - DCO - 6o NCO '29 WIN 200' AO' RIVER 01008011. URBAN ENVIRONMENT 60' 100' LOW IMPACT ENVIRONMENT NIGH IMPACT ENVIRONMENT SECTION E —E NOT TO SCALE COY OF TUIM1*AA 5N0REUNE MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTS FIGURE 18 -1 REV153. CLIENT AGENCY. IMO COMFY NATURAL RESOURCES � CULTURAL AND 1106 ■011 TORO. 500 211 AMAZE SEATTLE, 34 90104 ®KING COUNTY FACI.RES MANAGEMENT EVASION—PAWS CP 320 King County A&n4004retIon Buidin9 664106, 04600194on 98104 Telephone (206) 298 -0648 Fax (206) 296 -0186 MIA. SUMMIT TECHNOLOGY 1918041/0 D871Q4i 1C P.S. NO.VO NMI OW. VA 1•1511 MI ME MVO MacLeod Reckord Lxd -Mp• A1YMect9 NORTH WIND'S WIER PARK ti a WILD a yang w . y . and AV .10 INTERTIDAL ESTUARY SECTION AND DETAILS 5n"LET C2 PERINT SLEET 3 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. Wm: F-Mc ravol& per...li.a. Wari. cam 6.5frr • 5'12,0..a • • •.- - — exe,131 Wnwai Av.< ..e7;01.0 AC PAVING f.W...W.firltfc9za ■L-•••41-4-n 4,:.°1••yat, mug 'Of. txreIN.N KZ, :TN - IERNRI. 1,1 MATTEED EsP.VC. PETAL MN PRESSE) WO STS.J. PRES•1 CPO. LtS. ANO Da....0 PATTERN me.D vac .1.••o own TOW SPOP . EOSE CONC. 'ED ER., Nu,. ITT., r f.avaemaosand croz,e-sieeti_ ets&-ce wsaa MIA•41 !Aral' CZA,..S.GW.Acr W HNC C. Cc. ZE•C•atirs.,;■■••,/ A r• •SO•OR,S.E.VE/SiG jiff 7TP.Oas are•. • yst/x;.rfor. ft4.5H LL cafeas,a4 •Yrr.of Waal oe• Afrpo/09. AT*, LOW Fae awl az Nis:ay- Gs Asa ps, •- r.r. SLIW vf Gt.• /0 trIo.1 nT =mei, at.:496 00.or se. s‘wWwl.a. ga.xitl7 CONC. t 4C. t ' i . 1 5 - • • RSEP !ORS Et ■SI. , _ .ra OR •S EEC. CE.C. =MOOR sUrr-s MON CRAM r-\ ColtiS ROC LSE CR ots RAT PPE MOE 2•14" AC PAVING @ PATHS 0,4E0E01.0.a ERRCAL Au. SCES TOLLED OMER CENT.% .1C•O SOP. P FIATJR wax/ 5,w,y1 0 V WIDE CURB CUT RAMP PAPK•G SPX/ .14 \LT' TIARATs.AL watt SAMER 'AL ,."--ra N., VALI. SST, 0 ACCESSIBLE STALL & ACCESS AISLE PAVEMENT MARKING KEE .RXISS.P.RED S.R.0 urTE AYE PAWS, 0--A's„.1.101 ETC, •C 04 AYR, sm.. --'4./Tern1WAOLSCRi•rep•rcx) aitoCIED Y.s•OCACe CLOWN ® CONCRETE PAVING AL.• • :.Kg•We CONSTRUCTION JOINT. scpco.o 3. • 3 . .•.•• za.1.41a4coS4 azoNs• ,EXPANDON JONT 9.0-4 o Do-% 031' p4 MM. 0.1 cAmoi ac. csas eras CONTROL JOINT oc..p.o•Ocel...r.,VG-T/- foreeN• t•••■•••••es actITT44 ..soveNT.INE,40 Trna erAor. ext. pcwaw V WIDE CURB CUT RAMP CAP sORLASZ OTC ...--, i'- M: 4E4 COrC YEWS .7 • OJOS Os OM CR . sO.ZO SR P.A• I \ \ _._....... / 7-.47...s,87.;•=ir se, KR. AS.A0 PAHL \ .--- . • 0 CONCRETE CURB 11 Z cort CLR ORS. CR UPC 470C --: _SECTION 0 BENCH -- • ,RE 6441.• 4E, CROR•ROOEISC. WT .4.,<IWtos v(9..••- NI* 11,1,131.E" ‘9111O.W.Tr Ar• .- VEREVa • - Ire. re. •remot.-• •ES, "SW • CRUSHED ROCK SURFACING Wu: fie...-FLAls,CurfbCoftac•rA 7.7Trc- WPLO, &RM.. O•0014 ' CIIC,NASICs.- gut. •RERR. EBERYLIES. /9,64 nR CPRO,Os OQIIS Aft ris.wee• woN. • b.,•ener)..01- 0,1•...40,•••c -7-ater. N.JAN--/ee. W.:Ma-om z•ze, t. +Claz.r.g.g.gma-6 •••••••.-e, z W.... ••-,741.122. 5,O.,•61.0•34, 972. SOLARO. Top. lip:XCAXr; more eat. tCftCftS , Cesel,C•C•fiele. •••• • awcy(•••le CrI•4:41- 3.0.Z TRECP • tem= zeraxon.... 64 0.4,0•Ten. .r6.4.7 -1 ...A.142...r•E• sax- •Irals blares, "Wt.< .s•sa. as Wes. rives, ...es 5.1 7 7 .elwoLl..f.Ceras aceN2T,T.O.CATNIINI nec.1 0,0raPbaw REMOVABLE BOLLARD NTS rect,i•al •••• . 1.1,17.0y re-R. Aq1.1.4.44.0,- ,S.EL•ArtAMR, -- "ren.r......”1.17,..5-•06656 OE' rya., , >14 rtrAvi • 4,11...••• r1#49. eV. .to•S.CE.'/O ro, tW KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES P•7100.. SY SO WARE MOUE RA MU KING COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION-PARKS CIP 320Krq Coot, ArViresreen SukIng W•stenpon 2810. To*tcre 12CC) MOM Fs, 036)206.0186 ivt3ted. d Peioci WE-oP.O•Crua WOOD POST & RAIL FENCE NORTI-1 WiN5'WEIR EAR< 41.■1111. IM,. auval• 00210•• DETAILS oar D1 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. "yr. - A.,Am ) ' 01,01. .1: • - 171_ k - r.././nri•rW ve4tron..„1li • r•Iffer..-CARAA,€c eta tk:A. s•Ae We 45. 91.1*.1366 - (.040040411404 .< 444• 0.4411- -817101 •50:PE.• pa) /15 •.4 :nna Fr0414•-.15074.e. ▪ 1404':o ICII04IOO. ate t•Yr; ./t WOOD POST & RAIL FENCE W/ INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE rEor • cs P.m 44t5L 104 5,TCS. 2' 0.6422ES BEA, 'cur" 1004 040 104404141 P41 /-11./44 RAW, u0SE / -.ATE r4141114 la; .., 1 .4.:7,17.67,77.■7 0 FER rar..f.. RI 97, ' :;2.// R. 44,4514 04 54L111..4.41PAhl 004 .; 440 Mal 50. 20156./if COOIA 0 R023 CH C00.4.1. 52L a .1.27.1 WC rrarDE • r Ni. 44,0121 G00 014 04404.1. 20.E. nr Arr. O 4 TREE ‘:-...._,`,--,..... N ,. -,... -,--,[14 1.31.ETS 41 ROC MULL r 04,1. Ban, %SAM. `1',..„ ' N1-- Cr SA., a s !CP 0 x R11A1 W 0.104 GRrj,''''BASKET! L40 ,ON BKCFCArElNI ID'S .ARXg -N M.I.6 set uousi. F£1 VIC. NMI Wm WE. Co.E. WC, •-,:■„,., 0° ,01 Mt/1 AA .n....co eu..I. N war 1.2006 40. worszt 1.0 4P2C C.00440t 10 N., '''• - 4.4401510 Szc.R....1 C. Carraint.t..E. snc. C..00,0 4011' rent 10 ....v. Mt ■••,' : ...... - ......1:••,.......,.. I.-, .44.--TT, „.__..„.„..,..,.....,....--„ ,.‘„,.....,=,,,.......,.. i ....1. 4,-- 1:PROJECT-NAME ® ', ii. KING COIJNTY PARK SYSTEM i RON SINK CORWIN EXECIO OT 7',•-, -1 Alm .C,Amts (c.,■”movit , ...... ...c.■ ,...r.e4, ,. C V.. OM 1121111110: UST" r..21-1•51-..,!^1,-.1.---- ._ -.-0,mt.2,1__. , . wit I Z;LI t:5=J 011. 07.l00r - 1.• ll4•1414' • 04104111140: 0 TEMPORARY JOB SIGN NM' AIM /sat FtAs Lo,f CL.L•01151.0 ,*(4.(..O.W44 0.C.4.000.4 99,0 -6RE • ' Pew dr./ eoe r.eta notki /01,5&04 0 PICNIC TABLE W/ CONCRETE PAD AM ,- PL." 04. AT SAM GRAM al. Kato, .7- rot CETI IC \ -, ,,,, , • - 1, ,-/ ...0 I.C.C. toc TO miketE Gret.....-E 0, .C.Th 01212121402E - , ..',..c,...., ' , / / 52, 00,IE CO2.2.1.2.Y. FLAAT■6 efo \-', i....,, tf.:1,..- „ z .....- NE, 1....YET1 AT .73/4.1.. r co. NI. 60..2 .r:tt ,. ,/ -.-. r.0 _ _40, . _., . 1.14.% 4 4 POMO '"n1 018 "" ' (rt III I. - 5144041 !CO 40 penal CS Pt VRE,..7220CIS CARP.: KNEW ta - 50a 01.C....1. 045 514140 tar/CT 7044114 4401410&I2 Ci SHRUB PLANTING oc/.2,23 Ler,,Z,0/0 f2.0.002.C. KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES 10 61•71.10405 SO12...102 .120 S011. • - fee 4.4.2004.10.4213, Ft. rb,,r 1470444nx,r- f.,e0 • ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN 90.4 • Lefd.a.114me•Ifff<0... 102041 00A4.I000404 - 040004 I PLAN 8040 - fox fames. Y.- Pol,r0.4- ntern a TO .00..C.74.0.0 1 l 11.0.* ..- . ..:-e----.-ti ...„..,- ... iAmlo/ O. 6- ., • Lt. 7.. I..% I SECTION 0 TRASH RECEPTACLE W/ CONCRETE PAD AIM e'AreAr" / ft..,10504 rtrr..y4a04740444500 PAM'. 7....‘"a• ,....,,,,, 50077•7011040441f04141744 wpia"..-7.4. eg, • ' .1".1•440.1''''''''''''''''. ',.r'-':1•Trr.l.r,24.4.- As■ /•., tu.1,011,111.K. Et f-AIN 0 GOOSE EXCLUSION WRE FABRIC FENCE C) SIGNING Aro- .97104 144124 1411404r42. -- -1.4 4146040e0 IFIA7r., Of/ ffVf• 47s. d'Are.c.dicr.411,4,5,4 ▪ A44004.41124• DISMOUNT AND WAIJI BICYCLE DISMOUNT WON :0-4 Ct0484404-'14104A1' 144.'0404C'1041444 - 51.10e: vef...177445, - 1 r2K . ELEVATION OF PE.RIIIETEFI FENCE KING COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION-PARKS CIP =Nog Corry AccrevomE•AirN Sitale.WW0003 04404 Taiptor. 29646111 Fax (06)2964116 Peckad I: • NOT-4 WIND'sWEIR F4RK 0000. DETAILS NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. D2 lIX 51.000 10000. NOTE: SECTION A -A MIT KIN ocCoh. woo, 1-00a mat 11.21 rte... ex. ELEVATION • OFILTER FABRIC FENCE Et 100.01003 Pt014 O.TIMBER CHECK DAM W/ OUARRY SPALL MAT 0400. 8146 _ • . ;:45 WIC 00 SC 00-AC �i.s arm 0•00 .0040 04.1 n"aaL 11ocT anal 00.00 Ora°a""'H FILTER FABRIC PROTECTION Mat 0113 Ty., - L = _,t. 1 .00 Yfw� ¢1.1 A Ma 01 cr. CV 5004. II0 00.0 TO Wm-9 arc Sly .710.10 0. Mont.. x0 00 CATCH BASIN INSERT GENERAL NOTES: I. rm. sTA. w+Dun°40-63 v..0 Aa. 54MADO ramr 1 NNAAR loorddor I 000G. OM 417N ream DI 6004 MAN .720110.. 5.00 m50 10:7111-0a OINTERIM CB PROTECTION . IMAINACE MOM 1. M,Nr400*1 C.SW04.014nM.^Yxa9M91* 10 mrNO* W5.0077.01311E. T.s W 4Ma4n•p N m0600001.1003MO w0,n4land . 1015.0.0 61 34. ayr. tamePMe.t3.cma501,0710ma4rt.mm. SW PO4 W M 94.0414a0+0 0a14 MyW MIMMI Mee /Ma ar aNabd. S M0n.IMOnaAS.WrY ASnr.Nm./W1..10016110in 4104101 nom.arda 18,06 aN0.001 mtpW 4. Al cat's can gala 404 aMM1. 010003 'OUTFALL TO STREAM. COUP NO POIWTAMS- 5 .0 1 ant0.9. Ma. 0. Maw a 0M1 011dM CYfaNl trormam 03.064900 9018000.0“1.04/ Moo d PaahrmmrsxNnarp May00 .1,04..a..e,v0104atox0,7010.0. 020.10•0.0. mama M.0nmoa.atmo0amv.aaFroa µ T . S)ORMPUTE SCNEDLSE P VC AST110-3234 SCA3SGA5IO:T J00R-ALL Sa- 5.0EDM1000SSO. TYPE1009 CONCAETE- AST./ 414 CUSS n TOR SMALLER TON 1.- ASTM GTE CUSS N FOR 12. AM 1S ASTJC- m CLASS .1 FOR 1CP AIMGER ANSI MT 51 GAST 34 CORRUGATED GR DEI19TY PCIYET.ULE.VE PIPE' ICPEP) SMOOTH BORE -1100 N. GATEWAY 4 ON 5, GMCE 615 CA P34, CUSS C PER AVM 0.1:46, 4140550301309T8/803100 1.4 CAP. MLGAL1AAZEOSTEEl SH41N.vE APWA V1E4110ENTt ALLCLN SHALLwa4 ..ASS5 : it 1 EECOIG- GA:vAVQED STEEL CUP 5N411AEITERENRS1...13OF A SKT048E TITS LALUaHM CUP Sw41I,EET THE RECV: DJEVTSCF AAaaro LL+M TYPE, . CUP PIPE SPECIAt3 MLLE IU *97110 rb1ILI 00.1,270 N 3530E ai...-7M 110.21• 7T-'3X 110 11 IT .a 22051,2 14 .. 4.0-4, 351 1/ 72,96. 38/ 1 - 10 .a NGTE TYPE 057450, ti3 USED SN41 BE ASsdC1TE0014T!E CONSTRUCTION DOW/ANTS. • . ITATIGMCOMT001.50mS - - KPaaldtr.a escros Yneade0(63NFSCIMnrtMa rclmuC1900 cr4i Inma.4MeM0.0404645110 la 4 NM ma Lean e, mons mot 0m000; a...w.•nuvn 00100,4c.s. at 3 s TT. no+r. robs... ESGa ...dc.m.m00.n..+.vo.reaaamranl .01071 T4E3C ode4s a 0. 10003.04.4 d» srdrommrsra uWM S. T00mal 444 dP SC4..'9MYU0ne.Pn0MMOM050.0410110 b6 • armr<m 0,00 0.003100an 04000,0 Oas.aMYa MNa 9...0041 aevp4cMa4bom0nn1 0a616309005 .rw1 10010 00 /60Ca0mt6OO!T vSESC Smraor+aa:0. 4. Pe }mom MUM or 10.10460Maa4.aw 0..:000 T. ESC I,6014.r...,.r am omn see Ina ron. 100.0... ..mo.aoft onao a. Dung T. 015 m 100.. M,. am. ESC trosam0.4 3 ,am a.MP 4.7.1.3 bnaammat roVemaaa 004050 .n4 tameAM M..card seam iN 051 Wua> y w.v,'wa'10315 .,7,4* KsUP*0Pxt are Tara. as a.�.p pP: 055na.54aan. 0:0 0.M.a.meaa,..a.,..TOwn..eraC lva8Wd15140. - enw:•.y NnC- aT.nr.aaO..d ESC :4 Ca.av4.'K^ro man.r5r1ar 1 ana rian ms.3ESCromme v rang n...% era atmaity 713010 MT. S: mot T. ESC booms on nem.4030Mao .1.a.�rC 40000.010.0 a Te.r.A.r0 bye t. ..00.104 a Man.., 12 ▪ Tom. ..re Pan cm Mad mar *. MmMO moo,. .00,300•021.0 + 1r00510. arecormoaa1MWMc .<NaabO+rC1,4,61. aca.Man 0nox10 06.:0..10.... cs Mal O6 ..x040 AT 11 • .r .0010 drr:.P¢+a.0..010•r . n..e' miry. mound a Mora 10x01003 AMY am ma an V F 0,mon d r.. Tram. tz aOw"r4 405.ar ba.tt7. wnae Erman elm 13 00,101 a. comma MO. d M bn..)mwm.avev 1010.010 soe09 a Paax 43..03 15 :.man a r4erma.00mo :00x0 d.1 n 4.0000110100 inn aata4.0d Fed .rm.anoecOnrawns -er cxaaa.040ma •.MIT e Oa ..• '` 11j00 uaa<0rvaw.run a---atlbarngora .uT..41410 60ay _00100aa.n 140 11w1j1.:. w..v w MTaan+aer mrvd..aa <. wa 0.^.wn sa+an . 200 40d.ea0xnomposO.0 aaa.0am.nalmaaaaaao®Tawma.. 4 - 15 l.`.aiava naM0001000&1Mom mn0<aw0.11000140.0 amemam mbMa a 4w mars s. ;ATERFABRIC FENCEMO1E! 1. T.1 00510 5. wu wdn 4mer.ra.ml0Jal.Nrg14P.earrrle .aa w Pan 31I00100.sam.ala7.a40000Wfl*0 M0340mOSS *aaa0vl Pw..mamr0.n64010-.1.0. am mom. .000+.0..amemat • Tlx Me Mom Imam Nat a AuvW lo b4e.l.m.oC t.vr.4sd3 Tara you Wta amomnammaE/4001e .0100150 OATC0.avaOm. man c■ <tl.4E 3 Aeaa0W M 4r.000.ompy man sb4/05 15010.000000 .1571..71 n. 1A MOO ON 0 smw erroart*a m t.+Mc 4 swot. 10,00rw.wa..an. a at. mem M6wn bro. W ..IMr.1 swwm_.411 swd4010001 4P.raMa0r ,U5/44 ea014.0.40. ▪ v tog spa T.4.. 0 ..0100..arr04 mmvndanCm a. N.0 no an 31.0.. 4404. 000.00 01. MOM 5 40.03 ..far l0r0.0•35 6NM r. 11014.000.. N.a.an S.c•.+dna'a.<aau4e. oral TM tea W ..110100 n..SVn35.a)n4».m T10Rrpd par w1Mdd Mee OM< ATM ro■ 71.30100 stag asa • ..0mm ta M.•Iaw: ✓101007110• se1.1 e.a>.'Jw,nla w ma D000 0. • MA IC..05 M4, ,O a.0.fan.0.uy.a.ad+1.01M aae010axeMt 0.103 x040.1140.0. Ant Mu.. Iran 47..71 mtls 1nm.PaU'Y 5 M 40.E JIM L ar MOAT 03 � -. C 4' TO C 043000 SPARS OBIOFILTRATION SWALE TYP.CROSS SECTION TSPE IL zr 9 3T 0 FLOATABLE MATERIAL SEPARATOR -.12' -PIPE .. 5. 0300. ,.a riAWAP- r. r 1010 2E5511)It C -0. 74...10 ....�...��:I......r , RIP RAP OUTFALL KING COUNTY - DEPARTMENTOFPARKS,CULTURALAND NATURAL RESOURCES :.0; Sin P .1. " ■-...&/PnC7,4 y ••■- 0 ENTRANCE GATE and LOCKING POST • 1 .1 ■41.g IIF.777-0 i:4-;;;;;,-, i ..,-- • ":_..„...-- ---: ..i........T.T. n 1, An. ---,I. ....t.„4:7 • I... ,,,v, , t r ......n.7■TI ' ••-•TrS ,44.4 ;.T.,72 ,- 1 ; ;T.r;•4 • •-e' .- ,...'''--:,--i'.- ! i ;4--% LL- _ -'1"--7, • - --- 1 1 l....i . • ! f.X. 1......;,;;;_,,,_.r., !.... I r .:1 :- .• . '.. -..,--, :;--V,-, f•_i F.7-'7.7 -,:r. :',. • .-.._ . , • : • •..-1 •:•,. _T..... 4-mt. • ; • ; ••••;.- • ." %•••to '400 A550.43.Y •ULT KA 5PEC.- • • ••\ -L , . i 0:1?-11 .7 DO_B_E CITEOC Snr/E Ti 1 I 11 GA. L.04 TyP -:-• i tr: • ! ! - I: ' L 7 1 , V?7., 4 l -,i RON li; ! i 111 ._S . t! ...,(,,,, , ..V /... , , il ..,, , .„17:27,,,c....tE Z.,, • ,- ' ,... - i', t.,- , _•,-..- - _ __,-...r, 2. ;R:54SE 0101.15405015E-1 1 - - CAuf. v.04 101, - CR, 3.rnaE5 AiL.4 CUTUP TM. OF WU" 10110 . Fu. Itt anp Ta Inas 10 MS. TOW ifTrInIST,TXT GTTE SILVE 10 PIC 114:1 FCTT 11111101 E*J. 011 00011011 OF 00.1 vel51CmrsErE C) MAN ASSERIELY An5 • BIKE RACK Hsa. -- • - 10151.110 5rtir, TOOKE 013000 100' 15.0 SPECF0.1101 • 1101070111t04101f11 12750,4+. • --,T.-:•-•!.. J. -;•". • -W. ---• .-1‘ < -------Ar: rsc mni 1. nonrIat • cf-i:e.-. ‘1.11t•;;.•_-=;-. ;„I.- Iso 611cr.a1 les '.444-:°.::*-Y,..."... \ ' - - : II . Vi • M;a- r \ - - _ .7• .r ! I 4 . - - - • - - Mwt t s • a Ic rrr ; you 0,;; et r-631;....".5• ."...."'"'”'' •I 0 fOr PI LOW VAL.' TO KEST °Urn. • 101. VAT ME DOT ETTEN57.76 05 010 011. AUTOMATIC ZONE VALVE 1015 OOP CUENT AGENCY: KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES 914,0 /NOCE SEIMIE.VM 30151 '11.114.1411- T , • --- ...a / 7 &VW Jora v fa 0 OUICK COUPLER VALVE 1005 -;213/+"64v. ilrEletar.; Eal=1=gli. I .0 4.7 _ *4' 0 low cOuNTY PAM( STITIDit 0...e11e,00 010.051 .011015 *40010-4e0144- 5..e fee ; Vt• 10453. 11940 '011.4 300'4 • tUrs".,51. s, via", ..b...;*• • 0e:4I11513 ye53.03 . r/-171/4100 ;(1.47004I0 MI, 1.041' 115 34T-154 PI Or fr! Lia-rreft ct.GlICV a,* *1 01311171.011t01 0070'. ,417,11/4,1' ;Aye, 0sta-1160•Nc411e5,Ce, fr11-Y 000' PARK ENTRANCE SIGN 113E O P530,51.5301. 7-?EU r- 11 : . .11 ' Qe °ML 7 ../.._4C...--.1., _.... ..... _ - 0. . / v.. 1301 I1 i \ : 01114or; \ 14115 1E 5E1 It 5,5(11211 SUFACE 1 '7 IC111-,11. SCE 11115, • 5111111[115 • LASCGVITG ANT 117.1:15W 110119 4151 TE1101 TArt 011,11 1If000l-51014.1111ole71 RISER ASSEMBLY KING COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION-PARKS CIP 320 I(iv Cowry Atmnangeon Buileg S.M. wasting,. 9130D. ToKtotir (20612964511 ROB/23601N rviacLedd ft-dud ,31.11.4e .100 ).-; NORTH WINE,WEIR PAIK •PVI• T., min .6.10•• DETAILS D4 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. File: 98ft-80059 35mm Drawing# HIGH TIDE 100 -YR FLOOD ABOVE PFOR IAAT10N BASED ON NGVD '29 DATUM NOTE MLLW 13ATi1,1.• 0.00 - -80 NGVD 129 DATUM TAKE LOGAT1O14 IN FIELD FOR APPROVAL NOTE: SEE SHEET DI FOR WIT OF WORWC 70 7 PETY1 LOCATIONS ORIGIN SCALE: 1 " 20' ' BASELINE LEFT 0' 0.0' 138.0' 118.7' 171.7' 118.9'. 202.7' 124.6' 233.3' '116.5' 261.1' 100.2' 301.6' 92.9' 332.0' 121.6' 336.2' 163.0' 307.3' 203.8' 285.0' 227.9' 248.0' 245.8' 218.1' 247.1' 223.6' 262.6' 240.2' 261.8' 256.0' 266.3' 280.8' 260.6' 296.9' 259.4' 313.3' , 257.9' 321.4' 259.8' E 35400 E .11180 E 38200 100 -DATE CLIENT AGENCY KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT CULTURAL AND 1108 SMITH TOWER 508 2N0 AVENUE SEATTLE. WA 98104 KING COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION-PARKS CIP 320 Rang Cm* AdmWItl9lbn Building SWIM, W.8808.0n 98104 TNMptlon• (208) 288.0848 Fax (208)298.0188 �i�i�.IiI 0INCH 1) CHINA • 'if • a MacLeod Reckord LandsSrep. M2lftecte 231 &,7111[244 E101 8610,. W461111pon ,002 F0/- ]2-7011 r•A7( 65.212121 .. f,!. IyI.I1 ;iftIa�1i'1''I1rlfj, j.l jl Ii jj117IT'l 6 91'. • 1 bl li z1 . ii°i160 111111111111111111111.11jlii 111.1 rill:: i 11 .jj ili111I ii1 . 1. 1. 1iii �l CECIL MOSES MEMORIAL PARK FORMEIY.Y IWOWN 4Ar3 NORTH WW '9 AVE111 PAIY! SCALKS 15.20' -0• 'AM[f 21 22 1 2000 o MA" .IK /BTS to CUO lib JOe 710, CR PLANTING AND FENCE PLAN. SHEET L2 r,''` RIP RAP OUTFALL. I.E. =5.41 -�f -- BRIDGE O 6' WIOE GRAVEL PATH APPROX. BEYOND MHW S Cam` 12" CPEP �r 39 LF S =0.005 i I / I • I -_- CB #5 H -- / /i TYPE 1 \ RIM 7.86 LE. =5.61 1 I 1 I TEMPORARY I SETTLING POND 11 \ \ \ \ \•. \ \ \1 \ �\ ��I / It • \; , 1 1 1 ,5 ' / 1,;;' %' • ' o *• ? .I I I: I I I L I / / //i / *IA . t / / L I/I 1In4i1:INTERTIlAL' !324' t 1/11 // 1fI 1111ESTUAR 1(•ca•�. // % % �� /III 1 1 \1 \\ °'.�►��. -�� 1 \ \ , - f s1 veil • • I • 0. BASEoN6 B\- }00 ACCESS GENERAL NOTES: 1. THIS PROJECT;IS OUT OF THE NAVIGATION LIMIT OF THE TUREEN RIVER. B` °A }00 2. PROJECT IS LOCATED 1500 YARDS UPSTREAM OF THE 14TH AVE. BRIDGE REACH AND 200 YARDS UPSTREAM OF SLIP 6. 3. THERE IS NO EXISTING OR PROPOSED LEVEE ON THIS REACH OF THE RIVER. THEREFORE NO LANDWARD CATCH -POINT OF LEVEE IS SHOWN. 4. REFER TO GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY PERMITS FOR FURTHER INFORMATIONAL DRAWINGS /SKETCHES AND PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIREMENTS VISION DATE CLIENT AGENCY: ICING OF PARK% CULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES 1108 SMITH TOWER 506 2ND AVENUE SEATTLE. WA 98104 ' KING COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DMSONPARKS CP 320 King County Administration Building Seattle. Washington 98104 Telephone (206) 296 -0648 Fax (206) 296 -0186 1 i1i- T ' I I I iTrI FTT[ t.1TI [III III ,:III 111:1 I I 1 � � � 111 • 0INCH CHINA 1 • ,d�MOFFATT &NICHOL 115 SEN•AS 49111t SUM 503 SATRI. 110 111104 (iu) 652 -0222 FAX (311 632 -474 MacLeod Reckord Landscape Architects 231 Soraga Loft. **room NI0S 2.-3/3-7.• �1 HIGH TIDE 8.9 MHHW 5.2 OHW 4.4 MHW 4.24 MLW MLLW -6.00 100 -YR FL000 8.8 NOTE: NGVO '29 DATUM MLLW DATUM = 0.00 = 6.0 NGVD '29 DATUM LEGEND PROPOSED CONTOUR fffffffffff WILLOWS QUARRY SPALLS 1•" •••' • - •• J SAND & GRAVEL IMPERVIOUS' EXISTING MHW ELEV. 4.24 -- •- -• - -•- EXISTING TOP OF BANK 100 YR. FLOOD (El. 8.8) LOCATIONS ORIGIN BASELINE LEFT D' 0.0' 98.2' 269.0' 123.8' 284.0' 152.2' 273.0' 210.0' 280.5' 238.8' 254.0' 269.2' 237.0' 294.7' 208.0' 317.3' 175.8' 316.0' 144.0' 299.0' 112.5' 258.2' 108.3' 197.7' 138.9' 106.0' 140.3' 94.3' 165.0' 113.0' 216.0' 165.9' 226.6' 1 221.8' 240.5' 6 250.0' 200.8' 19 273.7' 159.0' 236.2' 153.0' 195.0' 183.5' 132.2' 184.3' 137.5' 219.2' 132.2' 250.8' 150.3' 229.0' 2128' 225.2' 241.2' 217.7' 253.0' 180.4' 236.0• 172.5' 168 8' 187.4' 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CECIL MOSES MEMORIAL. PARK POKILY IOIONN AS M0111M MINI NM PAM SCALE% 1• -7.o' DATE, 06/12/00 DRAM BH ABA CHECKED 03 RC JCS NO 4572 LAYOUT AND .GRADING PLAN SHEET C1 iII�,11�I� LI11 1]II!�'11 5 6 5l, 1►l E t, L, -6O lllllllllllillllllllliiiillllllliilallllliiiil��ila. Illill. il�lllllll�i�lli�illl `ii�llllllhl►II�II��,lil.i. 1111. �4�1ii_ ��I�. Liill ,���II�.I�I�fiIIIIILIiIiil11111 co z ,01 t EDSE limn •1- 102 1•922 t+ 231 , 121 4. (Oaf x /RR.N- �- REMOVE ALL PUMPEI7 &ARBME oN SLOPE •1v UMIr OF Woe4 crypI(ALLY INCLUDES WWI FuKNi1JR.E1 SuwP METH.,. BZ ) ,94 .. 1• is U 20 Ln • .13E M 131 r9 17! 11011 0 0 311 1F. 12121 IhI:I0• eu:uir. , 1114. lhn" 1.11 1f • 43 Val soli.. Lag • • :D '1. 10,9 Ax • I: /yam ^^•+�■• 715 . f 49W If 11re 14.1 / • 91 01 e.. • F 113 x'.16 e1! .11x• 41410°3 Cr IT ,rxf :.:.,1e• 14101 �. --113. OILS mn / 4.11 lit • F 43 . - LO£ATE. FIl•TF,IZ'I;° iG FEHCL . A5.lCco.ligF-D TO ACf.OHMeVAY>: coNs•ucrioN 613 Il, + 03 3.41411 •IS 111 1. 41 It, t -s• Al >I• LLC. Ins a5 ♦ 31 0 n ea 4a 0 0 MN .: ....1i Del''4... . . 1x1,. .. y3+ • t`m n.., 0 Tra.' ♦ v11E2.2101 • 211141 011 Est1NG RTIRE WALT- tE,rTTLE WATU Wirier VreneAL THRUST f=W4C5 Fox 46"47 WAT1;R riAmi UNDER RIVER oo Nor DISTUR6 Zone I1.91 `n nit HOTS: TDPOGRAPNY llOtal IN AREA OF FRIDGE AI3I/rlMet-rr 1.6 FROM EARLIER SURVEY AND I5 Ix 001 HOT ACGURIITE.. No GRAOINCr IN 7Hi5 AREA I6 REQuoRao UNDEit TH15 44 g20. E 39400 t -1.1319 21 LIGRT POL . WILL BE. REMover sY OTHERS PROM CONTRACT REMw1^ iNls cJ;aniL WITH UMB5 AND.RDoTv/AV INT7■GT AND -_ 1a• trn5Tb£KPilE FOR UE.. IN ESTUARY CJJNSTRUGT1oN M°II2 O.tn°!NE i5'0•. t• vino \1,1, 27, 220 '4 1,.11 11' \ ry. 4 • • x1.'9 712°'4 nr 257 • ... WAI 1117] regi•� L N 19.22 2112 IGHralg. WIt4 EE REMovvp B- Y...: orff Pe.toR TD 'caorRAer 111i1'i. a5x .. 47 1 • ,1>q.tlf iC I.it• Lr 1•r 'L1M 19:17 • r0• 14 r PbLe WILL B. KENYAN PRIOR 1D CON-" 417 �- }bl., x 124,1 x 10.4 t2• [In ]21 ij .M4 19 „CIF Lonlr rn 1.4 /: lH 12191 .. 575 Rer11oVE:',51RE. IY1-,RANI-,', AN�5`, YiCE IA& EY PTHERS PRIOR TO 11-1.15 COME -r . 1 FX/sr. RETPOQ'.1 euiwI M ra, I / 12/4/$91/N 9 8E F/ts3%CCrFO 1 'a' i / x1.41 { -ramn! �u _ .;. -r , �:o % /./411:7 PRDTECr FEMAIN• AND . 1 ,1 ' iS��nJ,,npns •0T. ■ 11 1,.11 'xif N • •. 7)l11TIA[0'F7x M " 5'' `a - ��.` _- c71r �t !M 1x.1[ hie' • .11°1oa41 / (sev vI _3-4-x57 WLye AND Fa�yylcE_ A•WN 710,E 11 /N't F,>;O1k�,7F-J� s70. 11 Icr9 six x 11.41 ens 1 S • n 11(fi0 x 6071 ei11 Y T •� 1.91 -010 .p .11: :' (•x90 Rf RTT . 1310 / a 11.,1 4 f201 ff.•. • 211 II •... • 11 11 • ,I x5 ,°7 1,7.11 ••••NI l 13 11 4 1,.j1 7414 CO.,m ,4112 471 ♦ , 1 4 11.24 a 34 x11.11 ,••• "x241 1 t Nt K.O 'i 2i.l2 • I-. run 2431791 ,. W.I.. I... - 11it 17.141"43 1114191 NI. • aD 11 1 x01 r 4. N 11.11 • b I• ..• ur oa al4 en. t 9.13 1: • 74x,1 1 11^,3 ••f 91 )le ' • 117.51 .41N 557.12 f1 1499 .• .. . . x f' li ....� - -.. - 7110• 5i • i irl?a360 1' 2 4.11 WAT r. FWN W?H iNIMAL 452 N 11.22 In[E 571 • x 12.•0. . • SSI .•• U' Rr .• 511 • !(3 911 n 10.1,1 • Sit 71'7 EX it'll J . Cr'd11 . UNK FENCE. Sts' • R 11.1! 553111:1474'4 Y't3.L4 n 535 10.75 • L[i 11 1IN ,Y' Ijj SI rim •••1 • •••MR 997 er. !IT C. i•., [D 11 • •'' x 41.10 .'• • 5x5 527•• II LAY ..I J0 ' 'N 12..1 run ,m ..�••� 1001 I x12,1 .1 ✓n 1 13.11 :.x� s�• r° nurrt •• ■lx' [n 1114° A�7 ,1 510 Ef 9122 N 11.11 ■ ■,ID 011 CD of 6]i -' t7.n9nJm[ 513�••te•• ID 01 '.011,11 00 m[ 1721/24.1 ,• Sti 4341 1.11.415.1 JII.Dr 79,11 i. 1 9•t \ ,r i x 11.34 513 •..12J,1• n.m IT 134153.. :F r xef. 1,23. s� \RF :n 01 s:0 ... . f0 t ' _a •'11.1743rd- :t</111,.11 ..��y9 71 12 . 00°1141. :!x•11.0: "is•� ewe yy[1`111 • „351' 4444 ., • _ i11S � -: MI PAT,r 421'n q 5'.1!112 roves E5 0 \M/VNTAiN PoRriou CGF)dx 1 /1SH7�IAMLTR RA �CRAVE USE A.s• S ON,EN !t5 KNOWN. • • Pura, • •' 557'-', "II.11 ,.i.•N 19.17 Mt 11x12 591 11.41 221[5 \, exe .`" --KLJRT•S/NioN. AV /WMC:LF.V. I4 ° 77) EMAIN�'%'C FR01EC1$R ext �T" 5 P uNE li5 Fx1+WN¢BEPfdalUFA 1.41 rio, T=xI '1T MEM° UtEANL7 FABER oRics LINE /,Yt1TtJ7 Rr /NEAR t-wtr. row ONE HIGH TIDE 8.9 MHHW 5.2 OHW 4.4' MHW 4.24 MLW- -3.3 MOW -8.00 100 -YR ROOD 8.a ABOVE INFORMATION BASED ON NGVD 29 DATUM. NOTE: MLLW DATUM 0.00 ' .6.0 NGVD 29 DANJM • • 3L 1001 + 0111 ssi 13 '1S'X 5 12.01 21044 • Cu; r0 9 40221 x 1,.11 1E22 E 39200 1 Is lee 7x14. 11.51 x054111,..' 1310"1 !t0 1 m 1104111 ,C+ RANI dg41p 121 522 .' ni1. 4 'I 41,541 431�len -4it% . .O5 SIGNIFICANT TREE REMOVAL SCHEDULE Number of Trees Diameter of Existing Tree Humber of Replaoennent 4.8' 1 8-12' • 3 12.18' 3 . 18-24' 2 over 24' s7 B TOTAL '31 1 2 ,,, 4'- 8 8 6 12 12 4 111_ Total vegetedon replacement rsquked Is 72 tnss.et minimum 2.5" cadger for . dedduous and 6-5' height for coniferous. Phase 1 Naf Project provides28 trees Sae Planting Plan Sheet L5 . Refer to speellcelbns for plant quelNy, darning and maintenance standards 1 4 11.24 141,1[ [ NT TREES TO SE REMOVED SMALL TREES/ LARGE 9HRUSS TO BE REMOVED AC. PAVEMENT AND BASE COURSE TO BE REMOVED . OM ELEV. 4.4 Mi*fw ism. 5.2 x---x FLIER FAERIC FENCE SEE 29OLF 1:•4: LMT OF WORK DEMOLITION NOTES . 1. REMOVE ALL EXISTING MATERIAL AS REQUIRED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. WHETHER SPECIFICALLY NOTED OR NOT. v 2. SEE SHEET K1 FOR TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES. • x 10 30 50 (North V 0 20 40 SCALE: 1 " ..20' 100 DATE CLIENT AGENCY: KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, 2'JLTURAL AND NATLRAL RESOURCES 1108 SVITH TOWER 506 2N0 AVENUE SEATTLE, 'AA 98104 KING COUNTY FACIUTIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION-PARKS CIP 320 King County Adminis I NOn tluildhg Seale, Washkigton 98104 Telephone 1208) 298'0848 Fax (208) 2954:1188 0 INCH ,. 1 • •. 2 . , • CHINA I MacLeod Reckord Landscape Ar(2litectS VI Re Eat SI L- 71119P■1wtst FM 3534E45 '.III��' 11�1.11�'I''lllljl�'�1I1� 1 91• Pl. EL ' 4. LLB;; -AL °6 ., 8 "..,. L 8 :' br. E •z' l N130 6 CECIL MOSES MEMORIAL PARK FORMERLY IWONW AR NORTH WIND'S WEIR PARK SOLE! 1A. 20'-0• Dm 21 22 /2000 DI". 8T, BTS /JK CIO= 5?. CR Jae 1O1 DEMOLITION AND TESC PLAN SHEET D1 35mm drawing — • -••••••••".•.:' ...... • • • • ' . • 1.-06PC r, • • "..;."-••••,;-: • •ep.r4V/i.kILP• - • . • tif•Nit.4r ± ... .. • . 6es lieLisedfi. or..4:4.:er6 ',.; : .. -.• • .9r4.. --e.•-..:•-;f■tr6. tiftiert. 0:•:.• • - e .-•.•e.Ocrrf-4-:.eNQ?.2 A-si="-A, •:!-;.,.,.... - • • 1i.•.1 ::64•cer r* frqem4•61 . - - .- . ;: • e)eyy•-0•14.--.:Lz-6*R-14r.. . :- ...• • • ••••:,....-• • ....:t:v/bri ati. y...-4-••••r••• .. .., ..--... •,...., • • • .• ...• . • • . . . • _ ..•• • - •. ;ifeyy• .• frifir). • • ' . • • • . 4/z•:•-#- • • . ... . • ...I..: • .. •"."-'!• • .. • • . , • • • . • • . • • • • • . . •,. • : • • -. • _ -•• • • . • 1,.606.Nt..4... IFirf;kier 5'..Ctr • . /.. terge-co,v..iO4.10. ) *P7. 1r npr/M.Y. k rfror-rr ?rt. G16 wrifrt 6,44o4 rfr.11-fr exftwaer, Merfr‘ • • '67114 yy1-4111.E.ritbkmet... tave:7 r..4. 1. • 1. citv r-dr ir--<"‘...6. 67'6 1-411• - eft% ce-4 . 14.frAo e.‘.:•etV 7 :V/i■Y4,.- ft•Cri 1%464 /1'‘tN.ore'r tee% • • C,f.e94 TrrAIW4•1 04 IN trF-1-*KaJt: 5"iLIA 1-tt4q• CiT-gHtN6e ;74.'1)-t9r7 . ' • ...'• • ENTRANCE GATE and LOCKING-POST -- • .'`i • • I.- ...14 • • • • . • • . • . • . • • l• ((K/ • 1. • . • . • • • • • ' r1....104.1-77 . A .L O2 4i Q1'LJ /),"Ye 1.0.•cdNer,Nori 60004)• (4ic-12:) OA .. 1 : • : 5 • 6 • • . • SI. EL ' • L 9 1 E Z, • 1 11 ili iii I t iti 1 iili iiliiiiIiiiili 111111111j111.111111.11111111111111.11111111111filidilitti[Rhidir:011.1.011ifibill,01.0111111111110111111.11 • • • ' •