Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit PL13-0038 - CITY OF TUKWILA - DUWAMISH GARDENS SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTDUWAMISH GARDENS 11269 EAST MARGINAL WY S PL13-0038 E13-015 L13-0015 SEPA Cita al J udwiea Department Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, Teri Svedahl , HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Project Number: PL13-038 Notice of Application Associated File Number (s): Notice of Decision Notice of Public Hearing Mailing requested by: Carol Notice of Public Meeting Determination of Non- Significance x Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit Shoreline Mgmt Permit Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Official Notice Notice of Action Other: Was mailed to each of the addresses listed/attached on this _18 day of _April , _2014 Project Name: Z UwuAnAl V\ ==- 5 : Project Number: PL13-038 Associated File Number (s): E13-015 Mailing requested by: Carol um Mailer's signature: /mac., s2Y W:\USERS\TERI\TEMPLATES-FORMS\AFFIDA IT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC AGENCY LABELS i V KXN Gu „ M5 atir, dn✓Ls, US Corps of Engineere jumccr'S Federal HWY Admin ( ) Federal Transit Admin, Region 10 ( ) Dept of Fish & Wildlife Section 1 FEDERAL AGENCIES • 511-41)"" Q"r - ( ) US Environmental Protection Ag- cy (E.P.A.) ( )US Dept of HUD ( ) National Marine Fisheries Service cffotm:c,av Section 2 ( ) Office of Archaeology ( ) Transportation Department (WSDOT NW) ( ) Dept of Natural Resources ( ) Office of the Governor ( ) WA State Community Development ( ) WA Fisheries & Wildlife, MillCreek Office ( ) WA Fisheries & Wildlife, Larry Fisher, 1775 12th Ave NW Ste 201, Issaquah WA 98027 WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) Dept of Social & Health Services ( ) Dept of Ecology NW Regional Office, Shoreland Div. SHORELINE NOD REQUIRES RETURN RECEIPT ( ) Dept of Ecology, SEPA **Send Electronically ( ) Office of Attorney General ( ) Office of Hearing Examiner ( ) KC Boundary Review Board ( ) Fire District # 11 ( ) Fire District # 2 ( ) KC Wastewater Treatment Div ( ) KC Dept of Parks & Recreation ( ) KC Assessor's Office Section 3 KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) Health Department ( ) Port of Seattle ( ) KC Dev & Enviro Services-SEPA Info Center ( ) KC Metro Transit Div-SEPA Official, Environmental Planning ( ) KC Dept of Natural Resources ( ) KC Dept of Natural Resources, Andy Levesque ( ) KC Public Library System ( ) Foster Library ( ) Renton Library ( ) Kent Library ( ) Seattle Library Section 4 SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES ( ) Westfield Mall Library ( ) Tukwila School District ( ) Highline School District ( ) Seattle School District ( ) Renton School District ( ) QWEST Communications ( ) Seattle City Light ( ) Puget Sound Energy ( ) Highline Water District ( ) Seattle Planning &Dev/Water Dept ( ) Comcast Section 5 UTILITIES ( ) BP Olympic Pipeline ( ) Val-Vue Sewer District ( ) Water District # 20 ( ) Water District # 125 ( ) City of Renton Public Works ( ) Bryn Mawr-Lakeridge Sewer/Water Dist ( ) Seattle Public Utilities ( ) Waste Management ( ) Tukwila City Departments ( ) Public Works ( ) Fire ( ) Police ( ) Planning ( ) Parks & Rec ( ) City Clerk ( ) Finance ( ) Building ( ) Mayor Section 6 CITY AGENCIES ( ) Kent Planning Dept ( ) Renton Planning Dept ( ) City of SeaTac ( ) City of Burien ( ) City of Seattle ( ) Strategic Planning *Notice of all Seattle Related Projects ( ) Puget Sound Regional Council ( ) SW KC Chamber of Commerce Muckleshoot Indian Tribe * Oe Cultural Resources �.4Fisheries Program ( ) Wildlife Program i Duwamish Indian Tribe * Section 7 OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) Puget Sound Clean Air Agency ( ) Sound Transit/SEPA ( ) Duwamish River Clean Up Coalition * ( ) Washington Environmental Council ( ) People for Puget Sound * ( ) Futurewise * send notice of all applications on Green/Duwamish River ( ) Seattle Times ( ) South County Journal Section 8 MEDIA ( ) Highline Times ( ) City of Tukwila Website P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist S-4 04-iej-k YY� 1 , Public Notice Mailings For Permits SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecoloav Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Tribes — For any application on the Green/Duwamish River, send the checklist and a full set of plans with the Notice Of Application Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (from PermitsPlus) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The Notice of Application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the Notice of Application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Notice is sent to Ecology's NW Regional Office Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mai/ to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date of filing with DOE) — Notice to DOE must be by return receipt requested mail (this requirement included in SSB 5192, effective 7-22-11). Department of Ecology Shorelands Section, NW Regional Office State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (printed out from PermitsPlus) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) - Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements — Cross-sections of site with structures & shoreline - Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist Carol Lumb From: Carol Lumb Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 5:19 PM To: SEPAunit@ecy.wa.gov Cc: Ryan Larson Subject: SEPA Determination Attachments: E13-015_MDNS_signed.pdf; site_9Ian_E13-015.pdf; SEPA staff report.doc; SEPA_Checklist_E13-015.pdf Attached please find a SEPA determination for the Duwamish Gardens project in the City of Tukwila, a shoreline restoration project on the Duwamish River. Please let me know if you have any questions. Carol Lumb Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 So u th cen ter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206-431-3661 CarolLumb@TuirwellaWa.gov Tukwila, the City of opportunity, the community of choice. 1 Carol Lumb From: Carol Lumb Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 3:45 PM To: 'donna.hogerhuis@muckleshoot.nsn.us' Subject: FW: Duwamish Gardens Project - Email #2 Attachments: SEPA staff report.doc; E13-015 MDNS signed.pdf Trying again — my first couple attempts to send you information have been returned. O From: Carol Lumb Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 3:43 PM To: 'donna.hogerhuis@muckleshoot.nsn.gov' Subject: Duwamish Gardens Project - Email #2 Donna, It looks like my first email to you failed to go through, I think because the plans for the project are 9 MB — if you want to see those, I can send you a hard copy or post them on my FTP site for your review. Thanks again for your help with the names and email addresses earlier. Let me know if you have questions. carol Carol Lurnb, Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206-431-3661 Carol Lvrb§a. Tuk wila Wa.go v Tukwila, the City of opportunity, the community of choice. 1 Carol Lumb From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Trying again. Carol Lumb Tuesday, April 29, 2014 3:46 PM 'donna.hogerhuis@muckleshoot.nsn.us' FW: Duwamish Gardens Project - Email #1 E13-015 MDNS signed.pdf; Duwamish_Gardens_50%_submittal_11x172.pdf From: Carol Lumb Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 3:41 PM To: 'donna.hogerhuis@muckleshoot.nsn.gov' Subject: Duwamish Gardens Project - Email #1 Donna, Thanks again for your help with names and email addresses. I am attaching the MDNS for the Duwamish Gardens project - the plans are a large set, so I will need to send you two emails. Let me know if you have questions. Carol Carol Lurnb, Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southeenter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206-431-3661 Carol.Luanb@T ukwJla Wa.gov Tukwila, the City of opportunity, the community of choice. 1 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS=2011-0199. SIGNATORY PARTY WASHINGTON STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER By: Date: Title: Allyson Brooks, Ph. D. State Historic Preservation Officer Contact Information: —Dtiib,n Department of Archaeology and Historeservation 1062 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 Olympia, WA 98501 Voice: (360) 586-3080 E-mail: Rob.Whitlam@dahp.wa.gov Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 9 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY WASHINGTON TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION By: Date: Title: Chris Moore Executive Director Contact Information: Chris Moore, Executive Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation Stimson -Green Mansion 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, Washington 98101 Voice: (206) 624-9449 E-mail: cmoore@preservewa.org Note: End of signature pages Page 17 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY WASHINGTON STATE RECREATION AND CONSERVATION OFFICE B y: Date: Title: Kaleen Cottingham Director Contact Information: Elizabeth Butler Recreation and Conservation Office 1111 Washington St SE Olympia, WA 98504 Voice: (360) 725-3944 E-mail: elizabeth.butler@rco.wa.gov Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 16 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45K1703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY KING COUNTY HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM By: Date: Title: Title: Judy Scott, Chairperson Port of Allyn Contact Information: Philippe D. LeTourneau, PhD Archaeologist King County Historic Preservation Program Department of Natural Resources and Parks 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 700 [MS: KSC-NR-0700] Seattle, WA 98104 Voice: (360) 477-4529 Email: Philippe.LeToumeau@kingcounty.gov Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 15 of 17 -{ Comment [p8]: Julie Koler? SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE By: Title: Virginia Cross. Tribal Council Chairperson Date: Contact Information: Laura R. Murphy Archaeologist Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 39015 172nd Ave. SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Voice: (253) 876-3272 E-mail: laura.murphy@muckleshoot.nsn.us Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 11 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY SNOQUALMIE INDIAN TRIBE By: Title: Date: Carolyn Lubenau, Chair, Snoqualmie Tribe Contact Information: Steven Mullen -Moses Director Archaeology & Historic Preservation Snoqualmie Tribe Voice: (425) 888-6551 x1106 Email: steve@snoqualmienation.com Note: Signatures continued on next page. 513b Puy 1Sai� Page 12 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY STILLAGUAMISH TRIBE B y: Date: Title: Shawn Yanity Chair, Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Contact Information: Kerry Lyste, Cultural Resources Stillagtiamish Tribe of Indians Post Office Box 277 Arlington, Washington 98223 Voice: (360) 652-7362 x226 Email: klyste@stillaguamish.com Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 13 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY SUQUAMISH TRIBE By: Date: Title: Leonard Forsman Chair, Suquamish Tribe Contact Information: Dennis Lewarch, THPO The Suquamish Tribe PO Box 498 Suquamish, WA 98392 Voice: (360) 394-8529 Email: dlewarch@suquamish.nsn.us Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 14 of 17 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director Notice of Application PROJECT INFORMATION The City of Tukwila has submitted a SEPA application to complete the Duwamish Gardens Salmon Habitat Restoration Project at the Duwamish Gardens property, located at 11269 East Marginal Way South. The City proposes to create an off channel habitat area for salmon and other fish species. The work will require removal of sediment, gravel and other materials from the 200 ft. shoreline jurisdiction. Work will also include relocating the riverbank, bringing in fill material, planting native vegetation, and construction of a walking trail. The project is part of the City's ongoing efforts to improve the Duwamish/Green River watershed for salmon and other aquatic species. Project Location: 11269 East Marginal Way S King County Parcel #102304-9071 Projects applied for include: SEPA Environmental Review Other known required permits include: Shoreline Exemption (exempt under WAC 973-27-040 (o) — identified in WRIA 9 plan as DU 7 project) Grading Permit Flood Control Permit WDFW Hydraulic Project Approval USACOE Section 10 Permit Studies provided with the applications include: Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Carosino Property, dated November 26, 2008. FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The application is available for review at the City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Blvd #100. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT Your written comments on the project are requested. They must be delivered to DCD at 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100; Tukwila, WA, 98188 or postmarked no later than 5:00 P.M. on March 21, 2014. Comments may also be emailed to Brandon.Miles@Tukwilawa.gov. Tukwila has reviewed the project for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a determination of non -significance (DNS). The optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-35 is being used. There will be a single integrated comment period for the land use permits and the environmental review so this may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the project. If timely comments do not identify probable significant adverse impacts that were not considered by the anticipated determination the DNS will be issued without a second comment period. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling DCD at (206) 431-3670. For further information on this proposal, contact Brandon Miles at (206) 431-3684, Brandon.Miles@tukwilawa.gov or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: February 24, 2014 Notice of Completeness Issued: February 24, 2014 Notice of Application Issued: March 7, 2014 0400 TO: City of Tukwila RECEIVE Department of Community Development MAR 04 201k TUKVVi�x PUBLIC WORKS File Number E13-015 PLI3 —03b LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM Building Planning Public Works Fire Dept. Police Dept. Parks/Rec Project: Duwamish Gardens SEPA Address: 11269 East Marginal Way Date March 4, 2014 transmitted: Response March 20m 2014 requested by: Staff coordinator: B. Miles Date response received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60 -day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS (Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) i PP,e-L)t' EA G.) I71( C0et-4,DtTroAJs,• . SEPA Review f • ir proposed salmon enhancement project. AidijHe & CAvVVitg,5. 6Ptro Rol4 11,04/Laess Rreii,„,,,,t,i) ua be_ efrt ♦- 'i'4,u l� c /.T Plan check date: S t i of l u} Comments `,� S prepared by: �j i Update date: 0400 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number E13-015 LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM TO: Building 1❑1 Planning I❑I Public Works Fire Dept. Police Dept. Parks/Rec Project: Duwamish Gardens SEPA Address: 11269 East Marginal Way Date March 4, 2014 transmitted: Response March 20m 2014 requested by: Staff coordinator: B. Miles Date response received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60 -day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS (Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) SEPA Review for proposed salmon enhancement project. Plan check date: Comments Update date: ;� ' •reoared b : ./r/ 0400 TO: City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number E13-015 LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM Building Planning 11 Public Works Fire Dept. 1❑ Police Dept. Parks/Rec Project: Duwamish Gardens SEPA Address: 11269 East Marginal Way Date March 4, 2014 transmitted: Response March 20m 2014 requested by: Staff coordinator: B. Miles Date response received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60 -day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS (Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) SEPA Review for proposed salmon enhancement project. Plan check date: Comments Update date: prepared by: 1 �i)(' t- ��r , (to MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, THE WASHINGTON STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, AND THE CITY OF TUKWILA SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. 1. WHEREAS, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District (Corps) Regulatory Branch received a Department of the Army (DA) permit application from the City of Tukwila (Tukwila) associated with a fish habitat improvement project located in Tukwila at 11269 East Marginal Way S. T23N, R04E, sec10, W.M., Des Moines USGS 7.5' quadrangle, King County, Washington (Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199); and 2. WHEREAS, the Corps' issuance of such a permit is subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. (NHPA), and its implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800 and 33 CFR 325, Appendix C); and 3. WHEREAS, the proposed project (the Project) includes construction of shallow water salmonid habitat (mudflats) within the Duwamish River by excavating approximately 30,000 cubic yards of soil along the right bank of the channel. The Undertaking will also remove existing buildings and structures associated with the National Register of Historic Places -eligible Ray-Carrossino Farmstead. 4. WHEREAS, the area of potential effects (APE) is all areas of permitted in -water activity, including upland areas where work is directly associated, integrally related, and would not occur but for the in -water authorized activity associated with the DA permit; and 5. WHEREAS, the Project is on land owned by the -Tukwila; and 6. WHEREAS, f fourkeports have been prepared identifying known and potential historic - - properties associated with the Undertaking, titled: a) Subsurface Investigation of the Proposed Duwamish Gardens, dated November 2008; b) Results of Contaminated Soil Geoprobe Observation and Cultural Resources Soil Analysis, dated July 2012; c) Duwamish Gardens Project, City of Tukwila, King County, Washington: Archaeological Site Delineation at 45 -KI - 703, dated April 2013; and d) Eligibility Recommendation for the Historic Component of Archaeological Site 45 -KI -703, dated February 2014, and these reports are included as if attached and incorporated by this reference; and Comment [pl]: Add the Grulich repon on the historic structures? SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. 7. WHEREAS, the Corps identified two historic sites in the APE, the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead and the prehistoric component of site 45KI703, both of which have been previously identified and determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places; and 8. WHEREAS, demolition and removal of the structures associated with the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead and excavation of portions of site 45K1703 would have an adverse effect to the properties, and the Washington State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) also known as the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) has agreed; and 9. WHEREAS, the Corps notified the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Muckleshoot), the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe (Snoqualmie), the Stillaguamish Tribe (Stillaguamish), the Suquamish Tribe (Suquamish), the Tulalip Tribes, and asked each of these Federally recognized tribes whether they would like to participate in this process, and 10. WHEREAS, Muckleshoot, Stillaguamish, Snoqualmie and Suquamish ("Consulting Tribes") have asked to participate as consulting parties in the Section 106 process, and 11. WHEREAS, the Corps notified the King County Historic Preservation Program (KCHPP), the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), and the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation (WTHP) about the undertaking and has taken into consideration their comments on identification, eligibility, assessment of effect, and resolution of adverse effect; and 12. WHEREAS, KCHPP, RCO, and WTH public entities; and quested consulting party status as interested 13. WHEREAS, in accordance with 36 CFR Section 800.6(a)(1). the Corps has notified the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Council) of its adverse effect determination and the Council has chosen [to/not to] participate in the consultation; and 14. WHEREAS, pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800.6(c)(2), and because of their role as the applicant for the DA permit, the Corps has invited Tukwila to sign this Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) as a signatory; and 15. WHEREAS, pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800.6(c)(3), and based on their stated interest, the Corps has invited the Muckleshoot, Stillaguamish, Snoqualmie and Suquamish, KCHPP, RCO, and WTHP to sign this MOA as concurring parties; and 16. WHEREAS, the Corps has consulted with SHPO and Tukwila in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. §470 (NHPA), to resolve the adverse effects of the undertaking on historic properties; and NOW, THEREFORE, the Corps, SHPO, and Tukwila (collectively the "Parties" and individually the "Party") agree that should the Undertaking move forward to construction, that the following Corps -enforced stipulations resolve adverse effects to historic properties associated with the Undertaking, and that these stipulations shall govern the Project and all of its parts unless this MOA expires or is terminated. Page 2 of 17 26r 1 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. Stipulations The Corps shall ensure that the following stipulations are implemented: 1. Archaeological Excavation and Site Protection. Sub -surface archaeology will be identified, treated, and protected following the mitigation plan titled Dutvatnish Gardens Project, City of Tukwila, King County, Washington, Archaeological Mitigation Plan for 45 -KI -703, dated March 2014, and this plan is included as if attached and incorporated by this reference. 2. Ray-Carrossino Farmstead. The following steps will be taken to resolve adverse effects to the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead: a. Salvage Materials for the Heritage Barns program. Materials from the barn will be salvaged as follows: (1) Tukwila will arrange to have a contractor dismantle and salvage specific portions or types of wood from the barn. (2) Materials will be salvaged in an orderly fashion (i.e., stickered on pallets, covered and secured). (4) Tukwila will provide reasonable access to those receiving the material for a few scheduled days for material pick-up. (5) After steps 1-4 are in place, the WTHP will contact area owners of designated Heritage Barns via email with the list of available materials attached. The WTHP would then accept requestlfor the materials on a first come, first serve basis until all material was accounted for. If, after a certain period of time k3 months), any unaccounted material remained, the WTHP would bundle it and sell it to a salvager, with the WA Trust receiving proceeds from the sale. Tukwila will dispose of any remaining unwanted salvaged material. b. Documentation of Ray-Carrossino Farmstead. Although the property has been documented architecturally, there is not sufficiently rich documentation on its role in the larger Italian community nor much about the Ray family. (1) Oral history interviews will be conducted with up to three Carrossino descendants to gather additional inforniation about the evolution of agricultural activities (from subsistence to specialized market). the history of how the original c.160 acre farmstead was used and eventually reduced in size to the present acreage. the Italian -American community in Tukwila. their social activities, and the community's relationship to the Duwamish Gardens property. The interviews will be audio recorded and the audio will be transcribed. Page 3 of 17 Comment [p2]: This would not be necessary if the assessment already says what is salvage-wonhy. Comment [p3]: This is too long; how can you tie this in to the contractor so that they can dispose of the rest?? SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45K1703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. (2) Additional research will be conducted on the history of the Ray family with particular focus on learning the locations of the Ray Ferry and the original Ray house. Up to 40 hours of research will be conducted during visits at up to four research repositories. Consulting oarties-) Comment (p4]: We agreed in the 3/20/14 call that this was not the priority at this time. (3) Tukwila will prepare an annotated map and brief report summarizing the additional research conducted under 2b k 1) and (2) above._The map will generally depict areas of - - -, - - -( Comment [p5]: Update numbering as needed. ..................... specific agricultural or social activities as well as any additional information about the Ray Family. The map and brief report will be submitted to DAHP, KCHPP. and the Tukwila Historical Society. The audio and transcriptions of the oral histories will be submitted to the Tukwila Historical Society. 3. Tribal Outreach. In recognition of native traditional occupation and continuing use of the area, Tukwila shall work with the Consulting Tribes to develop interpretive and educational components to be incorporated in the project to inform the public about Indian use of the area in the pre -contact and early historic periods, and to the present day. Within 30 days of execution of the MOA, Tukwila will schedule meetin s with the Consulting Tribes and work with them to develop a Tribal Outreach Plan for evelopin the educational and interpretative components cohesively into the project. •rior to implementation, the plan will be subject to review by Consulting Tribes. The Tribal Outreach Plan will include the following: a. TBD 4. Public Outreach. The following public outreach efforts will implemented: a. Install at least two edtueatenal-interpretive panels on-site to inform the community and visitors about the project and the area's history The panels will be developed by a professional interpretive specialist. shall be created inOne panel will focus on the farmstead history and one panel will focus on the Italian -American community in Tukwila. •sultati n with the Consulting Parties will have an opportunity to comment on the draft panel layout and text. Page 4 of 17 7 -( Comment [p6]: TCP recognized. SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45K1703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. b. 'Commission a new on-line essay regarding the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead and Am+v 15K1 03 on HistoryLink (http://www.historylink.org/) or a suitable alternative that has been approved by the Consulting Parties. [ c. Tukwila will present the results of excavation of 45KI703 at a professional meeting (such as the NWAAsNWACs). 5. Reporting. For any report produced under this MOA, Tukwila shall email all consulting parties a draft version of the electronic copy to review. Tukwila will revise the draft electronic copy in consideration of the comments. After final approval by the Corps and DAHP, Tukwila will provide consulting parties to this MOA two hard copies and one electronic copy of any final report Tukwila prepares as required under this MOA. Tukwila will email a yearly status update to the consulting parties detailing the current status of any incomplete Stipulation. 6. Administrative Stipulations a. Disputes arising about the implementation of the stipulations of this MOA will be resolved in the following manner: (1) The Corps shall notify all other signatories in writing of any instance where a signatory or consulting party to this MOA objects to the implementation of any of the stipulations set forth above. The Corps shall consult to resolve the objection. If the Corps determines that the objection cannot be resolved, the Corps shall forward all documentation relevant to the dispute, including the Corps' proposed resolution, to the ACHP. Within fifteen (15) business days after receipt of adequate documentation, the ACHP shall either: (a) provide written recommendations relative to the dispute, or (b) notify the Corps that it will comment in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800.7(c). (2) Any comment provided by the ACHP in response to such a request shall be taken into account by the Corps in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800 with reference to the subject of the dispute. The Corps' responsibility to ensure that all other actions under this MOA that are not the subject of the dispute are carried out shall remain unchanged. Prior to reaching a final decision on the dispute, the Corps shall prepare a written response that takes into account any timely advice or comments regarding the dispute from the ACHP, signatories and consulting parties, and provide them with a copy of this written response. The Corps will then proceed according to its final decision. (3) If the ACHP does not provide its advice regarding the dispute within the fifteen (15) day time period, the Corps may make a final decision on the dispute and proceed accordingly. Prior to reaching such a final decision. the Corps shall prepare a written Page 5 of 17 Comment [p7]: Ryan: this is in the 5500-1000 range. HistoryLink will prepare their own essay. SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. response that takes into account any timely comments regarding the dispute from the signatories and consulting parties to the MOA, and provide them and the ACHP with a copy of such written response. b. At any time during implementation of the measures stipulated in this MOA, should an objection to any such measure or its manner of implementation be raised by a member of the public regarding historic preservation, the Corps shall take the objection into account and consult as needed with the objecting party, the SHPO, or the ACHP to determine how best to address the objection. c. The contact information for each signatory to this MOA may be updated which shall not be considered an amendment to this MOA. An electronic message (email) exchanged among the contacts, indicating the updated information, shall be sufficient provided the signature authority for each Party is included in such communication. d. If the terms of this agreement have not been implemented within five years of execution of the MOA, this agreement shall be considered null and void, unless the signatories agree in writing to an extension for carrying out its terms. If this agreement is considered null and void, the Corps shall so notify the parties to this agreement, and if Tukwila chooses to continue with the undertaking, shall re-initiate review of the undertaking in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800. e. Any signatory to this agreement may propose to the Corps that the agreement be amended, whereupon the Corps shall consult with the other parties to this agreement to consider such an amendment. This MOA will be amended when such an amendment is agreed to in writing by all signatories. The amendment will be filed with the ACHP and go into effect on the date of the last signature from signatories. f. If the Corps determines that it cannot implement the terms of this agreement, or if any signatory determines that the agreement is not being properly implemented, such party may propose to the other parties to this agreement that it be terminated. The party proposing to terminate this agreement shall so notify all parties to this agreement, explaining the reasons for termination and affording them at least 30 days to consult and seek alternatives to termination. The parties shall then consult. Should such consultation fail, the Corps or other signatory party may terminate the agreement by so notifying all parties. Should this agreement be terminated, the Corps shall either: (1) Consult in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800.6 to develop a new MOA; or (2) Request the comments of the ACNP pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800.7. Page 6 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. g. Execution of this MOA by Corps, SHPO and Tukwila. and implementation of its terms, evidence that the Corps has afforded the ACHP an opportunity to comment on the undertaking and its effects on historic properties, and that Corps has taken into account the effects of the undertaking on historic properties. Page 7of17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45K1703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. SIGNATORY PARTY U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, SEATTLE DISTRICT By: Date: Title: Bruce A. Estok Colonel, Corps of Engineers District Commander Contact Information: Chris Jenkins, Regulatory Cultural Resources Program Manager US Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District P.O. Box 3755 Seattle WA 98124 Voice: (206) 764-6941 Email: Pau1.C.Jenkins@usace.army.mil Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 8 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS=2011-0199. SIGNATORY PARTY WASHINGTON STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER By: Date: Title: Allyson Brooks, Ph. D. State Historic Preservation Officer Contact Information: Dr. Rob Whitlam Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 1062 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 Olympia, WA 98501 Voice: (360) 586-3080 E-mail: Rob.Whitlam@dahp.wa.gov Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 9 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. SIGNATORY PARTY CITY OF TUKWILA By: Date: Title: Jim Haggerton Mayor Contact Information: Ryan Larson, P.E. Senior Program Manager — Surface Water 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188-2544 Voice: (360) 431-2456 E-mail: Ryan.Larson@TukwilaWA.gov Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page l0 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE By: Date: Title: Virginia Cross Tribal Council Chairperson Contact Information: Laura R. Murphy Archaeologist Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 39015 172nd Ave. SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Voice: (253) 876-3272 E-mail: laura.murphy@muckleshoot.nsn.us Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 11 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY SNOQUALMIE INDIAN TRIBE By: Date: Title: Carolyn Lubenau, Chair, Snoqualmie Tribe Contact Information: Steven Mullen -Moses Director Archaeology & Historic Preservation Snoqualmie Tribe Voice: (425) 888-6551 .x1106 Email: steve@snoqualmienation.com Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 12 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY STILLAGUAMISH TRIBE By: Date: Title: Shawn Yanity Chair, Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Contact Information: Kerry Lyste, Cultural Resources Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Post Office Box 277 Arlington, Washington 98223 Voice: (360) 652-7362 x226 Email: klyste@stillaguamish.com Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 13 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY SUQUAMISH TRIBE By: Date: Title: Leonard Forsman Chair, Suquamish Tribe Contact Information: Dennis Lewarch, THPO The Suquamish Tribe PO Box 498 Suquamish, WA 98392 Voice: (360) 394-8529 Email: dlewarch@suquamish.nsn.us Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 14 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY KING COUNTY HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM By: Date: Title: Title: !Judy Scott, Chairperson Port of Allyn 1, Contact Information: Philippe D. LeTourneau, PhD Archaeologist King County Historic Preservation Program Department of Natural Resources and Parks 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 700 [MS: KSC-NR-0700] Seattle, WA 98104 Voice: (360) 477-4529 Email: Philippe.LeTourneau@kingcounty.gov Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 15 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45K1703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY WASHINGTON STATE RECREATION AND CONSERVATION OFFICE B y: Date: Title: Kaleen Cottingham Director Contact Information: Elizabeth Butler Recreation and Conservation Office 1111 Washington St SE Olympia, WA 98504 Voice: (360) 725-3944 E-mail: elizabeth.butler@rco.wa.gov Note: Signatures continued on next page. Page 16 of 17 SUBJECT: Resolution of Adverse Effects to 45KI703 and the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, Tukwila, King County, Washington, Corps Reference Number NWS -2011-0199. CONCURRING PARTY WASHINGTON TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION By: Date: Title: Chris Moore Executive Director Contact Information: Chris Moore, Executive Director Washington Trust for Historic Preservation Stimson -Green Mansion 1204 Minor Avenue Seattle, Washington 98101 Voice: (206) 624-9449 E-mail: cmoore@preservewa.org Note: End of signature pages Page 17 of 17 City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist Date: ),5 i f Applicant Name: 2_fC4% L/53 , �f � �� 1n A `l J Street Address: (.4 )7) ,..4-441Cai c/ (tvj1 '5\c_. 1 1.J City, State, Zip: r V,1 � L/ 3 t 2 3 Telephone: ° 2 9 — +3 3— D I 6( Directions This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to result in potential "take" of Chinook salmon, Coho salmon, or Cutthroat trout as defined by Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or "No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next question as directed by the checklist. To answer these questions, you may need to refer to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if "take" is indicated. W:\Forms\Applications, Land Use\2011 Applications\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc Part A: Please review a.... answer each question carefully. Consiaer all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1-0 Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is defined as any excavating, filling, clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof, which alters the existing ground surface of the earth (TMC 18.06.370). Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 2-0 YES> ontinue to Question 1-1 (Page 3) 2-0 Will the project require any form of clearing? Clearing means the removal or causing to be removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (18.06.145). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-0 YES - ntinue to Question 2-1 (Page 4) 3-0 ' the project require work, during any time of the project, below the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands? Ordinary high water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks of a stream and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual as to distinctly mark the soil from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Page 18-15). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4-0 Continue to Question 3-1 (Page 5) 4-0 ' t11 the project result in the processing or handling, storage, or treatment of hazardous substances? This does not include the proper use of fuel stored in a vehicle's fuel tank. Hazardous substances are any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits the characteristics or criteria of hazardous waste as defined by Washington Administrative Code 173-303 (TMC 18.06.385). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on-site during construction. Please circle a ropriate response. Nom -Continue to Question 5-0 S - Continue to Question 5-0 5-0 Will the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples of projects that may affect groundwater include, but are not limited to: construction of a new well, change in water withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC 18.45.060 or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate response. - Continue to Question 6-0 YES - Continue to Question 6-0 W:\Forms\Applications, Land Use\2011 Applications\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc Litt' of 1 uKwua LJA bcreenzng LnecKtzst Part B (continued) 1-4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, 0r Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - ontinue to Question 2-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 2-0 (Page 2) Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 2-1 Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) YES - 'ontinue to Question 2-2 2-2 ';-11.11 the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as any self-supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a potential diameter -breast -height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2-3 YES Continue to Question 2-3 2-3 ill the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in the fall. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2-4 Opontinue to Question 2-4 2-4 -0111 the project involve clearing within 100 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 3-0 (Page 1) YEAS - ontinue to Question 2-5 2-5 Will the project involve clearing within 40 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) YES - ontinue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) 3-6 City of l ukwila LSA Screening Checklist Will the project .,;suit in impacts to watercourses or wetlands gnat have a surface connection to another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside seeps and wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection to the watercourse or river but are not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under natural conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow/groundwater support of 9 and above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please e -appropriate response. ontinue to Question 3-7 S Continue to Question 3-7 3-7 Will the project include the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands connected to a watercourse containing salmonids? For the purpose of this analysis, the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands includes wetlands, channels, sloughs, or other habitat feature created to enhance wildlife use, particularly waterfowl use, or may be attractive to wildlife, larly waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 3-8 YES - Continue to Question 3-8 3-8 Will the project include bank stabilization? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete es, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 4-0 (Page 2) ES - Continue to Question 4-0 (Page 2) City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist Date: g k-5 i ti Applicant Name: eicA, 3O GGIL Street Address: & 33-) 'S )L C4wttl [kit 1k. 1 ) J City, State, Zip: 11,31.4 ` L/ 2 1 3 3 Telephone: 3 22 ' 4-3 3 —0 I 1 6{ Directions This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to result in potential "take" of Chinook salmon, Coho salmon, or Cutthroat trout as defined by Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or "No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next question as directed by the checklist. To answer these questions, you may need to refer to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if "take" is indicated. W:\Forms\Applications, Land Use\2011 Applications\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc Part A: Please review ant. _swer each question carefully. Conside_ _l phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1-0 Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is defined as any excavating, filling, clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof, which alters the existing ground surface of the earth (TMC 18.06.370). Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 2-0 YES - ontinue to Question 1-1 (Page 3) 2-0 Will the project require any form of clearing? Clearing means the removal or causing to be removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (18.06.145). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-0 YES - C•ntinue to Question 2-1 (Page 4) 3-0 'I, ' the project require work, during any time of the project, below the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands? Ordinary high water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks of a stream and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual as to distinctly mark the soil from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Page 18-15). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4-0 Continue to Question 3-1 (Page 5) 4-0 the project result in the processing or handling, storage, or treatment of hazardous substances? This does not include the proper use of fuel stored in a vehicle's fuel tank. Hazardous substances are any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits the characteristics or criteria of hazardous waste as defined by Washington Administrative Code 173-303 (TMC 18.06.385). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on-site during construction. Please circle a ropriate response. y'Continue to Question 5-0 S - Continue to Question 5-0 5-0 Will the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples of projects that may affect groundwater include, but are not limited to: construction of a new well, change in water withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC 18.45.060 or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate response. - Continue to Question 6-0 YES - Continue to Question 6-0 W:\Forms\Applications, Land Use\2011 Applications\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc City of '1 ukwila LSA Screening Checklist Part A (continued) 6-0 Will the project involve landscaping or re -occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one-time use of transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect appropriate for the use of the land (TMC 18.06.490). For the purpose of this analysis, this i des the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle appropriate response. hecklist Complete YES — Checklist Complete Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1-1 Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water mark and top of bank? This includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a river or stream, but will not require work below the ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high water mark is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 1-2 ontinue to Question 1-2 1-2 ould the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off site or increased rates of erosion and/or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in increased erosion and/or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your project involves grading and you have not prepared a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percent of the runoff (including during construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answer Yes to this question. If your project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 1-3 S - ontinue to Question 1-3 1-3 11 the project result in the construction of new impervious surfaces? Impervious surfaces include those hard surfaces which prevent or restrict the entry of water into the soil in the manner that such water entered the soils under natural conditions prior to development; or a hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased rate of flow from the flow presented under natural conditions prior to development. Such areas include, but are not limited to, rooftops, asphalt or concrete paving, compacted surfaces, or other surfaces that similarly affect the natural infiltration or runoff patterns existing prior to development (TMC 18.06.445). Please circle appropriate response. ntinue to Question 2-0 (Page 2) ntinue to Question 1-4 City of 1 ukwila LSA Screening Checklist Part B (continued) 1-4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, r Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 2-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 2-0 (Page 2) Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 2-1 Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) ontinue to Question 2-2 2-2 ' f ill the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as any self-supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a potential diameter -breast -height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2-3 YES Continue to Question 2-3 2-3 ill the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in the fall. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2-4 igglo ontinue to Question 2-4 2-4 1 'f ill the project involve clearing within 100 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 3-0 (Page 1) YE - ontinue to Question 2-5 2-5 Will the project involve clearing within 40 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) YES - ontinue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) City of 1 ukunla t SA Screening Checklist Part D: Please review e question below for projects that incluc ork below the ordinary high water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish/Green or Black Rivers or in wetlands. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 3-1 Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the area between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a stream, and bed means the stream bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted -width of a stream. This includes both temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response. • - Continue to Question 3-2 410ontinue to Question 3-2 3-2 ,c ill the project involve any physical alteration to a watercourse or wetland connected to the Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose of this analysis, "connected to the river means" flowing into via a surface connection or culvert, or having other physical characteristics that allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts to areas such as sloughs, side channels, remnant oxbows, ditches formed from channelized portions of natural watercourses or any area that may provide off channel rearing habitat for juvenile fish from the Duwamish River. This includes both temporary construction alterations and permanent modifications. Watercourses or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwamish River that have a hanging culvert, culvert with a flap gate, diversion, or any entirely man-made or artificial structure that precludes fish access should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO , Continue to Question 3-3 YES - Continue to Question 3-3 3-3 Will the project result in the construction of a new structure or hydraulic condition that could be a barrier to salmonid passage within the watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, a barrier means any artificial or human modified structure or hydraulic condition that inhibits the natural upstream or downstream movement of s. onids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. NO -, ontinue to Question 3-4 YES - Continue to Question 3-4 3-4 Will the project involve a temporary or permanent change in the cross-sectional area of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, the cross-sectional area is defined as a profile taken from the ordinary high water mark on the right bank to the ordinary high water mark, on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-5 O, ontinue to Question 3-5 3-5 Will the project require the removal of debris from within the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, debris includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, logs, shrubs, rocks, piles, rip -rap, submerged metal, and broken concrete or other building materials. Projects that would require debris removal from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers as part of a maintenance activity should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. ANN I __ • ntinue to Question 3-6 dasi" ontinue to Question 3-6 Laty of Tukwila LSJI Screentng Checklzst 3-6 Will the project r. .t in impacts to watercourses or wetlands have a surface connection to another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside seeps and wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection to the watercourse or river but are not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under natural conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow/groundwater support of 9 and above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please appropriate response. Continue to Question 3-7 S - Continue to Question 3-7 3-7 Will the project include the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands connected to a watercourse containing salmonids? For the purpose of this analysis, the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands includes wetlands, channels, sloughs, or other habitat feature created to enhance wildlife use, particularly waterfowl use, or may be attractive to wildlife, larly waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 3-8 YES - Continue to Question 3-8 3-8 Will the project include bank stabilization? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete es, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 4-0 (Page 2) S - Continue to Question 4-0 (Page 2) ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Duwamish Gardens Habitat Project 2. Name of applicant: City of Tukwila 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Ryan Larson, Senior Program Manager City of Tukwila Public Works 6300 Southcenter Blvd Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 4. Date checklist prepared: February 1, 2014 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila. 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction is planned to commence in the summer of 2014 and be completed by winter of 2015. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. In the future the City may complete shoreline enhancements on the following adjacent parcels, 1023049059, 0923049292 and 0923049153. Completing shoreline restoration on these parcels is subject to availability of funding and will require separate environmental review. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. B. Miles Page 1 02/25/2014 C:\Users\Brandon-m\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\N6SALWBL\SEPA Checklist (2).doc Page 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECI.,,IST • Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife • Aquatic Use Authorization on Department of Natural Resources managed aquatic lands from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. • Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessment • Archaeological Site Delineation — ESA Paragon 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. In 2009, the City of Tukwila issued a Determination of Non -Significance for the demolition of all structures on the site. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Shoreline Compliance, City of Tukwila. Flood Control Zone Permit, City of Tukwila Clearing and Grading Permit, City of Tukwila Section 10 Permit, US Army Corps Hydraulic Project Approval, WDFW 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternates of your proposal and should not be summarized here. The site is known as Duwamish Gardens and has been owned by the City of Tukwila since 2008 for the purposes of converting the property to salmon recovery, conservation, and outdoor recreation. This is explicit in a 2008 agreement between the City of Tukwila and State of Washington. In 2010, a conceptual site plan was developed by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife for the site. The City of Tukwila has since modified the design and proposes the creation of approximately one acre of estuarine off channel habitat, as well as approximately two acres of upland terrestrial habitat and passive park features. A park and pedestrian trail will be developed in the upland portion of the site, and a trail will lead down to the edge of the restored off channel area. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Page 2 'NVIRONMENTAL CHEC_LIST 11269 E Marginal Way South Tukwila, WA 98168 Section 10, Township 23N, Range 04E, WM 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? Yes, the site is located along the Duwamish River. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The majority of the project site is flat with 1.5:1 slopes adjacent to the Duwamish River. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Soil Conservation Service information is not available. However, the project will occur in the Duwamish River Valley where alluvial soils, native sands and silts are typical. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Not known. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The proposed project is to improve fish habitat along the Duwamish River. The following grading activities will occur: 1. Approximately 143 cubic yards of gravel and cobble to accommodate a trail to the river will be installed; Page 3 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECi.LIST 2. Approximately 26,256 cubic yards of upland material will be removed in order to create an off channel from the Duwamish. 3. Removal of an additional 388 cubic yards of sediments below the Ordinary High Water Mark will occur. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. g• Yes, work could cause the stream banks to sluff or erode into the waterbody, but the use of best management practices will reduce any chances of erosion occurring. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 1000 square feet of the site area will be covered with imperious surfaces. Impervious surfaces on the site will include a small parking area and a pedestrian trail. Less than 5% of the property will be covered with impervious surface area. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: The use of best management practices. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The completed project will not impact air quality. In fact, the planted trees and other plantings may have a nominal impact in improving air quality. There may be some impacts associated with construction equipment, but this will be temporary and short term. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None foreseen. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Site watering will be used to control dust particles during clearing and grading activities and other best practices. Page 4 /IIINVIRONMENTAL CHECi—IST 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes, the Duwamish River is located adjacent to the subject property. The Duwamish River ultimately flows to Elliot Bay, which is part of the Puget Sound. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, the project is a fish habitat improvement project along the Duwamish River (Note: This is not required mitigation). The City proposes to construct one acre of offsite intertidal habitat area. As part of the construction project, 26,256 cubic yards of upland material will be disturbed to create the habitat area. Additionally, 338 cubic yards of sediment will be removed below the Ordinary High Water Mark. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Approximately, 388 cubic yards of sediment will be removed below the Ordinary High Water Mark. All fill materials will be removed to an approved, offsite facility. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. Yes, the project is the creation of an off channel intertidal habitat area. The purpose of the diversion is to create an area along the Duwamish River that will assist in salmon recovery in WRIA 9. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Per floodplain map 53033C0645F, the site is not located in the 1995 flood plain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. Page 5 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC—LIST b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. No. 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No. The existing septic tanks for the two houses on site will be abandoned per King County and Department of Ecology standards. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The project will have a net decrease in the amount of impervious surfaces located on the property. All existing structures on the site will be removed and a small parking lot will be constructed. Construction of the parking lot will comply with Department Ecology standards and the City's adopted stormwater standards. Water will likely follow the existing contours on the site and infiltrate onsite. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Unlikely. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Best Management Practices and compliance with State and Federal laws regarding handling of fuels and other chemicals. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X Shrubs Page 6 /111iVIRO X Grass Pasture X crop or grain Fish: wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other X water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other X other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? In order to construct the off channel fish habitat area and to regrade the site, a small amount of existing shrubs and grass will be removed. A dozen trees will also be removed as part of the project. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The project is the completion of a fish habitual restoration area and thus a significant amount of native trees, shrubs, groundcover and emergent plant material will be planted on the site. A complete list of the plants to be planted and proposed spacing can be found in the plant list which is sheet 9 of 16 of the proposed plans. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds or animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: X Mammals: X • Fish: X Other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. The project is located along the Duwamish River which is known to contain endangered and threatened fish species. According to the "Restoration Programmatic For the State of Washington Specific Project Information Form," the following endangered or threatened fish species are present near the site: 1. Bull Trout/Puget Sound IRU (Threatened) 2. Chinook Salmon (Threatened) 3. Steelhead Trout (Threatened) Page 7 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC..LIST c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Yes, for a variety of fish species. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: This project goal is to improve the fish habitat along the Duwamish River. When completed, the project will create a transition zone where migrating juvenile salmon can feed, take shelter, and osmoregulate as they transition from being freshwater fish to saltwater fish. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Gas to operate vehicles during construction activities. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. The only risk will be the automobiles and small construction equipment be used during the maintenance activities. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Just those services that are typical for a park environment. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None needed. b. Noise Page 8 NVIRONMENTAL CHECK _IST 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Noise in the area is typical for an urban environment. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction noise. All noise will have to comply with the City's noise regulations found in Title 8 of the TMC. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None needed. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The property has been under city ownership since 2008. There are two existing houses on the property, but both homes no longer have occupants. Since acquiring the property, the city has used the property for storage of materials. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Yes, the site used to be part of an old farm. c. Describe any structures on the site. There are two houses on the property, a barn, and other smaller out buildings. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, all structures on the site will be either removed or demolished as part of this fish habitat project. An environmental review of removing the structures was conducted in 2009, see E09-016. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Manufacturing Industrial Center/Heavy f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Manufacturing Industrial Center/Heavy g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Urban Conservancy Page 9 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEL—LIST h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, the site is located along a shoreline of statewide significance. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None, both homes on the site are unoccupied. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None needed. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None needed. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing? Not Applicable. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not Applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not Applicable. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. Page 10 VIRONMENTAL CHECI—IST c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not Applicable. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? When completed, the project will be habitat restoration area along the shoreline with trails and off channel habitat. Other parks and habitat restoration areas in the vicinity include Duwamish Hill, Cecil Moses and North Winds Weir. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: The proposed project will increase passive recreation opportunities along the Green River. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. One of the houses on the site (11269 East Marginal Way South) is known as the Carisino House and dates back before the 1900s. In 2009/10, the city attempted to Page 11 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC..LIST locate an individual to remove the houses from the site. As was noted in the 2009 SEPA checklist, if a taker for the house could not be identified, the City will demolish the house. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. A cultural site assessment has been completed for the project. Archaeological Site 45-K1-703 was identified during excavation of a guide way support for the Sound Transit project. Further investigations and delineation of the site was completed as part of this project and the project plans were altered to avoid the majority of the site. The City is in consultation with the Corps of Engineers concerning impacts to archaeological artifacts on site. The project will not proceed until any impacts are properly mitigated. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: A mitigation plan is currently being developed between the City, the Corps of Engineers, and consulting parties. It is anticipated that the plan will include avoidance for the majority of the identified site combined with monitoring, documentation, and curation of any artifact found during construction. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site is accessed from East Marginal Way South. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Five stalls will be installed, none will be removed. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Page 12 VIRONMENTAL CHECK—IST No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Minimum. Once completed the site will allow for some passive recreation. g• Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None needed. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None expected. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. All utilities commonly found in urban areas are available near the site. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. No permanent utilities are required for project. Temporary irrigation may be installed in order to water the plantings on site. C. SIGNATURE Under the penalty of perjury the above answers under ESA Screening Checklist and State Environmental Policy Act Checklist are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that thead ancy is relying on them to make its decision. Date Submitted: I ' I l Signature: Page 13 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC''1",IST Page 14 - r REPLY TO ATTENTION OF Regulatory Branch DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. BOX 3755 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124-3755 DEC 0 2 2013 Allyson Brooks, Ph.D. State Historic Preservation Officer Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Post Office Box 48343c Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 Reference: NWS -2011-0199 Duwamish Gardens Adverse Effect Dear Dr. Brooks: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Regulatory Branch is continuing consultation on the Duwamish Gardens project (the Undertaking) pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (DAHP Log No. 101309-09-COE-S). The Corps is reviewing a permit application associated with the project from the City of Tukwila (Tukwila) and is the Federal agency responsible for Section 106 compliance for this permitting action. The Undertaking is located at 11269 East Marginal Way S. in Tukwila, King County, Washington. The proposed action is a fish habitat improvement project. The purpose of this letter is to provide results on the site delineation work at prehistoric archaeological site 45KI703, and to request your comments on our assessment of effects under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 45K1703 Prehistoric Site Delineation Work ESA Paragon finalized a report titled Duwamish Gardens Project, City of Tukwila, King County, Washington: Archaeological Site Delineation at 45 -KI -703 dated April 2013, copy enclosed, on the results of their site delineation work at 45KI703. During site delineation at 45KI703, ESA Paragon monitored 20 geoprobes, excavated 17 site delineation trenches (82.2 linear meters) and seven test excavation units (8.7 m3). ESA Paragon found that the "presence of sparse cultural material discovered during of [sic] delineation at 45 -KI -703 support extending site boundaries approximately 150 feet (45 m) westward from previously mapped site -2 - boundaries." Artifact density was much lower (almost 100 times lower) in ESA Paragon's test units comparable to units archaeologically excavated as part of the Sound Transit project. ESA Paragon recorded only 5.6 artifacts, including shell and bone, per cubic meter of screened deposits, compared to 544.6 per cubic meter in the core site area from the Sound Transit data recovery excavations. ESA Paragon also recorded "four concentrations of charcoal, oxidized soil, and ash (with or without fire modified rock and/or sparse shell/bone), interpreted as anthropogenic fire features; all were in relative proximity to the previously recorded portion of 45 -KI -703". ESA Paragon "interprets the results of current investigations to indicate that precontact human occupation and land use was substantially less frequent and intensive in the delineation area, compared with previously recorded portions of 45 -KI -703". ESA Paragon "recommends that the Duwamish Gardens project will result in No Adverse Effect on 45 -KI -703, because further archaeological work is unlikely to result in new information that qualitatively differs from, or quantitatively exceeds, information collected previously during data recovery mitigation." ESA Paragon recommends archaeological monitoring by a professional archaeologist during construction. The Corps reviewed the documentation provided by ESA Paragon, and does not agree that the proposed construction would not have an adverse effect to 45K1703. In particular, the presence of four features uncovered in the limited exposure of the trenches indicates that even more features are likely to be uncovered. Archaeological features are rare, excellent sources of information about a site. BOAS' 2010 report titled The Duwamish River Bend Site: Data Recovery at 45KI703 (NADB No. 1339853) provides an interpretation of the site as the remains of a "burning" ceremony. According to Astrida Blulds Onat, "the features and resources found at 45KI703 can all be explained in the context of a fire made to commemorate one or more events that were important to the people living in the Duwamish River valley". Further research on features at this site, combined with consultation with tribes familiar with "burning" ceremonies, could help clarify the purpose of the features, and help support or refute Blulds Onat's interpretation. Ray-Carrossino Farmstead and Historic Archaeology The historic component of the site includes the buildings associated with the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead, which have already been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The proposed project would require removal of these buildings; the Corps finds destruction of the farmstead buildings to be an adverse effect. -3 - In a letter dated November 4, 2008 (NADB No. 148249), ESA Paragon wrote "Additionally, a scatter of historic artifacts is present through much of the project area. This historic artifact component will likely need to be addressed due to its association with the Carosino [sicj House which has been determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places." Based on their 2013 site delineation work, ESA Paragon noted that "recent and historic artifacts were encountered within the upper 30 to 50 cm of every trench and test unit." ESA Paragon notes that some "patterning related differential functioning in separate areas of the farmstead was discerned. For example, Trenches 6, 7, 8 and Test Units 2 and 3 near the location of former greenhouses contained abundant fragments of terra cotta flower pots and flat glass clearly related the structures. On the other hand, Trench 16 and Test Units 6 and 7, located in the residential area defined by the Ray-Carrossino house and bunkhouse, contained abundant saw -cut pig and cow bones (not collected), representing domestic food waste accumulated during recent and historic occupation of the farmstead." ESA Paragon concludes that although "these broad patterns are easily detectable, they do not appear to provide significant new information regarding the history of the farmstead beyond that which has already been recorded by Courtois et al. (1999) and Blukis Onat (2010)." The Corps examined both references, and found that they provided very little information on the historic archaeology of the site. Courtois et al. (1999) is the final EIS for the Sound Transit project (NADB No. 1339836). The only reference to the project area in the EIS is found on page 137, and it only discusses the built environment of the farmstead and its significance to the Italian immigrant communities of the early 20a' Century. Blukis Onat's 2010 report focused on prehistoric archaeology. Discussion of historic artifacts is limited to 22 artifacts, including a hazelnut shell, two bone fragments, six vessel fragments, two ceramic fragments, three plastic fragments, seven nails and nail fragments, and one piece of clinker. The Corps finds that there is research potential associated with the historic artifacts buried at the site. ESA Paragon recovered evidence for easily detectable broad patterns of discrete use at the site, and historic artifacts in each unit. The historic artifacts can be directly tied back to the NRHP-eligible historic farmstead. It is also possible that buried historic features, such as an outhouse, could be discovered during excavation. Summary Based on the information presented above, the Corps has determined that this project will have an adverse effect on the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead and to both the historic and prehistoric components of 45KI703. The Corps invites your comments about our assessment of effect, as well as any other comments you have on the undertaking. The Corps recommends that consulting parties meet to discuss a resolution of adverse effects, and will be sending out an invitation soon. If you have any questions or desire additional information, please contact Mr. Lance Lundquist at 1ance.a.lundquist@usace.army.mil or (206) 764-6909, or me at (206) 764-6941. cerely, Chris Jenkins Regulatory Archaeologist Enclosure City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Jim Haggerton, Mayor Jack Pace, Director MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (MDNS) File Number: Applied: Issue Date: Status: E13--015 August 18, 2013 April 16, 2014 Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance Applicant: Ryan Larson, Tukwila Public Works Dept. Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: Construct a salmon habitat restoration project including off -channel habitat on approximately two acres located at 11269 East Marginal Way South. The work will require the removal of approximately 26,256 cubic yards of upland material to create the off -channel habitat. Approximately 388 cubic yards of material will be removed below the Ordinary High Water mark. A trail system will run through the upland portion of the restoration site and also down to the water on the southeast portion of the site. The site is located in the shoreline jurisdiction, however as a restoration project it is exempt from needing a shoreline substantial development permit. The site contains structures eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and also prehistoric archaeological materials. Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Numbers: Section/Township/Range: 11269 East Marginal Way South 1.02304-9071; 102304-9060; 102304-9055 10-23-04 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-350 subject to the following conditions: 1. Adoption and implementation of the Archaeological Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for 45 -KI -703, an identified prehistoric site. 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Memorandum of Agreement among the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer and the City of Tukwila. Appeals must be filed by Wednesday, May 7, 2014. The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 21 days from the date below. For a copy of the appeal procedures, contact the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development. Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations CL: Page 1 of 2 04/15/2014 9:05 AM H:\\E13-015 Duwamish Gardens\E13-015 MDNS 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206-431-3670 • Fax 206-431-3665 Duwamish Gardens Salmon Habitat Notice of Decision E13-015 April 16, 2014 ,oration Project shall be commenced within the time period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.21C.075) The project planner is Carol Lumb, who may be contacted at (206) 431-3661 for further information. 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. / Jack liace, Responsible Official City • Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431-3670 cc: Ryan Larson, Tukwila Public works Dept. Chris Jenkins, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Allyson Brooks, State Historic Preservation Officer Washington Trust for Historic Preservation Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office King County Historic Preservation Program Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Indian Tribe Snoqualmie Indian Tribe Stillaguamish Indian Tribe Suquamish Indian Tribe State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division CL: Page 2 of 2 04/15/2014 9:05 AM H:\\E13-015 Duwamish Gardens\E13-015 MDNS 4 CONTEXT PLAN Entry/ parking are. _ - To Efue/arnish Hill Preserve Pa fOi-foikee expansion Duwamish River • `71--V' 0 _Laties2+W._ 7,1 DUWAMISH GARDENS CITY OF TUKWILA MAY 16, 2013 j. a. brennane* associate. raLc City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director FINAL STAFF EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST File No: E13-015 I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION Construct a salmon habitat restoration project including off -channel habitat on approximately two acres located at 11269 East Marginal Way South. The work will require the removal of approximately 26,256 cubic yards of upland material to create the off -channel habitat. Approximately 388 cubic yards of material will be removed below the Ordinary High Water mark. A trail system will run through the upland portion of the restoration site and also down to the water on the southeast portion of the site. The site is located in the shoreline jurisdiction, however as a restoration project it is exempt from needing a shoreline substantial development permit. II. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Name: Duwamish Gardens Salmon Habitat Restoration Project Applicant: City of Tukwila Public Works Department Location: 11269 East Marginal Way South Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designation: Manufacturing Industrial Center — Heavy (MIC -H) The following information was considered as part of review of this application. 1. SEPA Checklist and ESA screening checklist dated February 29, 2014. 2. 60% Project Drawings prepared by J.A. Brennan associates, landscape architects and planners. 3. Preliminary Geotechnical Findings dated April 1, 2005 prepared by Associated Earth Sciences Inc. 4. Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments. 5. Restoration Programmatic Notice to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dated June 11, 2013. Technical Information Report prepared by Pacific Engineering Design dated March 7, 2005. 6. December 2, 2013 letter from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding archaeological and historic preservation adverse effects of proposed project. 7. Draft Archeological Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for 45 -KI -703, March, 2014, prepared by ESA Paragon. CL H:\E13-015\SEPA Staff Rpt. Page 1 of 6 04/04/2014 11:08 AM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206-431-3670 • Fax 206-431-3665 E13-015: SEPA Staff Report Duwamish Gardens Salmon Habitat Restoration Project NOTE: Technical reports and attachments referenced above may not be attached to all copies of this decision. Copies of exhibits, reports, attachments, or other documents may be reviewed and/or obtained by contacting Carol Lumb, Senior Planner, 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington, 98188, telephone 206-431-3661. III. REVIEW PROCESS The proposed action is subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review as the project does not meet the exemptions listed under WAC 197-11-800. IV. BACKGROUND/PROPOSAL The City purchased the site in 2008 for habitat restoration purposes. The proposal is to construct approximately one acre of off channel habitat and another acre of upland terrestrial habitat along with passive park features of trails through the upland portion of the site and a trail leading down to the water. The site was used historically for agricultural purposes. It was settled in 1882 by Thomas Ray, who maintained a market garden and orchard and provided ferry service on the river. A house was built on the site between 1882 and 1896. Outbuildings include a small bunkhouse, green house, barn and a few ancillary sheds. The farm was a social center for the Duwamish community, where dances, parties and community gatherings were held. After the turn of the century a group of Italian immigrants rented the property from the Ray family. By 1915, they had purchased the house along with 29 acres and formed Duwamish Garden, a wholesale produce company. One of the partners in this enterprise, Joe Carrossino and his wife Teresa lived in the house. The developed farmstead also included a bocci court and the property because a social gathering place for the local Italian truck farmers and their families. Under a previous SEPA review, E09-016, the demolition of the structures on the site was reviewed and a DNS was issued on July 7, 2010. Since that time, the City has advertised twice for individuals or organizations that are interested in removing the structures and saving them for historical purposes. No parties have indicated an interest in removing any of the structures. V. REVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The following lists the elements contained within the Environmental Checklist submitted for the proposed project. The numbers in the staff evaluation correspond to the numbers in the Environmental Checklist. If staff concurs with the applicant's response, this is so stated. If the response to a particular item in the checklist is found to be inadequate or clarification is needed, there is additional staff comment and evaluation. CL H:\E13-015\SEPA Staff Rpt. Page 2 of 6 04/04/2014 11:08 AM E13-015: SEPA Staff Report Duwamish Gardens Salmon Habitat Restoration Project A. BACKGROUND: 1-12 --Concur with checklist. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: 1. Earth: a -h-- Concur with checklist. 2. Air: a –Applicant is required to obtain all relevant permits from Puget Sound Clean Air Agency to address any emissions to the air. b -c– Concur with checklist. 3. Water: a(1)-a(6)—Concur with checklist. b(1) and (2) -- Concur with checklist. c Concur with checklist d – Concur with checklist. 4. Plants: a -c -- Concur with checklist. d -Landscaping will be provided as part of this development to meet the Shoreline Master Program's requirement for 25 feet of native plants in a buffer area between the restoration project and the adjacent property. 5. Animals: a-c—Concur with checklist. d – The site is also along the Pacific Flyway, a migratory bird route. 6. Energy and Natural Resources: a -c -- Concur with checklist. 7. Environmental Health: a –b —Concur with checklist. 8. Land and Shoreline Use: a -The site is adjacent to a truck terminal on the north and vacant land and a motel on the west. Across East Marginal Way South are other industrial uses with a police firing range CL H:\E13-015\SEPA Staff Rpt. Page 3 of 6 04/04/2014 11:08 AM E13-015: SEPA Staff Report Duwamish Gardens Salmon Habitat Restoration Project approximately 1/4 mile from the site. Historically, the property was farmed, although the farming activity has ceased prior to City acquisition of the site. b-1-- Concur with checklist. 9. Housing: a -c— Concur with checklist. 10. Aesthetics: a-c—Concur with checklist. 11. Light and Glare: a -d -- Concur with checklist. 12. Recreation: a -c – Concur with checklist. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation: a -c – The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), in a letter to the City dated December 2, 2013, has determined that this project will have an adverse effect on the Ray-Carrossino Farmstead and to both the historic and prehistoric components of 45K1703, an identified prehistoric archaeological site. A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is being negotiated currently among the COE, the City and the Washington State Historic Preservation officer which will mitigate impacts from the removal of the structures and the excavation in an area that may contain archaeological and paleontological artifacts. Current stipulated mitigation measures include a partial dismantling of the barn and making the material available to other historic barn owners; more detailed documenting of the Carrossino family history and the history of the Italian truck farming community and activities of which the farm was a part; additional research of the Ray family, the original owners of the site; working with the Consulting Tribes, develop interpretive and educational components to inform the public about Indian use of the area in the pre -contact and early historic periods to the present day; and installing at least two interpretive panels on-site. One interpretive panel will focus on the farmstead history and one panel will focus on the Italian -American community in Tukwila. An archaeologist will be on-site to observe excavation activities and to ensure proper steps are taken if any culturally or archeologically significant items are found. The MOA is expected to be finalized in June, 2014. In March, ESA Paragon prepared for the City a draft Archaeological Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for 45 -KI -703, which identifies anticipated impacts from the off -channel habitat construction on the site, mitigation measures and archaeological treatment protocols. This plan is expected to be finalized in June 2014. The project will be subject to TMC 18.50.110, Archeological/Paleontological Information Preservation Requirements, which requires a cultural resource assessment, and CL H:T13-015 \SEPA Staff Rpt. Page 4 of 6 04/04/2014 11:08 AM E13-015: SEPA Staff Report Duwamish Gardens Salmon Habitat Restoration Project professional archaeologist on site when archaeological resources may be disturbed. The MOA required by the Corps of Engineers will satisfy the requirements of TMC 18.50.110. 14. Transportation: a-e—Concur with checklist. f- The site will include passive park space and trails. The number of vehicle trips these uses will generate has not been determined, however, it is anticipated that it will be minimum. g -Concur with checklist. 15. Public Services: a -b -- Concur with checklist. 16. Utilities: a -b -- Concur with checklist. V. COMMENTS: No comments were received during the public comment period, which closed on Friday, March 21, 2014. VII. CONCLUSION The proposal has the potential to impact archaeological and cultural resources due to the historical structures on the property and the historic use of the site by Native Americans. VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that pursuant to WAC 1997-11-340 (3), a Determination of Nonsignificance with mitigation (MDNS) be issued for this project. The following mitigation measures must be met: 1. Adoption and implementation of the Archaeological Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for 45 -KI -703. 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Memorandum of Agreement among the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer and the City of Tukwila. This DNS is based on impacts identified within the environmental checklist, attachments, and the above "Final Staff Evaluation for Application No. E13-015", and is supported by plans, policies, and regulations formally adopted by the City of Tukwila for the exercise of substantive authority under SEPA to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. CL H:\E13-015\SEPA Staff Rpt. Page 5 of 6 04/04/2014 11:33 AM E13-015: SEPA Staff Report Duwamish Gardens Salmon Habitat Restoration Project Prepared by: Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Date: April 4, 2014 CL Page 6 of 6 04/04/2014 11:33 AM H:\E13-015\SEPA Staff Rpt. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Duwamish Gardens Habitat Project 2. Name of applicant: City of Tukwila 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Ryan Larson, Senior Program Manager City of Tukwila Public Works 6300 Southcenter Blvd Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 4. Date checklist prepared: February 1, 2014 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila. 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction is planned to commence in the summer of 2014 and be completed by winter of 2015. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. In the future the City may complete shoreline enhancements on the following adjacent parcels, 1023049059, 0923049292 and 0923049153. Completing shoreline restoration on these parcels is subject to availability of funding and will require separate environmental review. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. B. Miles Page 1 02/25/2014 C:\Users\Brandon-m\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\N6SALWBL\SEPA Checklist (2).doc Page 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC IST Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife O° quatic Use Authorization on Department of Natural Resources managed aquatic lands from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. • Phase I and PhasKI Environmental Site Assessment C ' chaeological Site Delineation — ESA Paragon 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. In 2009, the City of Tukwila issued a Determination of Non -Significance for the demolition of all structures on the site. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Shoreline Compliance, City of Tukwila. Flood Control Zone Permit, City of Tukwila Clearing and Grading Permit, City of Tukwila Section 10 Permit, US Army Corps Hydraulic Project Approval, WDFW 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternates of your proposal and should not be summarized here. The site is known as Duwamish Gardens and has been owned by the City of Tukwila since 2008 for the purposes of converting the property to salmon recovery, conservation, and outdoor recreation. This is explicit in a 2008 agreement between the City of Tukwila and State of Washington. In 2010, a conceptual site plan was developed by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife for the site. The City of Tukwila has since modified the design and proposes the creation of approximately one acre of estuarine off channel habitat, as well as approximately two acres of upland terrestrial habitat and passive park features. A park and pedestrian trail will be developed in the upland portion of the site, and a trail will lead down to the edge of the restored off channel area. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC _IST 11269 E Marginal Way South Tukwila, WA 98168 Section 10, Township 23N, Range 04E, WM 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? Yes, the site is located along the Duwamish River. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The majority of the project site is flat with 1.5:1 slopes adjacent to the Duwamish River. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Soil Conservation Service information is not available. However, the project will occur in the Duwamish River Valley where alluvial soils, native sands and silts are typical. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Not known. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The proposed project is to improve fish habitat along the Duwamish River. The following grading activities will occur: 1. Approximately 143 cubic yards of gravel and cobble to accommodate a trail to the river will be installed; Page 3 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC—,,IST f. g. 2. Approximately 26,256 cubic yards of upland material will be removed in order to create an off channel from the Duwamish. 3. Removal of an additional 388 cubic yards of sediments below the Ordinary High Water Mark will occur. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, work could cause the stream banks to sluff or erode into the waterbody, but the use of best management practices will reduce any chances of erosion occurring. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 1000 square feet of the site area will be covered with imperious surfaces. Impervious surfaces on the site will include a small parking area and a pedestrian trail. Less than 5% of the property will be covered with impervious surface area. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: The use of best management practices. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The completed project will not impact air quality. In fact, the planted trees and other plantings may have a nominal impact in improving air quality. There may be some impacts associated with construction equipment, but this will be temporary and short term. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None foreseen. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Site watering will be used to control dust particles during clearing and grading activities and other best practices. Page 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC_ IST 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes, the Duwamish River is located adjacent to the subject property. The Duwamish River ultimately flows to Elliot Bay, which is part of the Puget Sound. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, the project is a fish habitat improvement project along the Duwamish River (Note: This is not required mitigation). The City proposes to construct one acre of offsite intertidal habitat area. As part of the construction project, 26,256 cubic yards of upland material will be disturbed to create the habitat area. Additionally, 338 cubic yards of sediment will be removed below the Ordinary High Water Mark. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Approximately, 388 cubic yards of sediment will be removed below the Ordinary High Water Mark. All fill materials will be removed to an approved, offsite facility. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. Yes, the project is the creation of an off channel intertidal habitat area. The purpose of the diversion is to create an area along the Duwamish River that will assist in salmon recovery in WRIA 9. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Per floodplain map 53033C0645F, the site is not located in the 1995 flood plain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. Page 5 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC._ _IST b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. No. 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No. The existing septic tanks for the two houses on site will be abandoned per King County and Department of Ecology standards. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The project will have a net decrease in the amount of impervious surfaces located on the property. All existing structures on the site will be removed and a small parking lot will be constructed. Construction of the parking lot will comply with Department Ecology standards and the City's adopted stormwater standards. Water will likely follow the existing contours on the site and infiltrate onsite. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Unlikely. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Best Management Practices and compliance with State and Federal laws regarding handling of fuels and other chemicals. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X Shrubs Page 6 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC_ ��IST X Grass Mammals: Pasture Fish: crop or grain Other: wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other X water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other X other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? In order to construct the off channel fish habitat area and to regrade the site, a small amount of existing shrubs and grass will be removed. A dozen trees will also be removed as part of the project. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The project is the completion of a fish habitual restoration area and thus a significant amount of native trees, shrubs, groundcover and emergent plant material will be planted on the site. A complete list of the plants to be planted and proposed spacing can be found in the plant list which is sheet 9 of 16 of the proposed plans. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds or animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: X Mammals: X Fish: X Other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. The project is located along the Duwamish River which is known to contain endangered and threatened fish species. According to the "Restoration Programmatic For the State of Washington Specific Project Information Form," the following endangered or threatened fish species are present near the site: 1. Bull Trout/Puget Sound IRU (Threatened) 2. Chinook Salmon (Threatened) 3. Steelhead Trout (Threatened) Page 7 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC_ _IST c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Yes, for a variety of fish species. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: This project goal is to improve the fish habitat along the Duwamish River. When completed, the project will create a transition zone where migrating juvenile salmon can feed, take shelter, and osmoregulate as they transition from being freshwater fish to saltwater fish. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Gas to operate vehicles during construction activities. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. The only risk will be the automobiles and small construction equipment be used during the maintenance activities. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Just those services that are typical for a park environment. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None needed. b. Noise Page 8 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC_ IST 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Noise in the area is typical for an urban environment. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction noise. All noise will have to comply with the City's noise regulations found in Title 8 of the TMC. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None needed. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The property has been under city ownership since 2008. There are two existing houses on the property, but both homes no longer have occupants. Since acquiring the property, the city has used the property for storage of materials. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Yes, the site used to be part of an old farm. c. Describe any structures on the site. There are two houses on the property, a barn, and other smaller out buildings. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, all structures on the site will be either removed or demolished as part of this fish habitat project. An environmental review of removing the structures was conducted in 2009, see E09-016. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Manufacturing Industrial Center/Heavy f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Manufacturing Industrial Center/Heavy g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Urban Conservancy Page 9 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC._ _.,IST h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, the site is located along a shoreline of statewide significance. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None, both homes on the site are unoccupied. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None needed. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None needed. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing? Not Applicable. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not Applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not Applicable. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. Page 10 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC _IST c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not Applicable. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? When completed, the project will be habitat restoration area along the shoreline with trails and off channel habitat. Other parks and habitat restoration areas in the vicinity include Duwamish Hill, Cecil Moses and North Winds Weir. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: The proposed project will increase passive recreation opportunities along the Green River. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. One of the houses on the site (11269 East Marginal Way South) is known as the Carisino House and dates back before the 1900s. In 2009/10, the city attempted to Page 11 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC.-_IST locate an individual to remove the houses from the site. As was noted in the 2009 SEPA checklist, if a taker for the house could not be identified, the City will demolish the house. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. A cultural site assessment has been completed for the project. Archaeological Site 45-K1-703 was identified during excavation of a guide way support for the Sound Transit project. Further investigations and delineation of the site was completed as part of this project and the project plans were altered to avoid the majority of the site. The City is in consultation with the Corps of Engineers concerning impacts to archaeological artifacts on site. The project will not proceed until any impacts are properly mitigated. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: A mitigation plan is currently being developed between the City, the Corps of Engineers, and consulting parties. It is anticipated that the plan will include avoidance for the majority of the identified site combined with monitoring, documentation, and curation of any artifact found during construction. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site is accessed from East Marginal Way South. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Five stalls will be installed, none will be removed. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Page 12 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC_ IST No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Minimum. Once completed the site will allow for some passive recreation. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None needed. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None expected. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. All utilities commonly found in urban areas are available near the site. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. No permanent utilities are required for project. Temporary irrigation may be installed in order to water the plantings on site. C. SIGNATURE Under the penalty of perjury the above answers under ESA Screening Checklist and State Environmental Policy Act Checklist are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the le. • agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: 12-17A L -C1571 ala511 (-( Page 13 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECL_LIST Page 14 Restoration Programmatic for the State of Washington Specific Project Information Form U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Regulatory Branch July 29, 2008 version Use this form to notify the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District (Corps) of a proposed restoration project that falls within the range of the nine restoration activities considered by National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) during its Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) consultation (NMFS Reference No. 2008/03598; USFWS Reference No. 13410-2008-F-0209). You may also use this form if your project slightly deviates from the description and scope of the nine project categories addressed in this consultation. However, should the resulting impacts exceed those considered in the NMFS and USFWS Biological Opinion you will need to consult individually (which generally takes longer) and potentially provide additional information. The Corps is responsible, in most cases, for ensuring that a project complies with the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Table of Contents I GENERAL INFORMATION 1 II EFFECT DETERMINATIONS FOR FISH SPECIES USFWS & NMFS 8 III EFFECT DETERMINATIONS FOR LISTED TERRESTRIAL SPECIES 14 IV SIGNATURE 19 APPENDIX A: DEWATERING AND FISH CAPTURE PROTOCOL 20 I GENERAL INFORMATION A. Date: June 11, 2013 Corps reference no.: TBD B. Applicant name (same as in JARPA): City of Tukwila Address 11269 E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 C. Agent Name (same as on JARPA): J.A. Brennan Associates Address: 100 South King Street, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98104 D. Location(s) of activity: Section: 10 Township: 23 Range: 04 Latitude (xxx° xx' xx.x"): 47° 30' 04.65" N Longitude (xxx° xx' xx.x" )• 127° 17' 19 69" W UTM: Located at River mile 6.9 to 7.0 1 Waterbody: Duwamish River County: King ESU or IRU: Puget Sound Chinook Salmon ESU (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Coastal/Puget Sound Steelhead trout DPS (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Coastal/Puget Sound Bull Trout IRU (Salvelinus confluentus) E. Project elements. In the table below, fill in the maximum length of each project element proposed and the number of structures where applicable. This information will be used by the Services for calculating your take exemption: Action Category Project Length and Width where applicable Number of Structures 1. Fish Passage: a. Culvert Replacement and Relocation b. Retrofitting Culverts c. Culvert Removal d. Tidegate Removal e. Removal or Modification of Sediment Bars or Terraces f. Temporary Placement of Sandbags, Hay Bales and Ecology Blocks g. Construction of Structures to Provide Passage over Small Dams 2. Installation of Instream Structures: a. Placement of Woody Debris yes 40 logs (15 — 30 ft long) and root wads to be placed at and below OHWM. b. Placement of Live Stakes c. Placement of Engineered Log Jams d. Grade Control ELJs e. Trapping Mobile Wood 2 Action Category Project Length and Width where applicable Number of Structures f. Placement of Boulders 15 tons g. Boulder Weirs and Roughened Channels h. Gravel Placement Associated with Structure Placement Placement of approximately 143 cubic yards of gravel and cobble to accommodate boat ramp or referred to as a river access channel. To be done below the OHWM. 1 structure - hand carry boat launch ramp. 3. Levee Removal and Modification 4. Side Channel/Off Channel Habitat Restoration and Reconnection Total project site size is 2.16. Off Channel (intertidal habitat) to be created will be 1 acre and will require excavation of approximately 26,256 cubic yards of upland material to create the off channel. 0 5. Salmonid Spawning Gravel Restoration 6. Forage Fish Spawning Gravel Restoration 7. Hardened Fords and Fencing for Livestock Stream Crossings 8. Irrigation Screen Installation and Replacement 9. Debris and Structure Removal Removal of approximately 388 cubic yards of sediments below the OHWM. F. Description of the proposed work: [Describe the work to be accomplished including purpose, number and type of structures to be installed or constructed, construction materials and machinery to be used, and anticipated construction techniques to be employed. You may attach additional pages or, if completing this form by computer, expand the space below to provide this information. Attach maps or drawings to clearly illustrate the location, nature, and extent of the proposed work.] 3 The site is known as Duwamish Gardens and has been owned by the City of Tukwila since 2008 for the purposes of converting the property to salmon recovery, conservation, and outdoor recreation. This is explicit in a 2008 agreement, "Deed of Right to Use Land for Public Aquatic Lands Access and Salmon Recovery" between the City and the State of Washington. A conceptual site plan was developed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife in 2010. The City of Tukwila has since further modified the design and proposes the creation of approximately one acre of estuarine off channel habitat, as well as approximately 2 acres of upland terrestrial habitat and passive park features. A park and pedestrian trail will be developed in the upland portion of the site, and a hand -carry boat launch will be developed along the edge of the restored off channel area. The project requires that approximately 26,256 cubic yards of upland material be excavated to create the off channel, which will be graded, and the soil will be amended and planted to create shallow water mudflat and high and low marsh habitat. The upland trail will include a few overlooks to view the river and restoration site. Interpretive information will be displayed throughout the park and along the trail. The restored off channel will create transition zones where migrating juvenile salmon can feed, take shelter, and osmoregulate as they transition from being freshwater fish to saltwater fish. Salmon recovery in the Green/Duwamish watershed depends on improving the quality and quantity of estuarine habitat in the Duwamish estuary. King County identified habitat areas in the Duwamish Estuary with the greatest need for transitions zones (King County 2006). Upland and Off Channel Construction Elements Trail System and Water Access Details A pedestrian trail will be installed from the park entrance to the western project boundary. It will run approximately 630 feet and dead-end in at a viewpoint (Attachment 1: Sheet 4). There will be two other viewpoints along this trail as well. The viewpoints will each have a bench and some or all may have an interpretive/educational sign. The trail system will also include a water access for the purposes of hand -carry boat launching capabilities. The trail is approximately 185 feet long from the central overlook. The final 60 feet will be below the OHW line, enabling water access during low water conditions. The trail will be a cobble river access trail to function as a launch for hand -carry boat loading and unloading. All trails constructed above OHW will be ADA accessible, per the federal, "Architectural Barriers Act, Accessibility Guidelines for Outdoor Recreation Areas". Trails will be surfaced with compacted, firm and stable crushed rock material with gentle grades, generally not exceeding 8:1 slope. Parking and Stormwater Stormwater treatment will be required for water running off of the proposed parking pavement. A rain garden will be developed to the west of the parking area and amended with suitable soils for treatment and planted, primarily with shrubs. In addition, the City would like to provide additional benefit to the environment by collecting and treating water from East Marginal Way S. that is currently untreated. An overflow surface channel, pipe and rock -lined outlet will be installed to carry overflow water into the restored off channel inlet. Off Channel Configuration Tidal connectivity and fish access to the site will be through either an open embayment or tidal channel into a mudflat zone. A short mud spit will be extended westward at an approximate elevation of 5.0 feet NAVD88. A tidal channel mouth connection into the marsh is recommended at the western end of the spit. This feature, if excavated to an elevation of 0.0 foot, would be a submerged inlet during the spring juvenile Chinook migration period. Excavation of the tidal channel is recommended to maintain connectivity into the marsh while limiting the potential for bank erosion at the end of the drainage channel. The mud spit will enhance quiescent backwater conditions in the marsh and facilitate mud flat and marsh sedimentation. The design will provide a low and high marsh composition with a tidal channel that could provide shallow depths across a range of tidal conditions, cover, and food sources. Substrate and Vegetation Site substrate and vegetation will both provide prey or quiescent conditions for juvenile fish. Overall site development will include riparian and marsh vegetation as well as upland native trees that will develop habitat attributes for more than just fish use (Attachment 1: Sheet 5 and 8). Site submerged or frequently submerged aquatic areas (vegetation free or not) should be fine grained substrate with a high organic content (up to 10%), prepared with worked -in compost. Both emergent 4 and riparian vegetation will be important to the habitat function for prey and off channel resting. A list of vegetation and corresponding planting zones can be found on Attachment 1: Sheet 9. Grading Gradients will be carefully designed for stability when exposed to repeated rising and falling waters. A preliminary slope stability analysis provided by Shannon & Wilson indicates that ground that is often subject to rising and falling waters — below OHW- should be designed with grades no steeper than 5:1 slope (Attachment 1: Sheet 5). For ground above OHWM, vegetated slopes graded at a maximum of 3:1 slope would be stable. Water and Erosion Control The construction plan proposes to create a temporary berm structure at a 2:1 maximum slope, from unexcavated bank, which would be left in place until off channel restoration is complete. The majority of the proposed habitat excavation (up to 22 feet deep) will be contained within the interior of the berm. Construction and excavation to occur on the mouth of the channel (and outside the berm structure) will be isolated to periods of low water conditions, and will not be submerged dredging with in -water disposal. The berm interior will be dewatered of groundwater seepage and pumped into a temporary settling pond or barrel for treatment prior to discharge into the river. The temporary slope on the landward side of the temporary berm will be protected with plastic sheeting during any time that it is not being worked for more than one week. A silt curtain will be installed during the in -water work window and remain in place during clearing and grubbing below 12.0 ft elevation, grading of the peninsula, and breaching into the site (i.e., removing the temporary berm) (Attachment 1: Sheet 6 and 7). Removal of the temporary berm will occur only during the in -water work window and during low tide. Specific Construction Details: The general duration of construction will begin on or around April 2014 and be completed by December 2014. All work with the exception of below the OHWM will be done in the dry. Specific in -water work includes the following: Removal of 388 cubic yards of sediments below the OHWM and placing 143 cubic yards of gravel and cobble in the form of a boat launch ramp. As previously discussed, a temporary berm will be created by excavating from the site surface (at approximate elevations 20-22 NAVD 88, down to 12 ft) to prevent movement of water from the river to the upland construction. Vegetation clearing will involve removal of Himalayan blackberry and two trees from the interior of the berm and removal of hickory and black locust from the slope. Approximately 388 cy of material will be extracted below the OHWM at low tide and along the steep bank. Approximately, 143 cy of fill (composed of gabions with cobble edge protection) will be placed below the OHWM to create the boat ramp. All work conducted below the OHWM will take approximately two weeks and will have a silt curtain deployed. Off channel construction will involve placement of LWD, rootwads, marsh plantings, and naturally weather boulders. At the conclusion construction, the completed off channel area will be exposed to flushing with the Duwamish by slowly removing the temporary berm. The silt curtain will reduce turbidity from berm removal and the curtain will remain in place until turbidity levels have subsided. Machinery to be used will all be land-based equipment and will include the following: Hydraulic track hoe(s) for excavation and placement of earth materials. Bulldozer(s) and/or front-end track loaders(s) to push material throughout the site and transfer earthen materials. Dumptruck(s), possibly 8 cubic yards, transporting excavated materials off-site and bringing imported earthen materials. Flatbed truck(s) to bring in imported materials such as plant materials. 5 G. Project timing: Start date : April 2014 Start Date In -water Work: window is Aug 1- Aug 31 End date : December 2014. End Date In -water Work H. Anticipated cubic feet per second (CFS) of stream at time of construction: Project will be conducted along the tidally influenced Duwamish River (approximated at < 20 CFS at project location). I. How much area do you propose to clear for temporary access? Himalayan blackberry predominantly covers the river bank that will be excavated so removal of this species will need to occur. New plantings of native riparian vegetation will be added. J. How many trees and what sizes will be felled for temporary access? Eleven trees will be removed from the bank where excavation will occur and five existing trees upland within the project area will be avoided (Attachment 1: Sheet 3). The trees to be removed are all non-native or invasive. Trees proposed for removal include: • Eight 4 -inch to 20 -inch black locust • Two 15 -inch to 30 -inch hickory • One 14 -inch Cedrus deodora K. Will your temporary access traverse across slopes steeper than 30%? No. L. How many temporary stream crossings do you propose? List all best management practices (BMPs) proposed to avoid and minimize impacts from stream crossings. None. M. Culvert replacements: NA N. Rock grade control structures: How much combined rock is proposed for structures? NA O. Removal or modification of sediment bars or terraces: Has there been previous removal of sediment at this location? If yes when and how much? NA P. Side Channel/Off Channel Habitat Creation: 1. Has a reach assessment or analysis been conducted for this project? A no -rise check was required per the City. The site is protected as an embayment, and minor sedimentation should not occur without effects on upstream or downstream areas. 2 How many years will the project take to complete? 8 months 3. Demonstrate sufficient hydrology for a self-sustaining channel. This has not been done. The channel was a result of the design restoration criteria review. It has been determined that there will be tidal ebb, surface drainage, and groundwater seeps to the marsh area that will flow towards the low areas of the marsh grading. It is expected that there is enough energy and flow to keep the channel open. Q. Will you be isolating the work area? [Explain how your decision on working in the wet or dry, or partially isolation the area, will minimize impacts to salmonids.] The area will be isolated by way of temporary berm created from existing site material. 6 R. Give a maximum estimate for the duration and length of downstream turbidity impacts. The Services will use this estimate for giving you your take exemption. (During construction you will be monitoring downstream sedimentation every 20 min to verify/refine your given estimate.) It is anticipated that the silt curtain will remain in place for 24 to 72 hours following berm breach to allow for turbidity levels to settle out. The median turbidity levels for the project site are approximately 3 NTUs during the month of August (King County 2008). This information will serve as criteria for determining removal of the silt curtain. S. Explain what equipment will generate noise above ambient levels and for what period during the day and for how many days. Excavation equipment (hydraulic track hoe and bull dozers) will likely exceed ambient noise levels temporarily but will be localized to the site. No ESA -listed terrestrial species would be affected. T. Please attach HPA or explain why you do not need one. HPA is in process via JARPA Application (Attachment 2), with a possible Exemption via: "Application for Streamlined Processing of FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS. (Attachment 3) U. If your project does not meet all of the criteria outlined in the PBA, but is a restoration action of similar scope and impacts, contact the Services with the project's description, conservation measures and reason(s) it may not currently fit under the PBA. Provide below any supporting conversations with NMFS and/or USFWS staff, including a list of the PBA criteria your project won't meet. This is a living document. We are continuously working on refining the proposed/covered actions and conservation measures. 7 II EFFECT DETERMINATIONS FOR FISH SPECIES USFWS & NMFS Each project should have the appropriate effect determination. The PBA allows for No Effect (NE), Not Likely to Adversely Affect (NLAA), or Likely to Adversely Affect (LAA) determinations for listed species. Each determination must be adequately documented in this form. If you need assistance in determining the appropriate effect determination, consult the Corps, USFWS, and NMFS staff. Check all currently listed evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) or Interim Recovery Units (IRUs) that may occur in the fifth field watershed where the project is located. Endangered Upper Columbia River Spring -run Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Snake River Sockeye (Oncorhynchus nerka) Upper Columbia River Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Threatened X Bull trout, Coastal/Puget Sound IRU (Salvelinus confluentus) Bull trout, Columbia River IRU (Salvelinus confluentus) Coho salmon, Lower Columbia River ESU (0. kisutch) Chinook salmon, Lower Columbia River ESU (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) X Chinook salmon, Puget Sound ESU (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Chinook salmon, Snake River Spring/Summer-run ESU (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Chinook salmon, Snake River Fall -run ESU (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Chum salmon, Columbia River ESU (Oncorhynchus keta) Chum salmon, Hood Canal summer ESU (Oncorhynchus keta) Steelhead trout, Lower Columbia River ESU (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Steelhead trout, Middle Columbia River ESU (Oncorhynchus mykiss) X Steelhead trout, Coastal/Puget Sound DPS (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Steelhead trout, Snake River ESU (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Designated X Critical Critical Critical Critical Critical Critical Critical Critical X Critical Critical Critical Critical Critical habitat for Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout IRU habitat for Columbia River bull trout IRU habitat for Columbia River chum salmon ESU habitat for Hood Canal summer chum salmon ESU habitat for Lower Columbia River Chinook salmon ESU habitat for Upper Columbia River Spring -run Chinook salmon ESU habitat for Snake River Spring/Summer-run Chinook salmon ESU habitat for Snake River Fall -run Chinook salmon ESU habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon ESU habitat for Lower Columbia River steelhead trout ESU habitat for Upper Columbia River steelhead trout ESU habitat for Middle Columbia River steelhead trout ESU habitat for Snake River steelhead trout ESU 8 Lake Ozette Sockeye salmon are not covered by this programmatic at this time. Directions: Use the Notes section under each question to document your rational and decision making process for presence or absence of the fish, and the effect determination. FILL OUT THIS SECTION FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL ESU THAT OCCURS IN THE FIFTH FIELD WATERSHED Effect Determination by Species: ESU and critical habitat: Puget Sound Chinook ESU and Critical Habitat 1) Is the project in a fifth - field watershed that contains or has the potential to contain Puget Sound Chinook? YES x If yes, list fifth field watershed, and go to question 2. Fifth -field watershed: Green/Duwamish Watershed 2) Do the stream(s) in which impacts may occur contain suitable habitat for Puget Sound Chinook Salmon? YES X If yes, what type of habitat is present? Spawning Rearing x Migratory Corridor x Not known Go to Question 3. Notes: The Green River supports a summer/fall Chinook run with adults beginning to enter the Duwamish River in mid-June, peaking in August and continuing to enter the river through November. Fry migrate soon (days to weeks) after emergence from spawning grounds in middle Green River. They rear in the lower river and/or Duwamish estuary (up to three months) before entering Puget Sound. Some also rear near spawning grounds for three to four months and then migrate relatively quickly (weeks to days) through the estuary to Puget Sound. 3) Approximately how far is the project from the nearest suitable habitat (in river miles, upstream or downstream) for Puget Sound Chinook salmon ? Notes: The Proposed project is located at River mile 6.75. Suitable adult migration habitat is present along the shoreline of the project area. Spawning occurs upstream of the project within the mainstem of the Green River from RM 23 to RM 61.2 (WDFW 2009). 4) Does the proposed activity have the potential to alter or affect the following indicators: temperature, sediment, chemical contamination/nutrients, physical barriers, substrate embeddedness, large woody debris, pool frequency, pool quality, off -channel habitat, refugia, wetted width/depth ratio, streambank condition, floodplain connectivity, peak/base flows, drainage network, disturbance history, function of riparian reserves, or disturbance regime? YES X If yes, briefly explain which habitat elements will be affected and indicate if the effects will be short term or long-term. For example, many activities will have increased levels of 9 turbidity during project implementation, but are expected to result in long-term improvements to the target indicators. The project will create temporary short-term increases in turbidity following removal of the temporary berm. Long term beneficial effects would result by removing existing contaminated sediments and creation of new off channel habit to provide resting, rearing, and foraging for juvenile Puget Sound Chinook. The addition of LWD will create refuge and variable pools for feeding and resting. Addition of low and high marsh plantings will also provide areas for foraging, rearing, and resting. 5) Provide rationale for effect determination. Only temporary turbidity impacts would occur from removing the temporary berm and allowing water to fill the off channel, however this would occur during the in -water work window, at high tide, and when Puget Sound Chinook are least likely to be present. In the long-term, beneficial impacts to juvenile Puget Sound Chinook salmon and critical habitat would result with the creation of new resting, foraging, and rearing habitat. Improvements by way of providing foraging and natural cover would result to the estuarine areas PCE. Therefore, the proposed project may affect, and is likely to adversely affect Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and their designated critical habitat. Effect Determination: LAA Puget Sound Chinook Salmon ESU and Critical Habitat Note: If you are dewatering an area, electroshocking in an area, or are doing major in -water work where listed salmonids are likely to be present during the work window, you will probably have a LAA effect determination. Effect Determination by Species: ESU and critical habitat: Coastal/Puget Sound Steelhead DPS 1) Is the project in a fifth - field watershed that contains or has the potential to contain Coastal/Puget Sound Steelhead trout DPS? YES x If yes, list fifth field watershed, and go to question 2. Fifth -field watershed: Green/Duwamish Watershed River 2) Do the stream(s) in which impacts may occur contain suitable habitat for Coastal/Puget Sound Steelhead trout DPS? YES X If yes, what type of habitat is present? Spawning Rearing x Migratory Corridor x Not known Go to Question 3. Notes: Winter steelhead occur in the Green River and migrate through the Duwamish River to their spawning grounds, arriving in spring. Fry emerge from the gravel during the summer and generally rear for two to three years in freshwater before outmigration through the Duwamish Estuary and out through Puget Sound. 10 3) Approximately how far is the project from the nearest suitable habitat (in river miles, upstream or downstream) for Coastal/Puget Sound Steelhead? Notes: Suitable adult migration corridor habitat is present within the project area at River Mile 6.9 to 7.0. Most spawning occurs in the Green River, upstream of the project area from RM 25 to RM 61 (WDFW 2012). 4) Does the proposed activity have the potential to alter or affect the following indicators: temperature, sediment, chemical contamination/nutrients, physical barriers, substrate embeddedness, large woody debris, pool frequency, pool quality, off -channel habitat, refugia, wetted width/depth ratio, streambank condition, floodplain connectivity, peak/base flows, drainage network, disturbance history, function of riparian reserves, or disturbance regime? YES X If yes, briefly explain which habitat elements will be affected and indicate if the effects will be short term or long-term. For example, many activities will have increased levels of turbidity during project implementation, but are expected to result in long-term improvements to the target indicators. The project would create temporary short-term increases in turbidity following removal of the temporary berm. Long term beneficial effects would result by removing existing contaminated sediments and creation of new off channel habit to provide resting, rearing, and foraging for juvenile Puget Sound steelhead. The addition of LWD will create refuge and variable pools for feeding and resting. Addition of low and high marsh plantings will also provide areas for foraging, rearing, and resting. 5) Provide rationale for effect determination. Only temporary turbidity impacts would occur from removing the temporary berm and allowing water to fill the off channel, however this would occur during the in -water work window when Puget Sound steelhead are least likely to be present. In the long-term, beneficial impacts to juvenile Puget Sound steelhead would result with the creation of new resting, foraging, and rearing habitat. Critical habitat has been proposed for designation but does not include the Duwamish estuary (NMFS 2013). Therefore, the proposed project may affect, and is likely to adversely affect Puget Sound steelhead and would not destroy or adversely modify proposed critical habitat located further upstream within the upper Green River subwatershed. Effect Determination: LAA Puget Sound steelhead and proposed critical habitat. Note: If you are dewatering an area, electroshocking in an area, or are doing major in -water work where listed salmonids are likely to be present during the work window, you will probably have a LAA effect determination. Effect Determination by Species: ESU and critical habitat: Bull trout 11 1) Is the project in a fifth - field watershed that contains or has the potential to contain Bull trout ? YES x If yes, list fifth field watershed, and go to question 2. Fifth -field watershed: Green/Duwamish Watershed 2) Do the stream(s) in which impacts may occur contain suitable habitat for Bull trout For bull trout use Tables 1 & 2 of Appendix A and/or the draft recovery plans (available at: http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/recovery.html) and a distribution map the USFWS posted at http://www.fws.gov/westwafwo/index.html to determine if your project is within critical habitat for bull trout. For other salmon you may use the NMFS critical habitat web page at http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Habitat/Critical-Habitat/CH-Maps.cfm determine if your project is within critical habitat. YES X If yes, what type of habitat is present? Spawning Rearing Migratory Corridor x Not known Go to Question 3. NO If no, the project will have "No Effect" on (insert species). Go to question 5. Notes: The project area at RM 6.9 to 7.0 is used as a migration corridor for bull trout as well as a foraging area. 3) Approximately how far is the project from the nearest suitable habitat (in river miles, upstream or downstream) for Bull trout ? Suitable habitat is present along the shoreline of the project area where bull trout may forage. 4) Does the proposed activity have the potential to alter or affect the following indicators: temperature, sediment, chemical contamination/nutrients, physical barriers, substrate embeddedness, large woody debris, pool frequency, pool quality, off -channel habitat, refugia, wetted width/depth ratio, streambank condition, floodplain connectivity, peak/base flows, drainage network, disturbance history, function of riparian reserves, or disturbance regime? YES X If yes, briefly explain which habitat elements will be affected and indicate if the effects will be short term or long-term. For example, many activities will have increased levels of turbidity during project implementation, but are expected to result in long-term improvements to the target indicators. The project would create temporary short-term increases in turbidity following removal of the temporary berm. Long term beneficial effects would result by removing existing contaminated sediments and creation of new off channel habit to provide holding for adult and sub adult bull trout as well as foraging areas. The addition of LWD will also create refuge and variable pools. Addition of low and high marsh plantings will also provide areas for foraging and holding. 12 5) Provide rationale for effect determination. Only temporary turbidity impacts would occur from removing the temporary berm and allowing water to fill the off channel, however this would occur during the in -water work window , during low tide, and when juvenile salmonids for which bull trout feed on, would least likely to be present. In the long-term, beneficial impacts to bull trout would be new holding and foraging areas. This would also improve the critical habitat migratory corridor and abundant food source PCEs. Therefore, the proposed project may affect, and is likely to adversely affect bull trout and their designated critical habitat. Effect Determination: LAA Bull trout and designated critical habitat. Note: If you are dewatering an area, electroshocking in an area, or are doing major in -water work where listed salmonids are likely to be present during the work window, you will probably have a LAA effect determination. 13 III EFFECT DETERMINATIONS FOR LISTED TERRESTRIAL SPECIES 1. To determine which listed species may occur in the project area follow the steps below: a. Obtain a county species list from the USFWS web page. http://www.fws.gov/westwafwo/se/SE List/endangered Species.asp http://www.fws.gov/easternwashington/county%20species%201i sts.htm b. Site-specific information of listed species occurrences in Washington State may be obtained from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat and Species Program http://www.wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phspage.htm and from the Washington Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program at http://www.dnr.wa.govinhp/. c. Remove species from the species list when habitat is not available for the species in the project area or "vicinity of activity" (generally 1 mile radius around the project site. The area that may be affected by any project impacts including noise and turbidity.) 2. When filling out the information below consider: Each project should have the appropriate effect determination. The PBA allows for NE or NLTAA determinations for terrestrial species, and NE, NLTAA or LTAA for aquatic species. Each determination must be adequately documented in this form. If you need assistance in determining the appropriate effect determination, request help from a Corps ESA Coordinator or the USFWS. The USFWS contact is Tom McDowell at 360-753-9426. a. For information on species biology, range and critical habitat use the USFWS web site: http://www.fws.gov/westwafwo/index.html b. Conservation Measures are listed in Appendix B c. If you do not implement all conservation measures related to the species present please explain. , LISTED TERRESTRIAL SPECIES Please refer to the PBA for actions that may affect these species and conservation measures to protect terrestrial species. For information on the listed terrestrial and aquatic species that occur in Washington, visit the following website: ecos.fws.gov or contact the following FWS field offices: Western Washington Office in Lacey: Central Washington Office in Wenatchee: Eastern Washington office in Spokane: COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS (360) 753-6044 John Grettenberger (509) 665-3508 Jessica Gonzales (509) 891-6839 Suzanne Audet Listed Species: Brown Pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis), Oregon silverspot butterfly (Speyeria zerene hippolyta), and Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus): a) Will the activity occur in Grays Harbor, Wahkiakum, Pacific, Jefferson or Clallam Counties? No. No Put NE under "Effect Determination" for these three coastal species. Yes If yes go to b) 14 b) Will the activity alter sand islands or coastal dunes and meadows in Grays Harbor or Pacific County? No Yes If yes, contact the FWS office in Lacey for coordination. c) Conservation Measures to be applied: d) Effect Determination for coastal species and rationale: NE LOWER COLUMBIA Listed species: Columbian white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus leucurus) a) Will the activity occur on islands or in the floodplain of the lower Columbia River (Wahkiakum and Cowlitz Counties) and include installing fence? No. No Yes If yes, apply conservation measures for the Columbian white-tailed deer b) Effect Determination and rationale: NE CARNIVORES and CARIBOU 1. Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) — The range of the grey wolf includes the Blue Mountains, northeast Washington (Rocky Mountains) and the Cascade Mountains. There are no confirmed records of wolves west of the Cascade Crest and no documented den sites in the state. 2. Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctus horribillis) — The grizzly bear recovery plan identifies high alpine areas in the North Cascades (north of Interstate 90 to the Canadian border) as important for recovery of this species in Washington. 3. Canada lynx (Lynx Canadensis) - This species occurs in high elevation forests (generally above 4,000 feet) in the North Cascades and northeast Washington. 4. The woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) occurs in high elevation forests (generally above 4,000 feet) in northeast Washington (Pend Oreille County). a) Will the activity be conducted in or near mountain meadows or forest openings, high elevation forests, or ungulate wintering or calving sites in the geographic areas where these listed species may occur? No. No Yes If yes, apply the appropriate seasonal restrictions identified in the PBA to minimize disturbance If you do not know whether your project will affect suitable habitat or feeding areas for these species, please contact the USFWS office in Spokane. 15 a) Effect Determination for these species and rationale. Document any supporting conversations with USFWS staff: NE. Pygmy rabbit (Brachylagus idahoensis) 1. The pygmy rabbit historically was found in dense, tall sagebrush areas east of the Columbia River (Douglas, Adams, Lincoln, Grant and Benton Counties). a) Will the activity occur in native sagebrush areas of the central Columbia Plateau? No. No Put NE under "Effect Determination" and proceed to next species. Yes If yes, contact the USFWS. d) Effect Determination and rationale: NE MATURE FORESTS in the CASCADE and OLYMPIC MOUNTAINS: Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) For information on the marbled murrelet, see http://www.fws.gov/pacific/marbledmurrelet/index.html a) Are you within 50 miles of marine water? Yes. No Put NE under "Effect Determination" and proceed to next species Yes b) Is there suitable habitat (mature conifer -dominated forests over 80 years old) within 200 feet of the project vicinity? No. No Yes Not known c) Will the activity generate noise above ambient levels within 200 feet (1.0 mile if blasting, low - elevation aircraft operations, or pile driving) of potential suitable nesting habitat? No. No Yes If yes, apply conservation measures to minimize disturbance. d) Does the activity include low elevation operation of aircraft, pile driving, or blasting within 1 mile of suitable or occupied nesting or foraging habitat? No No Yes If yes, apply seasonal restrictions to minimize disturbance. Activities in the marine environment that include pile driving or blasting may need to go through individual consultation. Contact the USFWS office in Lacey for specific restrictions related to underwater sound in marine areas. e) Will the project affect suitable nesting habitat or designated critical for marbled murrelets? Activities that remove or kill trees with suitable platforms, remove suitable platforms, or reduce the suitability of the stand as nesting habitat are not covered under this PBA. No. f) Notes: g) Conservation Measures to be applied: 16 h) Effect Determination and rationale: The project area is within 50 miles of marine waters, however, marbled murrelets are not expected to be present as suitable habitat is also not present. The project does not occur within or near designated critical habitat. Therefore, NE for species occurrence and CH. Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) For information, including critical habitat designation see http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/SpeciesReport.do?spcode=B08B a) Is there suitable habitat (mature conifer forests over 80 years old) within 200 feet of the project vicinity? No. No Put NE under "Effect Determination" and proceed to next species Yes Not known b) What type of forest habitat is present in the vicinity of the activity? nesting or foraging habitat dispersal habitat designated critical habitat none d) Will the activity occur in nesting or foraging habitat? No Yes If yes, apply seasonal operating restrictions to minimize disturbance. e) Will the activity generate above ambient noise within 200 feet (1.0 mile if blasting, pile driving or aircraft operations) of suitable nesting habitat? No Yes If yes, apply seasonal restrictions. f) Will the activity occur in or remove trees from spotted owl designated critical habitat? No Yes If yes, explain how/if this will affect the function of the stand. g) Notes: h) Conservation Measures to be applied: i) Effect Determination for northern spotted owls: NE Effect Determination for designated critical habitat for the northern spotted owl: The project is not within designated critical habitat. Therefore, NE. Listed Plants: No herbicide use, mechanical vegetation management, or construction activities are permitted in areas that could support listed plants under this programmatic. 17 Information on these species can be found at: http://ecos.fws.gov, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat and Species Program at (360)-902-2543 or their website at www.wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phspage.htm, or the Washington Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program at (360) 902-1667 or their website at www.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/. 1. Hackelia venusta (showy stickseed) this species occurs in Chelan County, between 984 and 1,600 feet in elevation, in the Ponderosa Pine zone 2. Lomatium bradshawii (Bradshaw's desert -parsley) — this species occurs in wetlands, prairies and grasslands in Clark County 3. Sidalcea oregana var. calva (Wenatchee Mountains checker -mallow) - this species is found in the Peshastin Creek watersheds in Chelan County. Information on critical habitat for this species can be found at: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr3793.pdf 4. Castilleja levisecta (golden paintbrush) - this plant occurs in Island, San Juan, and Thurston Counties and is found in open grasslands, prairies, and grass dominated coastal bluffs. 5. Howellia aquatilis (water howellia) — this aquatic plant is found in and around seasonal wetlands in Mason, Pierce, Thurston, Clark, and Spokane Counties. 6. Lupinus sulphureus ssp. kincaidii (Kincaids lupine) - this plant occurs near Boistfort, Lewis County in native upland prairie habitat. 7. Sidalcea nelsoniana (Nelson's checkermallow)- this plant is found in wetlands, stream corridors, or wet prairies in Lewis or Cowlitz Counties. 8. Silene spaldingii (Spalding's silene/catchfly)— this plant is also associated with native prairies and occurs in Asotin, Lincoln, Spokane, and Whitman Counties. 9. Spiranthes diluvialis (Ute ladies' -tresses) — this plant grows on the margins of springs, wet meadows, floodplains, and riparian areas in Okanagon and Grant County Please document conversations with USFWS staff and provide adequate information on botanical surveys and/or habitat analysis to support your effect determination. Effect determination for listed plants: NE. There are no listed plant species within or adjacent to the project area. 18 IV SIGNATURE I hereby verify that this work will comply with all applicable requirements of the above - referenced Biological Opinion should a Department of the Army authorization be issued for this work. Certain categories of activities require the permittee to submit -post construction reports to the Corps and/or the Services. These reports are identified in the PBA. For projects deviating from PBA criteria, the Services may require additional post -construction reporting. These additional reports will be clearly identified and agreed upon by the Services and applicant during the coordination process. By signing this form, the applicant agrees to submit within the required time frame all applicable post -construction reports. Signature of Applicant: Date: Signature of Agent. Date: 19 APPENDIX A: DEWATERING AND FISH CAPTURE PROTOCOL Work to facilitate habitat restoration may occur in isolation from flowing waters or in flowing water depending on site conditions to minimize impacts to salmonids. If bull trout or other listed salmonids could be present in the vicinity of the project use the following dichotomous key to determine which dewatering protocol and timing window you need to implement for your project. This key references information within the Draft Recovery Plan for the Coastal - Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout Volumes I and II (USFWS 2004a; USFWS 2004b), and the Draft Recovery Plan for the Columbia River Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout (USFWS 2002). http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/recovery.html. If you have questions, contact the USFWS. 1. Is the project located within a documented or potential bull trout Local Population Area that is excluded from coverage under this programmatic consultation (see Table 1)? a. Yes — Dewatering in a documented or potential bull trout Local Population Area in eastern Washington is not covered under this programmatic consultation. Complete an individual section 7 consultation for the project. Please contact the USFWS office in Spokane or Wenatchee for assistance. b. No — go to 2 2. Is the project located within a water body where any listed salmonids are likely to be present? For specific bull trout areas where projects are permitted see Table 2. a. Yes — go to 3 b. No - use "Protocol for Dewatering Outside High Likelihood Listed Fish Areas"; 3. Is the stream flow at the time of project construction anticipated to be greater than or equal to 5 cubic feet per second and is the dewatered stream length (not including the culvert and plunge pool length, if present) greater than or equal to 33 ft? a. No - use "Protocol for Dewatering Outside High Likelihood Listed Fish Areas"; b. Yes - use "Protocol I Dewatering Within High Likelihood Listed Fish Areas"; and consult with a USFWS bull trout biologist staff on appropriate timing window. 20 Table 1: Bull Trout Spawning and Rearing Areas that are Excluded from the Programmatic' (Listed in order of WRIA number) ' Management or Recovery Unit Core Area Spawning and Rearing Areas Excluded (no in -water work is permitted in these areas) Umatilla -Walla Walla River Basin Walla Walla Core Area WRIA 32 Mill Creek and tributaries Wolf Fork above Coates Creek N Fk Touchet and tributaries upstream of Wolf Fk confluence S Fk Touchet River and tributaries above Griffin Creek ...a,S, eF ;t�,,y .. � �''�.x� �..�.. _:ti�^`�.�;�,, aNt_ ,rq ., t S .� 3i• .tY,��kiwW,�'h fi F`, �4 �. v. Snake River Basin Asotin Creek N Fk Asotin Creek including Charley and Cougar Creeks — above confluence with Charley Cr Tucannon River WRIA 35 Tucannon River from confluence with Little Tucannon Upper Tucannon River and tributaries above confluence with Hixon Creek Cummings Creek Middle Columbia River Basin Yakima River Core Area WRIA 37 N and MFk Ahtanum Creek - above the confluence of S Fk S Fk Ahtanum Creek — above confluence with N Fk Ahtanum WRIA 38 Rattlesnake Creek — upstream of confluence with Naches River WRIA 39 Taneum Creek — upstream of Taneum Campground Upper Yakima — upstream of Lake Easton Dam Cle Elum River — upstream of confluence with Yakima River N Fk Teanaway — upstream of confluence with Yakima River Upper Columbia River Basin Wenatchee River Core Area WRIA 45 Upper Wenatchee and tributaries above confluence with the Chiwawa, including Nason Cr, Little Wenatchee, White and the Chiwawa Rivers Chiwaukum Creek and Icicle Creek— upstream from confluence with the Wenatchee River Ingalls Creek- upstream of confluence with Peshastin Creek Entiat River Core Area WRIA 46 Entiat River — above confluence with the Mad River Mad River — above confluence with Entiat River Methow River Core Area WRIA 48 Upper Methow tributaries - Lost River, Early Winters Cr, W Fk Methow, Goat Cr, and Wolf Cr Chewack River — upstream of Twentymile Cr Twisp River and tributaries above confluence of, and including, Little Bridge Creek Gold Cr — upstream of confluence with Methow River Northeast Washington Pend Oreille River WRIA 62 Le Clerc Creek — upstream of mouth Spawning and rearing areas on lands administered by the U.S. Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management are not listed because these lands are not included in this Programmatic 21 Table 2 List of streams and marine areas that important for bull trout recovery where in -water work is permitted Management Unit Bull Trout Areas Olympic Peninsula - Marine Olympic Peninsula - Freshwater Hood Canal and independent tributaries Strait of Juan de Fuca and independent tributaries (includes Bell, Morse, Ennis, Siebert Creeks) Pacific Ocean and independent coastal tributaries (includes Goodman, Mosquito, Cedar, Steamboat, Kalaloch and Joe Creeks, Raft, Moclips and Copalis Rivers) Lower Chehalis River/Grays Harbor and independent Tributaries (includes Humptulips, Wishkah, Wynoochee and Satsop Rivers) Dungeness River — mouth to RM 10 Skokomish River — mouth to head of Cushman Reservoir Hoh River — mouth to headwaters Queets River — mouth to headwaters Quinault River - mouth to headwaters Puget Sound - Marine Puget Sound - Freshwater All marine shorelines including North Puget Sound, Main Basin, Whidbey Basin, and South Puget Sound Samish River, Whatcom Creek, Squalicum Creek, Duwamish and lower Green River, and Lower Nisqually River including the Nisqually River estuary and McAllister Creek (FMO areas outside of core areas) Lake Washington including the following: lower Cedar River; Sammamish River; Lakes Washington, Sammamish, and Union; and Ship Canal Nooksack River — mouth to National Forest boundary (North and South Forks) Skagit River — mouth to National Forest boundary Stillaguamish River — mouth to headwaters of N Fork; Deer Creek — mouth to National Forest boundary; S Fork and Canyon Cr — mouth to National Forest boundary Snohomish/Skykomish — mouth to confluence of Skykomish and Snoqualmie Rivers; Pilchuck River; Snoqualmie River to falls; Tolt River; Skykomish River — mouth to National Forest boundary, including Sultan River, Woods Creek and Wallace River; S Fk Skykomish to National Forest boundary Puyallup River — mouth, including Mowich River, to National Park boundary; Carbon River — mouth to National Forest boundary; White River — mouth to National Forest boundary 22 Management Unit Bull Trout Areas Lower Columbia Lewis River — mouth to RM 75 (Upper Falls), including Swift, Yale, and Mervin Reservoirs Klickitat River — mouth to confluence of W FK Klickitat Mainstems of the Columbia, Snake, Walla Walla, Pend Oreille, and Grande Ronde Rivers Middle Columbia River Basin Ahtanum Creek — mouth to confluence of N and S Forks Naches River — mouth to confluence of Little Naches and Bumping River Tieton River — mouth to Rimrock Lake Yakima River — mouth to Easton (RM 203) and Teanaway River Upper Columbia River Basin Wenatchee River — mouth to confluence of the Chiwawa; Peshastin Cr — mouth to confluence of Ingalls Cr; Chewack River — confluence with Wenatchee to RM 20; Beaver Cr — mouth to Blue Buck Cr Entiat River — mouth to confluence with Mad River Methow River — mouth to confluence of Lost River Northeast Washington Pend Oreille River Pend Oreille River; Tacoma Cr - mouth to Little Tacoma; Small Creek — mouth to forks; Sullivan Creek to and including Sullivan Lake Walla Walla River Basin Touchet River — mouth to forks; S Fk Touchet River — to confluence of Griffin Cr N Fk Touchet to Wolf Fork; Wolf Fork to confluence of Coates Cr Mill Creek and tributaries Snake River Basin Mainstem Snake and Grande Ronde Rivers; Asotin Creek — mouth to confluence of N Fk Asotin and Charley Cr; Tucannon River — mouth to confluence of Hixon Cr 23 Protocol I Dewatering Within High Likelihood Listed Fish Areas A. Fish Capture — General Guidelines 1. Fish Capture Methods a. Minnow traps. Optional. Traps may be left in place prior to dewatering and may be used in conjunction with seining. Once dewatering starts, minnow traps should only be used if there is someone present to check the traps every few hours, and remove the traps once the water level becomes too low. b. Seining. Required. Use seine with mesh of a size to ensure entrapment of the residing ESA -listed fish and age classes. c. Sanctuary dip nets. Required. Use in conjunction with other methods as area is dewatered. d. Electrofishing. Optional. Use electrofishing only after other means of fish capture have been exhausted or where other means of fish capture are not be feasible. Applicants shall adhere to NMFS Backpack Electrofishing Guidelines (NMFS 2000). 2. Fish capture operations will be conducted by or under the supervision of a fishery biologist experienced in such efforts and all staff working with the capture operation must have the necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities to ensure the safe handling of all ESA -listed fish. 3. The applicant must obtain any other Federal, State and local permits and authorizations necessary for the conduct of fish capture activities. 4. A description of any capture and release effort will be included in a post -project report, including the name and address of the supervisory fish biologist, methods used to isolate the work area and minimize disturbances to ESA -listed species, stream conditions before and following placement and removal of barriers; the means of fish removal; the number and size of fish removed by species and age class; condition upon release of all fish handled; and any incidence of observed injury or mortality. 5. Storage and Release. ESA -listed fish must be handled with extreme care and kept in water at all times during transfer procedures. The transfer of ESA -listed fish must be conducted using a sanctuary net that holds water during transfer, whenever necessary to prevent the added stress of an out -of -water transfer. A healthy environment for non -ESA listed fish shall be provided by large buckets (five gallon minimum to prevent overcrowding) and minimal handling of fish. The water temperature in the transfer buckets shall not exceed the temperature of cold pool water in the subject stream. Retain fish the minimum time possible to ensure that stress is minimized, temperatures do not rise, and dissolved oxygen remains suitable. Release fish as near as possible to the isolated reach in a pool or area that provides cover and flow refuge. 24 B. Dewater Instream Work Area and Fish Capture Fish screen. Except for gravity diversions that have gradual and small outfall drops directly into water, all water intake structures must have a fish screen installed, operated, and maintained in accordance with NMFS Guidelines (NMFS 1997; Chapter 11 in NMFS 2008). The sequence for stream flow diversion will be: Note: this sequence will take one 24-hour period prior to construction to complete (of which 12 hours are for staged dewatering with 6 hours overnight). We suggest you start in the morning the day before project construction is scheduled and leave the reach dewatered overnight according to instruction below. 1. Install flow conveyance devices (pumps, discharge lines, gravity drain lines, conduits, and channels), but do not divert flow. 2. Install upstream barrier. Allow water to flow over upstream barrier. 3. Install block net at upstream end of work area. Block nets will be checked every 4 hours, 24 hours a day. If any fish are impinged or killed on the nets they will be checked hourly. 4. Reduce flow over upstream barrier by one-third for a minimum of 6 hours. 5. Inspect as discharge is diminishing and in dewatered areas for stranded and trapped fish and remove them with sanctuary dip nets. 6. Reduce flow over upstream barrier by an additional one-third for a minimum of 6 hours. 7. Again, inspect dewatered areas for stranded and trapped fish and remove them with sanctuary dip nets. 8. Leave the project area in a stable, low flow (one third of flow) condition, overnight, allowing fish to leave the area volitionally. 9. In the morning, remove any remaining fish from the area to be dewatered using seines and/or hand held sanctuary dip -nets. 10. Divert upstream flow completely. 11. Install downstream barrier if necessary (only in low gradient, backwatered reaches). 12. If water remains within the work area; seine, dip net, and lastly electrofish (if using this technique), the project area until catch rates have reached no fish for 3 consecutive passes. Move rocks as needed to flush fish and effectively electrofish the work area. 13. If needed, pump water out of isolated pools within the project area to a temporary storage and treatment site or into upland areas and filter through vegetation prior to reentering the stream channel. Continue to seine, dip net and electrofish while pumping. 14. If fish continue to be captured, shut pump off before average water depths reach one foot. Continue to seine, dip net and electrofish until no fish are caught for 3 consecutive passes. 15. Pump dry and check substrate for remaining fish. 16. Continue to pump water from the project area as needed for the duration of the project. The diversion structure is typically a temporary dam built just upstream of the project site with sand bags that are filled with clean gravel or stream/floodplain rock and covered with plastic sheeting. A portable bladder dam or other non-erosive diversion technologies may be used to contain stream flow. Mining of stream or floodplain rock can be used for diversion dam construction if it does not result in significant additional floodplain or stream disturbance. Often gravel has to be moved to key in logs in which case it makes sense to use this gravel for the diversion structure. 25 The temporary bypass system must consist of non-erosive techniques, such as a pipe or a plastic -lined channel, both of which must be sized large enough to accommodate the predicted peak flow rate during construction. In cases of channel rerouting, water can be diverted to one side of the existing channel. Dissipate flow at the outfall of the bypass system to diffuse erosive energy of the flow. Place the outflow in an area that minimizes or prevents damage to riparian vegetation. If the diversion inlet is a gravity diversion and is not screened to allow for downstream passage of fish, place diversion outlet in a location that facilitates gradual and safe reentry of fish into the stream channel. C. Rewater Instream Work Area Remove stream diversion and restore stream flow. Heavy machinery operating from the bank may be used to aid in removal of diversion structures. Slowly re -water the construction site to prevent loss of surface water downstream as the construction site streambed absorbs water and to prevent a sudden increase in stream turbidity. Look downstream during re -watering to prevent stranding of aquatic organisms below the construction site. All stream diversion devices, equipment, pipe, and conduits will be removed and disturbed soil and vegetation will be restored after the diversion is no longer needed. 26 Protocol II Dewatering Outside High Likelihood Listed Fish Areas If bull trout or other listed salmonids are captured at any time during the dewatering process, immediately notify a USFWS bull trout biologist or NMFS biologist and obtain guidance to either continue to dewater and remove fish or stop activities and re -water the project site. Normal guidance: 1. If you encounter listed fish at or prior to step 3 switch to Protocol I 2. If you encounter listed fish after step 3, continue to dewater and remove fish, paying close attention to presence of additional listed salmonids. A. Fish Capture — General Guidelines 1. Fish Capture Methods a. Minnow traps. Optional. Traps may be left in place prior to dewatering and may be used in conjunction with seining. Once dewatering starts, minnow traps should only be used if there is someone present to check the traps every few hours, and remove the traps once the water level becomes too low. b. Seining. Required. Use seine with mesh of such a size to ensure entrapment of the residing ESA -listed fish and age classes. c. Sanctuary dip nets. Required. Use in conjunction with other methods as area is dewatered. d. Electrofishing. Optional. Use electrofishing only after other means of fish capture have been exhausted or where other means of fish capture are not be feasible. Applicants shall adhere to NMFS Backpack Electrofishing Guidelines. 2. Fish capture operations will be conducted by or under the supervision of a fishery biologist experienced in such efforts and all staff working with the seining operation must have the necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities to ensure the safe handling of all ESA -listed fish. 3. The applicant must obtain any other Federal, State and local permits and authorizations necessary for the conduct of fish capture activities. 4. A description of any seine and release effort will be included in a post -project report, including the name and address of the supervisory fish biologist, methods used to isolate the work area and minimize disturbances to ESA -listed species, stream conditions before and following placement and removal of barriers; the means of fish removal; the number and size of fish removed by species; conditions upon release of all fish handled; and any incidence of observed injury or mortality. 5. Storage and Release. Fish must be handled with extreme care and kept in water to the maximum extent possible during transfer procedures. A healthy environment for the stressed fish shall be provided by large buckets (five gallon minimum to prevent overcrowding) and minimal handling of fish. The temperature of the water shall not exceed the temperature in large deep holding pools of the subject system. The transfer of any ESA -listed fish must be conducted using a sanctuary net that holds water during transfer, to prevent the added stress of 27 an out -of -water transfer. Retain fish the minimum time possible to ensure that stress is minimized, temperatures do not rise, and dissolved oxygen remains suitable. Release fish as near as possible to the isolated reach in a pool or area that provides cover and flow refuge. B. Dewater Instream Work Area and Fish Capture Fish screen. Except for gravity diversions that have gradual and small outfall drops directly into water, all water intake structures must have a fish screen installed, operated, and maintained in accordance with the NMFS Guidelines (NMFS 1997; Chapter 11 in NMFS 2008). The sequence for stream flow diversion would be as follows: 1. Install flow conveyance devices (pumps, discharge lines, gravity drain lines, conduits, and channels), but do not divert flow. 2. Install block net at upstream end or work area. 3. Seine and dip net through the entire project area in a downstream direction, starting at the upstream end; thereby moving fish out of the project area. Then, if necessary electrofish. 4. Install upstream barrier and divert upstream flow completely. 5. Capture any remaining fish using hand held dip -nets. 6. Install downstream barrier if necessary (only in low gradient backwatered reaches). 7. If water remains within the work area; seine and dip net, if necessary electrofish the project area until catch rates have reached no fish for 3 consecutive passes. 8. Pump water out of isolated pools within the project area to a temporary storage and treatment site or into upland areas and filter through vegetation prior to re-entering the stream channel. Continue to seine, dip net, or electrofish while pumping. 9. If fish continue to be captured, shut pump off before average water depths reach one foot. Continue to seine, dip net, or electrofish until no fish are caught for 3 consecutive passes. 10. Pump dry and check substrate for remaining fish and remove them. 11. Continue to pump water from the project area as needed for the duration of the project. The diversion structure is typically a temporary dam built just upstream of the project site with sand bags that are filled with clean gravel or stream/floodplain rock and covered with plastic sheeting. A portable bladder dam or other non-erosive diversion technologies may be used to contain stream flow. Mining of stream or floodplain rock can be used for diversion dam construction if it does not result in significant additional floodplain or stream disturbance. Often gravel has to be moved to key in logs in which case it makes sense to use this gravel for the diversion structure. The temporary bypass system must consist of non-erosive techniques, such as a pipe or a plastic -lined channel, both of which must be sized large enough to accommodate the predicted peak flow rate during construction. In cases of channel rerouting, water can be diverted to one side of the existing channel. Dissipate flow at the outfall of the bypass system to diffuse erosive energy of the flow. Place the outflow in an area that minimizes or prevents damage to riparian vegetation. If the diversion inlet is a gravity diversion and is not screened to allow for downstream passage of fish, place diversion outlet in a location that facilitates gradual and safe reentry of fish into the stream channel. 28 C. Rewater Instream Work Area Remove stream diversion and restore stream flow. Heavy machinery operating from the bank may be used to aid in removal of diversion structures. Slowly re -water the construction site to prevent loss of surface water downstream as the construction site streambed absorbs water and to prevent a sudden increase in stream turbidity. Look downstream during re -watering to prevent stranding of aquatic organisms below the construction site. All stream diversion devices, equipment, pipe, and conduits will be removed and disturbed soil and vegetation will be restored after the diversion is no longer needed. Literature Cited King County. 2008. Stream and River Water Quality Monitoring. Duwamish River Site 0309. http://green.kingcounty.gov/WLR/W aterres/StreamsData/Conventional.aspx?Locator=0309. NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1997. Fish Screening Criteria for Anadromous Salmonids. NMFS Southwest Region, (January 1997). 12 p. http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/hcd/fishscrn.pdf NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2000. Guidelines for Electrofishing Waters Containing Salmonids Listed Under the ESA. http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/ESA-Salmon-Regulations- Permits/4d-Rules/upload/electro2000.pdf NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). February 2008. ANADROMOUS SALMONID PASSAGE FACILITY DESIGN. http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon- Hvdropower/FERC/upload/Fish Passage Design.pdf NMFS. 2013. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon and Puget Sound Steelhead. Proposed Rule. Federal Register: 78: 2726- 2796. USFWS (USFWS). 2002. Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) draft recovery plan. Chapter One. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 137 pp. USFWS (USFWS). 2004a. Draft Recovery Plan for the Coastal -Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus). Volume I (of II): Puget Sound Management Unit. Portland, Oregon. 389 + xvii pp. USFWS (USFWS). 2004b. Draft Recovery Plan for the Coastal -Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus). Volume II (of II): Olympic Peninsula Management Unit. Portland, Oregon. 277 + xvi pp. 29 WDFW. 2009. Green River (Duwamish) Chinook. Recovery Goals, Population History, Escapement, and Hatcheries Associated with this Population. https://fortress.wa.gov/dfw/score/score/species/population details jsp?stockId=1160. WDFW. 2012. Green River (Duwamish) Winter Steelhead. Recovery Goals, Population History, Escapement, and Hatcheries Associated with this Population. https://fortress.wa.gov/dfw/score/score/species/population details jsp?stockId=6175 30 Attachment 1 - JARPA FIGURES Sixteen Drawings Sheets 31 TO ELLIOTT BAY, SEATTLE Scale: N.T.S. PROJECT BOUNDARY Duwamish Gardens Habitat Project List of Sheets: 1 Vicinity Map 2 Existing Conditions 3 Demolition, Clearing and Grubbing Plan 4 Site Plan 5 Grading and Drainage Plan 6 Erosion and Water Control Plan 7 Erosion and Water Control Details 8 Planting Plan 9 Plant List 10 Cross Sections 11 Detail: Root Wad and Woody Debris 12 Detail: Tidal Stream 13 Detail: Cobble River Access Trail 14 Detail: Emergent Planting and Snag 15 Detail: Tree Planting 16 Detail: Shrub Planting PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWLA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 96168 SHEET 1 OF 16: COVER SHEET PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWLA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC VERTICAL DATUM CONVERSIONS (PER CITY OF SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES) DATUM ELEVATION NAVD88 0.80 MEAN LOW WATER +0.49 MEAN LOWER LOW WATER (83-01 EPOCH) -2.35 140VD 29. KING COUNTY.MLTRO +3.58 NOTE: FROM A DATUM TO NAND 88 ADD THE VALUE SHOWN FROM NAVD88 TO A DATUM SUBTRACT THE VALUE SHOWN EXAMPLE: NAVD88 ELEV. 20.00 = (20.00 -(-2.35)) = MLLW ELEV. 22.35 NGVD29 ELEV. 10.00 = (10.00 + 3.58) = NAVD88 ELEV. 13.58 PROPERTY - CONTAMINATED SOIL, TYP. 200'SHORELINE SETBACK SOUND TRANSIT GUIDEWAY ABOVE GROUND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE 45 -KI -703 1" =60' 0' 30' 60' DUWAMISH RIVER ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE (10.1) (PROPERTY LINE) A m . PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65' N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE#: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 2 OF 16: EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC VERTICAL DATUM CONVERSIONS (PER CITY OF SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES) DATUM ELEVATION NAVD88 0.00 MEAN LOW WATER T0.49 MEAN LOWER LOW WATER (83-01 EPOCH) -2.35 NGVD 29. KING COUNTY,ML IRO +3.58 NOTE: FROM A DATUM TO NAVD 88 ADD THE VALUE SHOWN FROM NAVD88 TO A DATUM SUBTRACT THE VALUE SHOWN EXAMPLE: NAVD88 ELEV. 20.00 = (20.00 -(-2.35)) = MLLW ELEV. 22.35 NGVD29 ELEV. 10.00 = (10.00 + 3.58) = NAVD88 ELEV. 13.58 PRESERVE ROW OF JUNIPERS 200' SHOREHNE SETBACK DEMOLISH BUILDING FOUNDATIONS 1AND SLA TYP. (BUILDINGS JQBE DEMOLISHEDBYOWNER) DEMOLISH \ ASPHALT DRIVEWAY P MOLISH- CONCRETE'\ WAIWAY MAINTAIN CITY OWNED FENCING THROUGH DURATION OF C NTRACT SAVE AND PROTECT ALL UTILITY VAULTS �-- DEMOLISHSTAIRB,– r COORDINATE WITIt1 --DiMOLISH BUILDING -11 OWNER i FOUNDATIONS AND SLABS, TYP. (BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED BY OWNER) REMOVE 30" HICKORY REMOVE 15" MULTI -STEMMED HICKORY REMOVE 4" MULTI - STEMMED BLACK LOCUST EMOLI" REMOVE 2I4, RETE MUJLTISTEM' PATIO CH RRIES REI VE 14 DE OLISH I. CED R»S1 ECDORA .ASRHALT \ ASF HALT STAIRS, DRIVEWAY COORDINATE WITH „ t OWNER I 1 n1. DEMOLISH BUILDING FOUNDATIONS AND SLABS, TYP. (BUILDINGS TO BE' DEMOLISHED BY OWNER) 111=60' 0' 30' 60' CLEAR AND GRUB ALL REMOVE 5 BLACK LOCUST BLACKBERRIES TREES: 18-20" MULTI -STEMMED, 30", 24", 16", 18" MULTISTEMMED; CUT TO GROUND LEVEL, SAVE ROOT SYSTEM DUWAMISH RIVER PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKV4LA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47' 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122` 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE#: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 3 OF 16: DEMOLITION, CLEARING AND GRUBBING PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC 200' SHO TRUCK DRIVEWAY (SIZE AND CONFIGURATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE, IN NEGOTIATION WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER) \ E SETBACK \ 5 PARKING STALLS (LOCATION AND \ CONFIGURATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE) WOODY DEBRIS, SHEET CRUSHED ROCK PEDESTRIAN TRAIL, TYP. HABITAT PROTECTION FENCING VIEWPOINT, TYP. Ii • CRUSHED ROCK COBBLE, TYP. 1"=60' C� 0' 30' 60' RIVER ACCESS TRAIL COBBLE RIVER ACCESS TRAIL DUWAMISH RIVER PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47" 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122" 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE 9: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 4 OF 16: SITE PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKVNLA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC VERTICAL DATUM CONVERSIONS (PER CITY OF SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES) DATU8 ELEVATION NAVD88 0.00 MEAN LOW WATER +0.49 MEAN LOWER LOW WATER (83-01 EPOCH) -2.35 NCVD 29. KING COUNTY,METRO +3.58 NOTE: FROM A DATUM TO NAVD 88 ADD THE VALUE SHOWN FROM NAVD88 TO A DATUM SUBTRACT THE VALUE SHOWN EXAMPLE: NAVD88 ELEV. 20.00 = (20.00 -(-2.35)) = MLLW ELEV. 22.35 NGV029 ELEV. 10.00 = (10.00 + 3.58) = NAVD88 ELEV. 13.58 NAVD 88 200' SHOR 1 \ NEW TYPE -1 -CB •BIORETENTI•• • ERFLOW TE 60 SF BIORETENTIO 1 ELL U 0' 30' 60' EXISTING ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE DLIWPMISN PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.(, STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 5 OF 16: GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWLA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC MAX. SLOPE ELEVATION RANGE MUDFLAT 10H:1V 0-5 HIGH AND 5H:IV 5-10 LOW MARSH MOST RIPARIAN 34:1V 1n -1i- UPLAND 3H:1V 13+ RIPARIAN NAVD 88 200' SHOR 1 \ NEW TYPE -1 -CB •BIORETENTI•• • ERFLOW TE 60 SF BIORETENTIO 1 ELL U 0' 30' 60' EXISTING ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE DLIWPMISN PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.(, STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 5 OF 16: GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWLA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC 40179 1. 00141 011 0711 41 UFO. O. 6711 SO (4110100: 41110'!71 BAY 6114101 lOS 4 1400 0]X741111140 1$9111.0111 0tt0'000%4 3 6000- 316(1 SR ISZER (0)10111'11 0X 17. VAR 401TA 11}17'44303.] RRyp 10 K-Y'1^R 4011: NOSY. 714']7!14 E(R1 (1» 10104131 0 7E46 10 030111 71074,1071010+50144 NOW Wart 61140 3060 '33) COMM. 0046/14 E71Y (C( 90f(T 10 OE CUYISIS $ 60310E 110 310.11E9 1,106 640.0 6 10NLR MFF 1111. SOU 1144 310044 410310 PTA 1011-41110 402' 31 00 Off YXSI E 03100O E1'90E 6 1st 01 S1.9311 44 111/4011/10 9.11K 4:104345431 901 C3 03IL101 If 07011]4: Nix PLASM 9EE131 ER010 MY IK 141 R K 0013170 3 01111 450.,0 004 0000 11011 40!. 1. 411,11 Al 01010 1101(011-11177 4090 04004410 MR 10 11910MF 111901.491 ERI. O. KOMI 161'31*:. ERY (13)11191 1.010111.10 9X. 6/1/0410 4101040 0441030111-101111 10140WAS *eC 01111Si 111 TCC —ID PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE#: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 6 OF 16: EROSION AND WATER CONTROL PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: SHANNON AND WILSON, INC. EXTRA FLOTATION TO COMPENSATE FUR VONT OF END CONNECTOR TENSION CABLE 0_ ROIABGN SEGMENT WATERLINE - A�- EN0 CONNECTOR SART BALLAST CHAIN SILT CURTAIN DETAIL GROMMET NTS BUOYANCY FLOAT CABLE 1= AIRLINE NOTE: ANCHOR CHAIN EVERY 100 FEET. ALLOW APPROX. 1 FOOT CLEARANCE BETWEEN LOWER EDGE OF SKIRT AND MUD LAYER. BALLAST CHAIN HUE/LINE NEW A -A JOINTS IN FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE SPLICED AT P051S. USE STAPLES, PARE RINGS, OR EOUIVALENI TO ATTACH FABRIC 0 POSTS. POST SPACING MAY, INCREASED 1 TO B' R PARE BA0ONG IS USED NOTE: FILTER FABRIC FENCES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG CONTOUR 0004(6ER POSSIBLE 2'z2' BY 14 GA. SIRE OR 000100IENI, IF STANDARD STRENGTH FABRIC USED FILTER FABRIC MINIMUM 4'x4' TRENCH BACKFILL TRENCH YAM 6471VE SOIL OR 3/4'-1.5'WASHED GRAVEL. SILT FENCE DETAIL POSTS, STEEL FENCE POSTS, REBAR, OR EOUIVA0EN1 NTS PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 7 OF 16: EROSION AND WATER CONTROL DETAILS PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWLA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: SHANNON AND WILSON, INC. Rigs i1 qui. KOA A WELLA SEEDING/PLANTING AREA BENEATH GUIDEWAY STREETSCAPE PLANTING- TREES AND LOW -GROWING PLANTS RAIN GARDEN- MOSTLY LOW -GROWING PLANTS LAWN UPLAND RIPARIAN PLANTING (EL. 13+) MOIST RIPARIAN PLANTING (EL. 10-13) HIGH MARSH PLANTING (EL. 7.5-10) LOW MARSH PLANTING (EL. 5-7.5) RIPARIAN AND UPLAND RESTORATION OF RIVER BANK NOTES: • AMEND ALL MUDFLAT, MARSH, RIPARIAN AND UPLAND AREAS WITH COMPOST MIXED WITH NATIVE SOIL • RAKE OUT DEBRIS • PLACE BIODEGRADABLE EROSION CONTROL FABRIC ON ALL GRADED SLOPES BETWEEN ELEVATION 5 AND 13 200' SHO ,u '• 4��''//4iF/ //!4/./�" '/1��ij9/i1jI/1i I1/ /iP/�1/ni/X1 /L/L�/LLjL1IMF IL14�LLLL�'/44 //LL/'./? . , /1111 INV 11 1111 II 1er 311 SII' DIr, "- .0,407:010), ���0), UP iL LLALNDL /t RIPARIAN IPARIAN RESTORATION ON EXISTING SLOPE BANK Air ANKArn i�fln- Al►A11/lie, a3D•Air : LLL: LLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LL j / I/ /IIv'7/ ij Alf RESTORATION ON 1" = 60' EXISTING SLOPE BANK PARKING AREA PLANTING AND BIORETENTION C LL CONFIGURATIONS SUBJECT TO CHANGE IAN ci))1 0' 30' 60' PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES, DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19,69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE#: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY 5 TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 8 OF 16: PLANTING PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWLA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC TREES PLANTING ZONES SYMBOL SO.TIFIC NAME COMIONNANIE SIZE CONDITION SPACING UR LAT RG AG ARIES GRAND. GRAND RR 5 GAL CONTAINER A. SHOWN AC /CER DRCINATUM VINE MAPLE 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN ACE/ MACROSIYLLVA/ BIG LEAF MAPLE SG CONTAINER FL OREGON ASH OAL COMAINER AS .0WIL LT LIRIODENDRON TULIPEFERA TASTIGIATA TULIP TREE 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN PS PICEA STCHENSS SITKA SPRUCE 5 GAL CONTAINS/ AS SHOWN PB PCPULUS BALSAMIFERA BUG,/ COTTONWOOD 5 GAL CONTAINS/ AS STOWS PSEUDOTSUGA MENZESII DOUGLAS RR 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN .AUL LUCIOA PACIFIC WILLOW TP THUM PLIC.STA WESTERN RED CEDAR 5 GAL A. SHOWN HETEROPSYLIA WESTERN HEMLOCK 5 GAL DONTAINER AS STIOWN SHRUBS SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING LAI RG SERVICEBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER CORKS STaDNFERA RSLOSIER DOGWOOD 1 GAL CONTAINER GS GAULTHERIA SUTTON SAUL I GAL HO HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR OCEANSPRAY LI LONICERA INWOLUCRATA TLNNBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER TALL OREGON -GRAPE 1 GAL CONTANIER PC PHYSOCARPUSCAPITATUS PACIFIC NNEBARK I GAL RS RIBES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANT 1 GAL RN NOOTIU ROS: 1 GAL CONTAINER RO ROSA RUGOSA.SNOW .SNOW PAVEMENT ROSE 1 GAL OINTAINER roc SALT<SCDUIERIANA ScoulERS WALLOW 1 GAL CONTAINER .ALD SITCHENSIS STILL 'WILLOW 1 GAL CONTAINER SYMYIfOWCARFG. ALE/US 1 GNI CONTAINER GROUNDCOVERS SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME DOWNON NAME SZE CONDITION SPACITO RG NINNICSAINICN 1 GAL FC COASTAL STRAWBERRY CONTAINER EMERGENT MIX A SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SZE CONDITION SPACING LM RG AR ARGENTINA EGEDII PACIFIC SLVERWEEN 1 GAL CONTAINER AE AGROSTIS EIERATA SPI.BENTGRASS 1 GAL CONTAINER ZA'O C. AS AGROSIIS STOLINFERA CREEPING BUNTGRASS 1 GAL CONTAINER CO CAREX OBNUPTA SLOUGH SIDGE 1 GAL CONTAINER GOOC DC TUFTED HAIRGRASS 1 GAL CONTAINER WOO MINTED RUSH 1 GAL CONTAINER Er C SORPNSMKROCARPUS SMALL FRUITED BULLRUSH 1 GAL CONTAINER b'OC 1 GAL CONTAINER CCOC PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65' N LONGITUDE: 122° 1T 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 9 OF 16: PLANT LIST PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWLA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: 6* 044 G \ \ 14, eop / Pic�3 lP4+ e. o� 'o 0' 30' 60' B 1"=40' 126501 Ns, 0' 20' 40' "9� 7-4\ 444,if00T9 9y4°‘4 CF`rA t(), '1)4, 1PA0e'a94°Aeo9CFFCVY� 9fp C s G(C S 9J. O s,.yc 421,�l. p`z� `o°P5,14'0 .1Q1)4*7xp�Fp F(yTtoy 'r-43 i 94_ �. B' PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE#: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 10 OF 16: CROSS SECTIONS PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC RIPARIAN PLANTINGS, SEE PLANS 1' DIAM. DRILLED HOLE 7X9 GALV. STEEL CABLE W. CABLE CLAMPS ROOT WAD, SEE SPECIFICATIONS CABLE EYELET THREADED THROUGH ANCHOR 0.H.W. MANTA RAY ANCHOR OR APPROVED EQUAL COBBLES, PER PLAN ROOT WAD NOT TO SCALE USE ONLY SOUND MATERIAL 25% OF LENGTH 15'-30 LOG NOTCHED 4" WIDE MANTA RAY DRIVABLE BY 3" DEEP (TOP OF LOG ANCHOR OR APPROVED ONLY) TO SEAT CABLE /If EQUAL WRAPS. �/ _I I—II =m_ _.,�� VI _ _ _ —� �=—III—III—� �— — i —III—) —� � III III � I �—III—III —I II—II=I I I—III— ;III-WEI I I—III—III III III = I MI 11E1 11E1 I El HEIII I I EWE] I I—II=III=IIIIII I I=III-I I I=II=II=III II I=III=II=II=I I I=I I I I I II=II=III= II-IIIAI-III-II--IIiII-IIIII-II-III-I-II-III-IIII-IIIII II=' IIIII-III II II II=II III =IIITII IIIIIIII-II-II III II 1 =W=III-III-III-III-III- I I-III-III=III= = I I a I I= -III=III=III=III=IIIIII IIII xsw a tEHGT EXISTING SUBGRADE LOG WITH ROOT WAD 7X9 GALV. STEEL CABLE W. CABLE CLAMPS WOODY DEBRIS WITH ROOT WAD NOT TO SCALE PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17'19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 11 OF 16: DETAIL: ROOT WAD PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC LOG NOTCHED 4' WIDE BY 3' DEEP (TOP OF LOG ONLY) TO SEAT CABLE WRAPS LOG ANCHORED IN TIGHT CONTACT WITH SOIL 1/4'709 GALVANIZED STEEL CABLE W. CABLE CLAWS CABLE EYELET THREADED THROUGH ANCHOR OHW ADRIVEABLE ANCHOR SYSTEM FOR LOAFING LOG TIDAL STREAM SECTION A' NOT TO SCALE PRUNE LIMBS FLUSH WITH COLLAR, TYP. PROVIDE 18'-24' CEDAR, DOUGLAS FIR, OR SPRUCE LOGS OHW SUBGRADE NOTE SLOPE VARIES; SEE PLANS TIDAL STREAM LONGITUDINAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 12 OF 16: DETAIL: TIDAL STREAM PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC SELECT % MAN TO 3 MAN BOULDERS PER PLAN ADJACENT MARSH OR 1-1/2" DRAIN ROCK MUDFLAT GROUND SURFACE PLAN VIEW COBBLE RIVER ACCESS TRAIL SCALE: 1/4" = 1' APPROX. 10', VARIES, PER PLAN 1-1/2" DRAIN ROCK 4"-6" ROUNDED COBBLES 3:1 SIDE SLOPES MAX. SELECT Y MAN TO 3 MAN BOULDERS PER PLAN ADJACENT MARSH OR MUDFLAT GROUND SURFACE 741174 "WS 9 11 ••P" 6• SECTION VIEW 1/4" = 1' 0' 2' 4' PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 13 OF 16: DETAIL: COBBLE RIVER ACCESS TRAIL PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC OHW NOTE: USE GOOSE EXCLUDER WIRE PROTECTION WHEN WILDLIFE CONSUMPTION ISA PROBLEM. PROVIDE MYLAR RIBBON ON BAMBOO STAKES TO PROTECT NEW PLANTINGS FROM WILDLIFE CONSUMPTION AS REQUIRED. SPACING: 6" 0.C. 1Ih f 1 N-- 1 I�r`'�II -III-1 1-1 1111 11,„ l T1= I- TUBERS CORMS, AND/OR ROOTS PLANTED 8 WEIGHTED WITH 8d NAIL EMERGENT PLANTING NOT TO SCALE —CONTAINER PLANTING FIRMLY EMBEDDED IN MUD. STAKE IF NECESSARY. PLACE TOPSOIL z w w N N r (3L2 zQ wz eLL zQ VARIES, SEE NOTE HABITAT SNAG NOT TO SCALE 15 BRANCHES MIN. 1"-3" DIA MIN. CUT 6 CAVITIES (PROJECT TOTAL) AS DIRECTED BY OWNER. NEW SNAG TREE CEDAR, SPRUCE, DOUGLAS FIR OR PONDEROSA PINE FINISH GRADE OMPACTED SOIL PROVIDE: 1/3 OF TOTAL SNAGS © 30' HEIGHT, 24" DIA 1/3 OF TOTAL SNAGS @ 20' HEIGHT, 20" DIA. 1/3 OF TOTAL SNAGS @ 15' HEIGHT, 18" DIA PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 14 OF 16: DETAIL: EMERGENT PLANTING AND SNAG PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC NOTES: • STAKE TREES OVER 5' HEIGHT • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH THE FINISHED GRADE • SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING • FLAG GUYING WIRES WITH SURVEYOR TAPE 2 STRAND TWISTED 12 GAUGE GAL. WIRE ENCASED IN 1" DIAMETER RUBBER HOSE 8'-0" BVC TM' TREATED PINE STAKES DRIVEN TO REFUSAL INTO UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL MIN. 24" DEPTH. FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE REMOVE ALL WRAPPINGS FROM TOP Y, OF ROOTBALL 3" MULCH, KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK FORM SAUCER WITH 3" HIGH CONTINUOUS RIM SPECIFIED PLANTING MIX, WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE AIR POCKETS CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING NOT TO SCALE NOTES d0 4 • STAKE TREES OVER 5' V 4 o HEIGHT 4 nj�'1� F. • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF �D �o�.� i!�y' A� ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH W 4. ,,8 `\ • SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING ••••• ' f 7/ THE FINISHED GRADE .i':, • FLAG GUYING WIRES WITH PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING 8,p, #4 r A V. VI> IIA, /10 fill • 10.• 2 STRAND TWISTED 12 GAUGE GAL. WIRE ENCASED IN 1" DIAMETER RUBBER HOSE 8'-0" BVC TM' TREATED PINE STAKES DRIVEN TO REFUSAL INTO UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL MIN. 24" DEPTH. STAKE ABOVE FIRST BRANCHES OR AS NECESSARY FOR FIRM SUPPORT FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE 3" MULCH, KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK FORM SAUCER WITH 3" HIGH CONTINUOUS RIM REMOVE ALL WRAPPINGS FROM TOP Yz OF ROOTBALL SPECIFIED PLANTING MIX, WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE AIR POCKETS II -II=I I I Ila I 2X BALL DIA4 DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING NOT TO SCALE PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 4T 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122' 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 15 OF 16: DETAIL: TREE PLANTING PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWLA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC NOTES: • STAKE TREES AS SHOWN IN TREE PLANTING DETAILS AS APPLICABLE • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH THE FINISHED GRADE • SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING 6' PLANTING HOLE TO BE SHRUB ON SLOPE DIA OF NOT TO SCALE FORM SAUCER WITH 3" HIGH CONTINUOUS RIM, DOWNHILL SIDE ONLY 3" MULCH, KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE REMOVE ALL WRAPPINGS FROM TOP Y3 OF ROOTBALL AFTER PARTIAL BACKFILL SPECIFIED PLANTING MIX, WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE AIR POCKETS NOTE •MULCH COMPLETELY BETWEEN ALL PLANTS EXCEPT IN SEEDED AND MARSH AREAS. • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH THE FINISHED GRADE. 3" MULCH. KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK. FORM SAUCER WITH 3" CONTINUOUS RIM FINISH GRADE ir' tIPlIW wkw=wW EXISTING SUBGRADE PLANTING SOIL. WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE ALL AIR POCKETS. SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING. 4-2 X DIA OF ROOTBALL-4 PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWI LA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 16 OF 16: DETAIL: SHRUB PLANTING PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC ATTACHMENT 2 - JARPA Application r WASHINGTON STATE Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) Form1r2 US Army Corps of Engineers € Seattle District USE BLACK OR BLUE INK TO ENTER ANSWERS IN THE WHITE SPACES BELOW. Part 1—Project Identification AGENCY USE ONLY Date received: Agency reference #: Tax Parcel #(s): 1. Project Name (A name for your project that you create. Examples: Smith's Dock or Seabrook Lane Development) (help] Duwamish Gardens Habitat Project Part 2—Applicant The person and/or organization responsible for the project. [help] 2a. Name (Last, First, Middle) Larson, Ryan, David - City of Tukwila Public Works 2b. Organization (If applicable) City of Tukwila 2c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box) 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 2d. City, State, Zip Tukwila, WA, 98188 2e. Phone (1) 2f. Phone (2) 2g. Fax 2h. E-mail (206) 431-2456 ( 206) 571-1668 (206)431-3665 rlarson@ci.tukwila.wa.us Additional forms may be required for the following permits: • If your project may qualify for Department of the Army authorization through a Regional General Permit (RGP), contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for application information (206) 764-3495. • If your project might affect species listed under the Endangered Species Act, you will need to fill out a Specific Project Information Form (SPIF) or prepare a Biological Evaluation. Forms can be found at http://www. nws. usace. army. mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Reoulatory/PermitGu idebook/Enda ngered Species. aspx. • Not all cities and counties accept the JARPA for their local Shoreline permits. If you need a Shoreline permit, contact the appropriate city or county government to make sure they accept the JARPA. 2To access an online JARPA form with [help] screens, go to http://www.epermitting.wa.gov/site/alias resourcecenterfiarpa larva form/9984/jarpa form.aspx. For other help, contact the Govemor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at 1-800-917-0043 or helpna.ora.wa.gov. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 1 of 15 Part 3—Authorized Agent or Contact Person authorized to represent the applicant about the project. (Note: Authorized agent(s) must sign 11 b of this application.) [help] 3a. Name (Last, First, Middle) Jim Brennan 3b. Organization (If applicable) J.A. Brennan and Associates 3c. Mailing Address (Street or Po Box) 100 South King Street, Suite 200 3d. City, State, Zip Seattle, WA 3e. Phone (1) 3f. Phone (2) 3g. Fax 3h. E-mail (206) 583-0620 ( ) ( ) Jim@jabrennan.com Part 4—Property Owner(s) Contact information for people or organizations owning the property(ies) where the project will occur. Consider both upland and aquatic ownership because the upland owners may not own the adjacent aquatic land. [help] X Same as applicant. (Skip to Part 5.) ❑ Repair or maintenance activities on existing rights-of-way or easements. (Skip to Part 5.) ❑ There are multiple upland property owners. Complete the section below and fill out JARPA Attachment A for each additional property owner. ❑ Your project is on Department of Natural Resources (DNR) -managed aquatic lands. If you don't know, contact the DNR at (360) 902-1100 to determine aquatic land ownership. If yes, complete JARPA Attachment E to apply for the Aquatic Use Authorization. 4a. Name (Last, First, Middle) 4b. Organization (If applicable) 4c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box) 4d. City, State, Zip 4e. Phone (1) 4f. Phone (2) 4g. Fax 4h. E-mail ( ) ( ) ( ) JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 2 of 15 Part 5—Project Location(s) Identifying information about the property or properties where the project will occur. [help] ❑ There are multiple project locations (e.g. linear projects). Complete the section below and use JARPA Attachment B for each additional project location. 5a. Indicate the type of ownership of the property. (Check all that apply.) [help] o Private ❑ Federal X Publicly owned (state, county, city, special districts like schools, ports, etc.) ['Tribal KI Department of Natural Resources (DNR) — managed aquatic lands (Complete JARPA Attachment E) 5b. Street Address (Cannot be a PO Box. If there is no address, provide other location information in 5p.) [help] 11269 East Marginal Way S 5c. City, State, Zip (If the project is not in a city or town, provide the name of the nearest city or town.) [help] Tukwila, WA 98168 5d. County [helol King 5e. Provide the section, township, and range for the project location. [heipl 1/4 Section Section Township Range NW 10 23 04 5f. Provide the latitude and longitude of the project location. [help] • Example: 47.03922 N lat. / -122.89142 W long. (Use decimal degrees - NAD 83) 47.5012 N lat / -122.2958 W Long (NAD 83) 5g. List the tax parcel number(s) for the project location. [help] • The local county assessor's office can provide this information. 1023049071, 1023049060, 1023049055 (See Sheet 1 and 2 -Drawings Attachment 1) 5h. Contact information for all adjoining property owners. (If you need more space, use JARPA Attachment C.) [help] Name Mailing Address Tax Parcel # (if known) Department of Natural Resources Aquatic Resources Division Headquarters PO Box 47027 102304HYDR Olympia WA 98504-7027 Department of Natural Resources 791086 PRODUCT SALES & LEASING DIV PO BOX 47016 1023049083 OLYMPIA WA 98504 Amalfi Investments 1809 SEVENTH AV #1002 1023049059 SEATTLE WA 98101 JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 3 of 15 5i. List all wetlands on or adjacent to the project location. [helm None 5j. List all waterbodies (other than wetlands) on or adjacent to the project location. [help] Duwamish River (River Mile 6.75) 5k. Is any part of the project area within a 100 -year floodplain? [help] ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know 51. Briefly describe the vegetation and habitat conditions on the property. [hoot The river bank portion of the property consists of a steep bank with a slope greater than 1.5 foot horizontal to 1 foot vertical. The slope is covered by a dense thicket of Himalayan blackberries and several Targe nonnative trees. The upland portion of the site is vacant with gravel and tall grass. (Sheet 2 of 16 -Attachment 1) 5m. Describe how the property is currently used. [hem The property is vacant, fenced and has a small metal building on-site used for storing sandbags for the City of Tukwila. 5n. Describe how the adjacent properties are currently used. [help] The property to the north and west is used as a trucking distribution site. The property to the east is the East Marginal Way right-of-way, a city roadway, and the property to the south is the Duwamish River. 50. Describe the structures (above and below ground) on the property, including their purpose(s) and current condition. [helm There are abandoned homes and sheds that will be removed. Currently the primary building in use is a metal out building — used to store sand bags for the City of Tukwila 5p. Provide driving directions from the closest highway to the project location, and attach a map. [help] From 1-5 either north or south, exit at Boeing Access Road in south Seattle. Proceed west. At the first intersection west of the railroad tracks, turn left (south) onto East Marginal Way S. Proceed past S. 112th St. Turn in to the last driveway on the right (west) side of the street before the bridge over the Duwamish. Street address is 11269 East Marginal Way S. (See Sheet 1 of 16 — Attachment 1) JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 4 of 15 Part 6—Project Description 6a. Briefly summarize the overall project. You can provide more detail in 6b. [help] The project will create substitute shallow water fish habitat on a 2.16 acre site. The City of Tukwila will create estuarine off channel habitat, as well as riparian and upland terrestrial habitat. A park and pedestrian trail will be developed in the upland portion of the site, and a hand -carry boat launch will be developed along the edge of the restored off channel area. The project requires that approximately 26,256 cubic yards of upland material be excavated to create the off channel, which will be graded, and the soil will be amended and planted to create shallow water mudflat and high and low marsh habitat. The upland trail will include a few overlooks to view the river and restoration site. Interpretive information will be displayed throughout the park and along the trail. The restored off channel will create transition zones where migrating juvenile salmon can feed, take shelter, and osmoregulate as they transition from being freshwater fish to saltwater fish. Salmon recovery in the Green/Duwamish watershed depends on improving the quality and quantity of estuarine habitat in the Duwamish estuary. (See Sheets 3-9, Drawings Attachment 1) 6b. Describe the purpose of the project and why you want or need to perform it. [help] The purpose of this project is to create off channel shallow water habitat. The project is located in the high priority "transition zone" between fresh and salt water, which provides the appropriate range of salinities for juvenile Chinook and chum to transition to salt water. Off channel and shallow water habitats in this stretch of the Duwamish will provide opportunities for juvenile fish to move out of the main channel to habitats where they can feed and rear. Longer residence times in the estuary allow for larger, healthier smolts prior to ocean migration. The Duwamish river has lost 98% of the historic estuary and this and similar project are intended to replace a portion of this function. 6c. Indicate the project category. (Check all that apply) [help] ❑ Commercial ❑ Residential ❑ Institutional ❑ Transportation ❑ Recreational ❑ Maintenance X Environmental Enhancement 6d. Indicate the major elements of your project. (Check all that apply) [help] ❑ Aquaculture ❑ Bank Stabilization ❑ Boat House ❑ Boat Launch ❑ Boat Lift ❑ Bridge ❑ Bulkhead ❑ Buoy ❑ Channel Modification ❑ Culvert ❑ Dam / Weir ❑ Dike / Levee / Jetty ❑ Ditch ❑ Dock / Pier ❑ Dredging ❑ Fence ❑ Ferry Terminal ❑ Fishway ❑ Float ❑ Floating Home ❑ Geotechnical Survey ❑ Land Clearing ❑ Marina / Moorage ❑ Mining ❑ Outfall Structure ❑ Piling/Dolphin ❑ Raft ❑ Retaining Wall (upland) ❑ Road ❑ Scientific Measurement Device ❑ Stairs ❑ Stormwater facility ❑ Swimming Pool ❑ Utility Line X Other: Side Channel/Off Channel Habitat Restoration JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 5 of 15 6e. Describe how you plan to construct each project element checked in 6d. Include specific construction methods and equipment to be used. [help] • Identify where each element will occur in relation to the nearest waterbody. • Indicate which activities are within the 100 -year floodplain. Channel Modification The project will create substitute shallow water habitat by excavating approximately 26,265 cubic yards of material on City owned property adjacent to the Duwamish River. This will create an open water area outside of the main river channel. Excavation will be done using standard construction practices involving onsite excavation and disposal of waste materials in an approved off-site disposal area. Dredging The project will require that sediment and riverbank be removed from the river at the connection to the habitat site. This connection will be constructed after the site is fully excavated and will involve a silt curtain within the river. The temporary berm will be constructed by excavating from the site surface (generally, at elevations 20- 22 NAVD 88), down to elevation 12'. The temporary berm will remain in place to protect interior areas until the interior grading is complete. Temporary berm slopes will be constructed at a 2H:1V maximum angle. The interior will be dewatered of groundwater seepage and pumped into a temporary settling pond or barrel for treatment prior to discharge into the river. Lower —layer excavation will occur outside of the wet season. The temporary slope on the landward side of the temporary berm will be protected with plastic sheeting during any time that it is not being worked for more than one week. A silt curtain will be installed during the in -water work window prior to removing the temporary berm. Finish elevations of the final spit will be achieved and as much of the planting established as possible prior to breaching. The temporary berm will then be removed from the landward side and breaching will occur only during the in -water work window and during low tide. We anticipate that dewatering will occur only to excavate the lowest portions of the proposed embayment or side channel. This will be done in total isolation from the river prior to breaching the berm. Note that the berm is not so much constructed as it is a remnant of the existing bank, which will be left in place (though lower than the existing ground elevation) while the interior of the embayment is excavated. LWD Approximately 40 pieces of root wads and LWD and ranging from 15 to 30 feet in length will be installed at and below the new OHWM. Equipment to be used: Hydraulic track hoe(s) for excavation and placement of earth materials. Bulldozer(s) and/or front-end track loaders(s) to push material throughout the site and transfer earthen materials. Dumptruck(s), possibly 8 cubic yards, transporting excavated materials off-site and bringing imported earthen materials. Flatbed truck(s) to bring in imported materials such as plant materials. (See Sheets 5-9, Drawings Attachment 1) JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 6 of 15 6f. What are the anticipated start and end dates for project construction? (MonthNear) [help] • If the project will be constructed in phases or stages, use JARPA Attachment D to list the start and end dates of each phase or stage. Start date: April 2014 End date: December 2014 ❑ See JARPA Attachment D 6g. Fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc. [help] Design $250,000 Construction $2,500,000 Total $2,750,000 6h. Will any portion of the project receive federal funding? [help] • If yes, list each agency providing funds. ❑ Yes X No ❑ Don't know Part 7—Wetlands: Impacts and Mitigation ❑ Check here if there are wetlands or wetland buffers on or adjacent to the project area. (If there are none, skip to Part 8.) [help] 7a. Describe how the project has been designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to wetlands. [help] X Not applicable 7b. Will the project impact wetlands? [help] ❑ Yes X No ❑ Don't know 7c. Will the project impact wetland buffers? (help] ❑ Yes X No ❑ Don't know 7d. Has a wetland delineation report been prepared? Thelp] • If Yes, submit the report, including data sheets, with the JARPA package. ❑ Yes X No 7e. Have the wetlands been rated using the Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System? [help) • If Yes, submit the wetland rating forms and figures with the JARPA package. ❑ Yes 1 2 No ❑ Don't know 7f. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for any adverse impacts to wetlands? [help) • If Yes, submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 7g. • If No, or Not applicable, explain below why a mitigation plan should not be required. ❑ Yes ❑ No KI Not applicable JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 7 of 15 7g. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish, and describe how a watershed approach was used to design the plan. [help] The design is mitigation with a construction approach to minimize impacts with in -water work limited until the final phase of the project. The purpose of this project is to recreate a more natural river environment by widening the channel, reducing bank slopes, and planting native vegetation. No further mitigation should be required. (See Sheets 4 and 8, Drawings Attachment 1) 7h. Use the table below to list the type and rating of each wetland impacted, the extent and duration of the impact, and the type and amount of mitigation proposed. Or if you are submitting a mitigation plan with a similar table, you can state (below) where we can find this information in the plan. [helpl Activity (fill, drain, excavate, flood, etc.) Wetland Name' Wetland type and rating category2 Impact area (sq. ft. or Acres) Duration of impact3 Proposed mitigation type4 Wetland mitigation area (sq. ft. or acres) N/A 1 If no official name for the wetland exists, create a unique name (such as "Wetland 1"). The name should be consistent with other project documents, such as a wetland delineation report. 2 Ecology wetland category based on current Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System. Provide the wetland rating forms with the JARPA package. 3lndicate the days, months or years the wetland will be measurably impacted by the activity. Enter "permanent" if applicable. `Creation (C), Re-establishment/Rehabilitation (R), Enhancement (E), Preservation (P), Mitigation Bank/In-lieu fee (B) Page number(s) for similar information in the mitigation plan, if available: 7i. For all filling activities identified in 7h, describe the source and nature of the fill material, the amount in cubic yards that will be used, and how and where it will be placed into the wetland. [help] N/A 7j. For all excavating activities identified in 7h, describe the excavation method, type and amount of material in cubic yards you will remove, and where the material will be disposed. [help] N/A Part 8—Waterbodies (other than wetlands): Impacts and Mitigation In Part 8, "waterbodies" refers to non -wetland waterbodies. (See Part 7 for information related to wetlands.) [help] X Check here if there are waterbodies on or adjacent to the project area. (If there are none, skip to Part 9.) 8a. Describe how the project is designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to the aquatic environment. [help] ❑ Not applicable This project will have direct impacts to the Duwamish River. The project will excavate a section of shoreline to create off channel habitat. It is anticipated that construction will be sequenced to complete as much excavation of the off channel area as feasible prior to connecting it to the main river channel. During this final excavation phase, silt curtains will be used within the river and work within the water will be limited to low tides to reduce sediment transport downstream. The construction plan proposes to create a temporary berm structure at a 2:1 maximum slope, from unexcavated bank, which would be left in place until off channel restoration is complete. The majority of the proposed habitat excavation (up to 22 feet deep) will be contained within the interior of the berm. Construction and excavation to occur on the mouth of the channel (and outside the berm structure) will be isolated to periods of low water conditions, and will not be submerged dredging with in -water disposal. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 8 of 15 The berm interior will be dewatered of groundwater seepage and pumped into a temporary settling pond or barrel for treatment prior to discharge into the river. The temporary slope on the landward side of the temporary berm will be protected with plastic sheeting during any time that it is not being worked for more than one week. A silt curtain will be installed during the in -water work window prior to removing the temporary berm. Removal of the temporary berm will occur only during the in -water work window and during low tide. (See Sheets 3-14, Drawings Attachment 1) 8b. Will your project impact a waterbody or the area around a waterbody? [help] X Yes ❑ No 8c. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for the project's adverse impacts to non -wetland waterbodies? [help] • If Yes, submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 8d. • If No, or Not applicable, explain below why a mitigation plan should not be required. X Yes ❑ No ❑ Not applicable The design is mitigation with a construction approach to minimize impacts with in -water work limited until the final phase of the project. The purpose of this project is to recreate a more natural river environment by widening the channel, reducing bank slopes, and planting native vegetation. No further mitigation should be required. 8d. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish. Describe how a watershed approach was used to design the plan. • If you already completed 7g you do not need to restate your answer here. (help] This project is the result of recommendation in the WRIA 9 Salmon Recovery Plan dated August 2005. 8e. Summarize impact(s) to each waterbody in the table below. [help] Activity (clear, dredge, fill, pile drive, etc.) Waterbody name' Impact Iocation2 Duration of impact3 Amount of material (cubic yards) to be placed in or removed from waterbody Area (sq. ft. or linear ft.) of waterbody directly affected Limited Dredging Duwamish In the water body/Below OHWM Estimated 20 Days Removal of 388 cubic yards of sediments 460 LF (+/-) Duwamish Shoreline Fill Duwamish In the water body/Below the OHWM. Estimated 20 Days Placement of 143 cubic yards of gravel and cobble to accommodate boat ramp. 460 LF (+/-) Duwamish Shoreline 'If no official name for the waterbody exists, create a unique name (such as "Stream 1") The name should be consistent with other documents provided. 2Indicate whether the impact will occur in or adjacent to the waterbody. If adjacent, provide the distance between the impact and the waterbody and indicate whether the impact will occur within the 100 -year flood plain. 3 Indicate the days, months or years the waterbody will be measurably impacted by the work. Enter "permanent" if applicable. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 9 of 15 8f. For all activities identified in 8e, describe the source and nature of the fill material, amount (in cubic yards) you will use, and how and where it will be placed into the waterbody. [help] Placement of 143 cubic yards of approved gravel and cobble to accommodate boat ramp below OHWM. (See Sheet 4, 8, 13 — Drawings Attachment 1) 8g. For all excavating or dredging activities identified in 8e, describe the method for excavating or dredging, type and amount of material you will remove, and where the material will be disposed. [helot Removal of 388 cubic yards of sediments below the OHWM and placing 143 cubic yards of gravel and cobble in the form of a boat launch ramp (see Attachment 1, sheet 15). A temporary berm will be created to prevent movement of water from the river to the upland construction. A silt fence and current will be deployed to reduce turbidity. At the conclusion of the channel construction and associated marsh and vegetative plantings as well as placement and anchoring of LWD and root wads, the berm will be taken down and the new channel allowed to flush with water from the Duwamish. This activity will be done during the in -water work window. (See Sheet 4, 8, 13 — Drawings Attachment 1) Part 9—Additional Information Any additional information you can provide helps the reviewer(s) understand your project. Complete as much of this section as you can. It is ok if you cannot answer a question. 9a. If you have already worked with any government agencies on this project, list them below. [help] Agency Name Contact Name Phone Most Recent Date of Contact US Army Corp — Seattle Lori Lull (206) 766-6438 June 11, 2013 Green/Duwamish — WRIA 9 Elissa Ostergaard (206) 296-1909 June 11, 2013 DNR — Aquatics Land Manager Duwamish River Cindy Rathbone (360) 791-4755 May 29, 2013 9b. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies identified in Part 7 or Part 8 of this JARPA on the Washington Department of Ecology's 303(d) List? Fhelpl • If Yes, list the parameter(s) below. • If you don't know, use Washington Department of Ecology's Water Quality Assessment tools at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/. X Yes ❑ No Yes, Duwamish River 9c. What U.S. Geological Survey Hydrological Unit Code • Go to http://cfpub.epa.cov/surf/locate/index.cfm to help identify (HUC) is the project in? [help] the HUC. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 10 of 15 USGS Cataloging Unit: 17110013 9d. What Water Resource Inventory Area Number (WRIA #) is the project in? [helpl • Go to http://www.ecy.wa.gov/services/qis/maps/wria/wria.htm to find the WRIA #. WRIA 9 9e. Will the in -water construction work comply with the State of Washington water quality standards for turbidity? [helpl • Go to http://www.ecy.wa.qov/programs/wq/swos/criteria.html for the standards. X Yes ❑ No ❑ Not applicable 9f. If the project is within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act, what is the local shoreline environment designation? [help] • If you don't know, contact the local planning department. • For more information, go to: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sma/laws rules/173-26/211 desionations.html. ❑ Rural X Urban ❑ Natural ❑ Aquatic ❑ Conservancy ❑ Other 9g. What is the Washington Department of Natural Resources Water Type? [helot • Go to http://www.dnr.wa.qov/BusinessPermits/Topics/ForestPracticesApplications/Pages/fp watertypinq.aspx for the Forest Practices Water Typing System. ]Shoreline ❑ Fish ❑ Non -Fish Perennial ❑ Non -Fish Seasonal 9h. Will this project be designed to meet the Washington Department of Ecology's most current stormwater manual? [help • If No, provide the name of the manual your project is designed to meet. X Yes ❑ No A rain garden with suitable soils for treatment, has been designed into the project for water runoff from the proposed parking area. The City's project will provide additional benefit by collecting and treating some water from East Marginal Way South that is currently untreated. An overflow surface channel, pipe and rock -lined outlet will be installed to carry overflow water in the restored off -channel inlet. Name of manual: 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual 9i. Does the project site have known contaminated sediment? [helps • If Yes, please describe below. X Yes ❑ No The top 2 feet of soil across the site was generally found to contain detectable levels of Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), with some exceptions. Although the detected concentrations were often lower than established regulatory cleanup criteria, some soil samples contained contamination in excess of MTCA Method A cleanup criteria. Soil in the top 2 to 4 feet to be excavated during construction will fall into three waste categories: Clean, Class II Waste, and Problem Waste. Groundwater at the western end of the site was not found to be contaminated with HVOCs as detected during a previous investigation. Water removed during excavation dewatering in this area will likely not require treatment to remove contaminants prior to discharge. However, treatment for conventional water quality parameters (i.e., pH, turbidity, etc.) will likely be JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 11 of 15 required depending on the discharge point and applicable permit. 9j. If you know what the property was used for in the past, describe below. [help) Past uses of the property included agriculture, residential, and commercial activities. The site is known as Duwamish Gardens and has been owned by the City of Tukwila since 2008 for the purposes of converting the property to salmon recovery, conservation and outdoor recreation. This is explicit in a 2008 agreement, "Deed of Right to Use Land for Public Aquatic Lands Access and Salmon Recovery" between the City and the State of Washington. For many years prior to this purchase, the property was known as the Carosino property and was used by the Carosino family as a farm. In 2005, the Central Puget Sound Transit Authority (aka Sound Transit) gained an easement along a portion of the eastern portion of the site to construct and elevated guideway and associated utilities, namely power lines and vaults. An elevated section of Sound Transit's Central Link light rail, which currently connects downtown Seattle with Sea-Tac airport, runs through the Duwamish Gardens site, and was completed in 2009. 9k. Has a cultural resource (archaeological) survey been performed on the project area? (help) • If Yes, attach it to your JARPA package. X Yes ❑ No Summary — Detailed provided in Attached Report " Duwamish Gardens Project, City of Tukwila, King County, Washington, Archaeological Site Delineation at 45- KI-703", April 2013: ESA Paragon monitored geotechnical geoprobing, and conducted site delineation trenching and test excavations to delineate and characterize previously unrecorded portions of a cultural site (45-KI-703) identified during the Sound Transit elevated guideway and utility construction project. ESA Paragon monitored a total of 20 two-inch geoprobes, and excavated 17 delineation trenches and seven test excavation units within the Permit Area. ESA Paragon encountered definitive precontact artifacts — five pieces of Iithic debitage — only within a single trench nearest to the previously recorded portion of 45-KI-703. ESA Paragon also recorded four concentrations of charcoal, oxidized soil, and ash (with or without fire modified rock and/or sparse shell/bone), interpreted as anthropogenic fire features; all were in relative proximity to the previously recorded portion of 45- KI-703. Ephemeral pockets of highly crushed shell or bone (indeterminate) were neither identifiable to taxon, nor definitive human origin. ESA Paragon also noted the widespread presence of at least two buried palesols with associated diffuse charcoal, but devoid of precontact artifacts or features. ESA Paragon interprets the results of current investigations to indicate that precontact human occupation and land use was substantially Tess frequent and intensive in the delineation area, compared with previously recorded portions of 45-KI-703. ESA Paragon recommends revising 45-KI-703 boundaries to extend an additional 150 feet (45 meters) west of their current mapped location. However, ESA Paragon recommends that the Duwamish Gardens project will result in No Adverse Effect on 45-KI-703, because further archaeological work is unlikely to result in new information that qualitatively differs from, or quantitatively exceeds, information collected previously during data recovery mitigation. Artifacts and ecological samples collected as part of the delineation are being curated at the Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, in Seattle, Washington. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 12 of 15 91. Name each species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act that occurs in the vicinity of the project area or might be affected by the proposed work. [help] Puget Sound Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Coastal/Puget Sound Steelhead Trout (0. mykiss) Coastal/Puget Sound Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) 9m. Name each species or habitat on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Priority Habitats and Species List that might be affected by the proposed work. IFhelpl Chinook Salmon Bull trout Chum Salmon (0. keta) Coho salmon (0. kisutch) Pink (0. gorbuscha) Steelhead Part 10—SEPA Compliance and Permits Use the resources and checklist below to identify the permits you are applying for. • Online Project Questionnaire at http://apps.ecv.wa.gov/opas/. • Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at (800) 917-0043 or help@ora.wa.gov. • For a list of addresses to send your JARPA to, click on aoencv addresses for completed JARPA. 10a. Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). (Check all that apply.) [help] • For more information about SEPA, go to www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sepa/e-review.html. LOCAL GOVERNMENT DA copy of the SEPA determination or letter of exemption is included with this application. 0 ASEPA determination is pending with (lead agency). The expected decision date is E J ❑ 1 am applying for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption. (Check the box below in 10b.) [help] ❑ This project is exempt (choose type of exemption below). ❑ Categorical Exemption. Under what section of the SEPA administrative code (WAC) is it exempt? ❑ Other: ❑ SEPA is pre-empted by federal law. 10b. Indicate the permits you are applying for. (Check all that apply.) [help] LOCAL GOVERNMENT Local Government Shoreline permits: X Substantial Development ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Variance ❑ Shoreline Exemption Type (explain): Other city/county permits: ❑ Floodplain Development Permit ❑ Critical Areas Ordinance STATE GOVERNMENT JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 13 of 15 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: X Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) ❑ Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption — Attach Exemption Form Effective July 10, 2012, you must submit a check for $150 to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, unless your project qualifies for an exemption or alternative payment method below. Do not send cash. Check the appropriate boxes: ❑ $150 check enclosed. (Check # ) Attach check made payable to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. ❑ Charge to billing account under agreement with WDFW. (Agreement # ) ❑ My project is exempt from the application fee. (Check appropriate exemption) ❑ HPA processing is conducted by applicant -funded WDFW staff. (Agreement # ) ❑ Mineral prospecting and mining. ❑ Project occurs on farm and agricultural land. (Attach a copy of current land use classification recorded with the county auditor, or other proof of current land use.) ❑ Project is a modification of an existing HPA originally applied for, prior to July 10, 2012. (HPA # ) Washington Department of Natural Resources: X Aquatic Use Authorization Complete JARPA Attachment E and submit a check for $25 payable to the Washington Department of Natural Resources. Do not send cash. Washington Department of Ecology: X Section 401 Water Quality Certification FEDERAL GOVERNMENT United States Department of the Army permits (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers): ❑ Section 404 (discharges into waters of the U.S.) X]Section 10 (work in navigable waters) United States Coast Guard permits: ❑ General Bridge Act Permit ❑ Private Aids to Navigation (for non -bridge projects) JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 14 of 15 Part 11—Authorizing Signatures Signatures are required before submitting the JARPA package. The JARPA package includes the JARPA form, project plans, photos, etc. [help] 11a. Applicant Signature (required) [help] I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information provided in this application is true, complete, and accurate. I also certify that I have the authority to carry out the proposed activities, and I agree to start work only after I have received all necessary permits. I hereby authorize the agent named in Part 3 of this application to act on my behalf in matters related to this application. (initial) By initialing here, I state that I have the authority to grant access to the property. I also give my consent to the permitting agencies entering the property where the project is located to inspect the project site or any work related to the project. (initial) Applicant Printed Name 11 b. Authorized Agent Signature [help] Applicant Signature Date I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information provided in this application is true, complete, and accurate. I also certify that I have the authority to carry out the proposed activities and I agree to start work only after all necessary permits have been issued. Authorized Agent Printed Name Authorized Agent Signature Date 11c. Property Owner Signature (if not applicant). [help] Not required if project is on existing rights-of-way or easements. I consent to the permitting agencies entering the property where the project is located to inspect the project site or any work. These inspections shall occur at reasonable times and, if practical, with prior notice to the landowner. Property Owner Printed Name Property Owner Signature Date 18 U.S.0 §1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly falsifies, conceals, or covers 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 $10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both. If you require this document in another format, contact the Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance (ORA) at (800) 917-0043. People with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. People with a speech disability can call (877) 833-6341. ORA publication number: ENV -019-09 rev. 06-12 JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 15 of 15 ATTACHMENT 2 - Streamline Process for Fish Habitat Enhancement Projects Application for Streamlined Processing of FISH HABITAT ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS Addition to the Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) Under RCW 77.55.181 you may qualify for a streamlined permit process with no local government fees if your project is designed to enhance fish habitat. If your project meets the requirements below, you are entitled to the streamlined Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) process, exemption from the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and exemption from all local government permits and fees. To apply for the exemption process, you must provide, on the same day, a complete application package to: the Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and all applicable local government planning and permitting departments. Local governments have 15 days to provide comments to WDFW to aid it in deciding whether your project qualifies (see below for details). To QUALIFY for the fish habitat enhancement exemption you must check at least one each from A and B and provide a letter of approval from one of the agencies listed in B. It is highly recommended you discuss your proposal with the local Area Habitat Biologist (AHB) prior to submitting your application. A) My project (check all that apply): ▪ Removes a human -made fish passage barrier. ❑Restores an eroded or unstable stream bank using bioengineering techniques. X Places woody debris or other in -stream structures that benefit naturally reproducing fish stocks. B) My project is approved by (check all that apply): f WDFW's Salmon Enhancement, or Volunteer Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Enhancement Programs. The sponsor of a watershed restoration plan as provided in chapter 89.08RCW. ❑WDFW, as a department -sponsored fish enhancement or restoration project. ❑Conservation District, where the project complies with design standards established by the Conservation Commission through interagency agreement with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the Natural Resource Conservation Service. ❑A formal grant program established by the legislature or the Department of Fish and Wildlife for fish habitat enhancement or restoration. To APPLY for the Exemption, submit a complete application package consisting of the following documents to the local government planning department and WDFW. Indicate below which local government agency you are sending your application to and when you are sending it. Required application materials: • This addition to the JARPA. • A completed JARPA (use the most recent version of JARPA). • Payment of HPA application fee of $150 (submit ONLY to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). • Plan drawings (no larger than 11 x 17 format). • Letter of approval of your specific project from one of the agencies listed in B, above. I am sending my application to the following local government planning department: xx/xx/20xx City of Tukwila - Planning Department 06/ /2013 on: (Date) PLEASE NOTE: • In addition to applying for this streamlined processing, you need to apply for all other applicable Federal and State permits identified in the JARPA. • If WDFW determines that your project meets the fish habitat enhancement exemption criteria, SEPA and all local government permits and fees are waived. WDFW will process your HPA within 45 days of receiving your complete application. • If significant concerns are raised during the 15 -day comment period regarding adverse impacts from your project that cannot be addressed through HPA conditions, WDFW may determine that the project does not qualify for the exemption process. If WDFW makes that decision, you may re -apply to WDFW, the applicable local government, and any other applicable permitting agency for approval under the full permitting process. If WDFW determines that your project does NOT qualify for the exemption, or if your application is incomplete, you and the local government planning department will be notified. Applicant Name: JARPA Fish Habitat Revision 2012.1 TO ELLIOTT BAY, SEATTLE Scale: N.T.S. PROJECT BOUNDARY Duwamish Gardens Habitat Project List of Sheets: 1 Vicinity Map 2 Existing Conditions 3 Demolition, Clearing and Grubbing Plan 4 Site Plan 5 Grading and Drainage Plan 6 Erosion and Water Control Plan 7 Erosion and Water Control Details 8 Planting Plan 9 Plant List 10 Cross Sections 11 Detail: Root Wad and Woody Debris 12 Detail: Tidal Stream and Snag 13 Detail: Cobble River Access Trail 14 Detail: Emergent Planting with Goose Excluder 15 Detail: Tree Planting 16 Detail: Shrub Planting I PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) ATITUDE: 47" 30' 04.65" N 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 1 OF 16: COVER SHEET PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC VERTICAL DATUM CONVERSIONS (PER CITY OF SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES) DATUM ELEVATION NAVD88 0.00 MEAN LOW WATER +0.49 MEAN LOWER LOW WATER (83-01 EPOCH) -2.35 NGVD 29, KING COUNTY, METRO +3.58 NOTE: FROM A DATUM TO NAVD 88 ADD THE VALUE SHOWN FROM NAVD88 TO A DATUM SUBTRACT THE VALUE SHOWN EXAMPLE: NAVD88 ELEV. 20.00 = (20.00 -(-2.35)) = MLLW ELEV. 22.35 NGVD29 ELEV. 10.00 = (10.00 + 3.58) = NAVD88 ELEV. 13.58 PROPERTY BOUNDARY NAVD 88 CONTAMINATED SOIL, TYP. 200' SHORENAE,S SOUND TRANSIT. GUIDEWAY ABOVE GROUND' ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE 45 -KI -703 ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE (10.1) (PROPERTY LINE) DUWAMISH RIVER 0' 30' 60' PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) ATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N 122°17'19.69"W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA98168 SHEET 2 OF 16: EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC �EF DATUM CONVERSIONS (PER CITY OF SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES) DATUM ELEVATION NAVD88 0.00 MEAN LOW WATER +0.49 MEAN LOWER LOW WATER (83-01 EPOCH) -2.35 NGVD 29, KING COUNIY,ME IRO +3.58 NOTE: FROM A DATUM TO NAVD 88. ADD THE VALUE SHOWN FROM NAVD88 TO A DATUM SUBTRACT THE VALUE SHOWN EXAMPLE: NAVD88 ELEV. 20.00 = (20.00 -(-2.35)) = MLLW ELEV. 22.35 NGVD29 ELEV. 10.00 = (10.00 + 3.58) = NAVD88 ELEV. 13.58 ✓, TEMOLISH BUILDING • -:22:=1"-,FO. ,JNDATIONS AND SLABS, 1 P. (BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED BY OWNER) NAVD 88 PRESERVE ROW OF JUNIPERS DEMOLISH BUILDING SLA TYP. J0- (BUILDING BE DEMOLISH OWNER) DE OLISH:`;: .AS HALT DRI EWAY �D jIOLISH \': CONCRETE'''` WA1 WAY `;'' ',MAINTAIN CITY -AWNED FENCING THRNGH DURATION OF CCVNTRACT = �7 DEMOLISH STAIR COORDINATE WIT 1 OWNER • - REMOVE 15" MULTI -STEMMED HICKORY DEMOLISH STAIRS, COORDINATE WITH ; OWNER, DEMOLISH BUILDING FOUNDATIONS AND SLABS, TYP. (BUILDINGSTO BE DEMOLISHED BY OWNER) REMOVE 30" HICKORY REMOVE 4" MULTI - STEMMED BLACK _..,_ .,.. LOCUST` EMOLIR • (4"MOVE.2. tl'1' 111 CCRETE M LTI STEM PATIO CW RRIES' { • NREM_ VE 14;1 CED IS DEdOORA AE�?IOLISH 1 ASPHALT i� 1 \ 1 � D.RI\/EWAY -SAVE`AND PROTECT ALL 1 UTILITY VAULTS.111 7(,j; ;1 Gl T 77 (P N CLEAR AND GRUB ALL REMOVE 5 BLACK LOCUST BLACKBERRIES TREES: 18-20" MULTI -STEMMED, 30", 24", 16", 18" MULTISTEMMED; CUT TO GROUND LEVEL, SAVE ROOT SYSTEM DUWAMISH RIVER 0' 30' 60' PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 3 OF 16: DEMOLITION, CLEARING AND GRUBBING PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC 200' SHO TRUCK DRIVEWAY (SIZE AND CONFIGURATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE, IN NEGOTIATION WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER) \ 5 PARKING STALLS (LOCATION AND \ CONFIGURATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE) i , HABITAT PROTECTION • FENCING ..._..... "" , VIEWPOINT, TYP,,-- CRUSHED ROCK ';.:... PEDESTRIAN TRAIL, TYP. m 0 r 1.".::_ :60':: 0' 30' 60' RIVER -ACCESS TRAIL _......_.......:.:.. COBBLE RIVER ACCESS TRAIL DUWAMISH RIVER PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) TITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N -•E: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 4 OF 16: SITE PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC rI. DATUM CONVERSIONS (PER CITY OF SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES) DATUM ELEVATION NAVD88 0.00 MEAN LOW WATER +0.49 MEAN LOWER LOW WATER (83-01 EPOCH) NCVD 29, KING COON fY, MEIPS -2.35 +3.58 NOTE: FROM A DATUM TO NAVD 88 ADD THE VALUE SHOWN FROM NAVD88 TO A DATUM SUBTRACT THE VALUE SHOWN NAVD 88 EXAMPLE: NAVD88 ELEV. 20,00 = (20.00 -(-2.35)) = MLLW ELEV. 22.35 NGVD29 ELEV. 10.00 = (10.00 + 3.58) = NAVD88 ELEV. 13.58 2 ' 200' SHOR NEW TYP1-CB BIORETENTIe _sERFLOW W 60 SF BIORETENTIOI tyyELL \ 1 1 1 2,1 ID 2, .........H .per. ... _ '....................-�LLW .23 0' 30' 60' EXISTING ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE DUWAMISH RIVER • PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE* ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 5 OF 16: GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC MAX. SLOPE ELEVATION RANGE MUDFLAT 10H:1V 0-5 HIGH AND 5H:1V 5-10 LOW MARSH MOIST RIPARIAN 3H:1V 1n-13 UPLAND 3H:1V 13+ RIPARIAN 2 ' 200' SHOR NEW TYP1-CB BIORETENTIe _sERFLOW W 60 SF BIORETENTIOI tyyELL \ 1 1 1 2,1 ID 2, .........H .per. ... _ '....................-�LLW .23 0' 30' 60' EXISTING ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE DUWAMISH RIVER • PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE* ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 5 OF 16: GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC PRL4-0SED PAIN A r ARPRUliW6F 1OCADCO 10 SAT 1ENCE ME NOR 1) NOTES: 1. 003144 541 FENCE AT ELEVADO1 11' PRIOR TO EAR1F00R1 AEONO 0101 8ANN CRAM; AREAS. 1. RENUVE CONIAMINAILD 10'SCRL PER SPE010060 00. 3 RF1'0001 UPPER 501. 14110 (011) 10 ELE0AOc1 12'. UPPER LAR: KNOVA: A1IOXED 18000 10 144-6A0R 1TII124 *1100.. 4. 1ENHORARY 610111 (03) 10 REMAIN IN PLACE. AND PROTECT IN1'ER104 AEE'AS UNTIL 801ERI04 E?.A1600 Cr LOWER 126160 (Y7) 204801EIE. 0ELP02AP.Y BERM SIDE SLOPES 10 BE CON IRM?0. 6 ;IAN, 5 002400TE AND DE0AIER INTERIOR GRADING LONER LAYER Si (17). T0LER LAYER REMOVAL ALLOWED W0 10 24 -NATER 413010 804000 0131 10US1 BE CONDUCTED CLIME c 11E YET SEASON. PROPU0TD 901 CUR1AN (140343011 DOE 10 C WERONG CURRENT) 18.1 CURTAIN ANOTON 01i0 BUOY (110) 30 20 10 0 NOP —10 (1814.)-------- aft 1011,416:1201 TOE 11 10.25' -, 000NARY 6031 144E El. 10.1' - BUOY S.R.T OK.+TAL1ANCHOR -\ A "L PLAN WALE: 1'=30' rc IS' 1EMPORA11" BERM (03) 3 6O r EXISTING GROUND SFFA0 L E7.4.611011 GROUND 5424141S EziRAP1AA1E0 -1 LPPER LAYQI (0) 1EMP SLOPE 26:14 LONER LAYER (02) Cf 01031 I2 (.7ONJ 91131ACC EXTRAPOLATED 1IN:SNFL GRATE SECTION A 6. 1E0PORARY SUFE 011 LANDWARD SLE Cr V3 MUST 81 PROTECT) WIN PLASM SHEE1ING DURING ANY WE THAT IT I0 NOT BEND 6012417 YAIR6E2 11340 WORE 11W+ I AUK. 7. 24STALL SAT 0301X01 DURING 11 -WATER NORA 414206 AND PRO? TO REM01110 1E14PORASY DERN. E. ROAM 1012ORARY BERM (63) 0(EL LANDWARD SLE. REACHING X.100101 coot 00021C N -PATER 0003: 01NDOW AND OLARNC .00 11X. rE510/61410 GRc61UwAIER .L 5.-6' 0 33 20 10 —10 PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) ATS ITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N r.T JDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 6 OF 16: EROSION AND WATER CONTROL PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: SHANNON AND WILSON, INC. EXTRA FLOTATION TO COMPENSATE FOR WEIGHT OF END CONNECTOR TENSION CABLE �\ T I L END CONNECTOR A ROTATION SEGMENT --� WATERLU4E 0 0 o SKIRT A-• BALLAST CHAIN SILT CURTAIN DETAIL GROMMET NTS PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W EC2 BUOYANCY FLOAT NOTE: ANCHOR CHAIN EVERY IGD FEET. ALLOW APPROX. 1 FOOT CLEARANCE BETWEEN LOWER EDGE OF SKIRT AND MUD LAYER. SKIRT — BALLAST CHAIN MUDLINE VIEW A -A JOINTS IN FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE SPLICED AT POSTS USE STAPLES, WIRE RINGS, OR EQUIVALENT TO ATTACH FABRIC TO POSTS. •rrC31II�6SECunisII �SaaaSa0Qi�0aa06S�•S MITeI IPyISaPH a9�a6S9i um u FEE MITI saasBIU SIza:sasa sze zaaasuee .,:-. EISH ERM 6' MAX POST SPACING MAY BE INCREASED7 TO B' IF. WIRE BACKING IS USED NOTE: FILTER FABRIC FENCES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG CONTOUR WHENEVER POSSIBLE CITY OF TUKWILA 2x2' BY 14 GA. WIRE OR -• - EDUIVALENT, IF STANDARD STRENGTH FABRIC USED FILTER FABRIC MINIMUM 4'164" TRENCH —" BACKFILL TRENCH WON NATIVE SOIL OR 3/4"-1.5'WASHED GRAVEL 2"44' WOOD POSTS, STEEL FENCE POSTS, REBAR, OR EQUIVALENT SILT FENCE DETAIL DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 7 OF 16: EROSION AND WATER CONTROL DETAILS NTS PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: SHANNON AND WILSON, INC. Istal VIiuI. LLLLLLLLL LLL, SEEDING/PLANTING AREA BENEATH GUIDEWAY STREETSCAPE PLANTING- TREES AND LOW -GROWING P RAIN GARDEN- MOSTLY LOW -GROWING PLANTS LAWN UPLAND RIPARIAN PLANTING (EL. 13+) MOIST RIPARIAN PLANTING (EL. 10-13) HIGH MARSH PLANTING (EL. 7.5-10) LOW MARSH PLANTING (EL. 5-7.5) RIPARIAN AND UPLAND RESTORATION OF RIVER BANK LANTS NOTES: • AMEND ALL MUDFLAT, MARSH, RIPARIAN AND UPLAND AREAS WITH COMPOST MIXED WITH NATIVE SOIL • RAKE OUT DEBRIS • PLACE BIODEGRADABLE EROSION CONTROL FABRIC ON ALL GRADED SLOPES BETWEEN ELEVATION 5 AND 13 200' SHO ' PARKING AREA PLANTING AND BIORETENTION C LL CONFIGURATIONS SUBJECT TO CHANGE f ri rr r� rrri rrr rri fi , y r � li fi, �II�// //////1/17," ,r rr rr r .dLl:/�/ .lilillllLi®11®®!� r ri ri 4 r �All>�j gyr Aar Mr ILLI 111 Ns •^LLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL.LLL■ !, LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL` Y LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLtiLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL'L LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL„LLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLL-LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LL LLI LI I I I LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL .. L-LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL "LLLLLLLLL'LL' LLLLL ” = 60' 0' 30' 60' 1AN RESTORATI.ON..ON EXJ$TING SLOPE BANK UPLAND/ RIPARIAN RESTORATION ON EXISTING SLOPE BANK;' PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA i (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) ATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N lNIr"TUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 8 OF 16: PLANTING PLAN PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC S PLANTING ZONES SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING UR MR HM LM RG SS AG ARIES GRANDIS GRAND FIR 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X X AC ACER CIRCINATUM VINE MAPLE 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X X AM ACER MACROPHYLLUM BIG LEAF MAPLE 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X X FL FRAXINUS LATIFOLIA OREGON ASH 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X LT LIRIODENORON TULIPEFERA FASTIGIATA' TULIP TREE 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X X PS PICEA SITCHENSIS SITAR SPRUCE 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X PB POPULUS BALSAMIFERA BLACK COTTONWOOD 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X PM PSEUDOTSUGA MENZESII DOUGLAS FIR 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X SL SALIX LUCIDA PACIFIC WILLOW 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X TP THUJA PLICATA WESTERN RED CEDAR 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X X TH TSUGA HETEROPHYLLA WESTERN HEMLOCK 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X SHRUBS SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING U R HM LM RG S5 AA AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER B'O.C. X X X CS CORNUS STOLONIFERA REDOSIER DOGWOOD 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'O.C. X X X GS GAULTHERIA SHALLON SALAL 1 GAL CONTAINER 3' O.C. X X X HD HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR OCEANSPRAY 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X LI LONICERA INVOLUCRATA TWINBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER B. 0.C. X X MA MAHONIAAOUIFOLIUM TALL OREGON -GRAPE 1 GAL CONTAINER B'O.G. X X PC PHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUS PACIFIC NINEBARK 1 GAL CONTAINER 6' O.C. X X RS RIBES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANT 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'O.C. X X RN ROSA NUTKANA NOOTKA ROSE 1 GAL CONTAINER 6'OC. X X RG ROSA RUGOSA 'SNOW PAVEMENT' SNOW PAVEMENT ROSE 1 GAL CONTAINER 6"O.C. X SS SALIX SCOULERIANA SCOULER'S WILLOW 1 GAL CONTAINER B' O.C. X SSi SALIX SITCHENSIS SITKA WILLOW 1 GAL CONTAINER B' O.C. X SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNOWBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 3'O.C. X GROUNDCOVERS SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING U R HM LM RG SS AF ARCTOSTAPHYLOS ULVA-URSI KINNIO(INNICK 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X FC FRAGARIA CHILOENSIS COASTAL STRAWBERRY .11 POT CONTAINER 1B" OC. X EMERGENT MIX A SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING U R HM LM RG 5S AR ARGENTINA EGEDII PACIFIC SILVERWEED 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X AE AGROSTIS EXERATA SPIKE BENTGRASS 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X AS AGROSTIS STOLINIFERA CREEPING BUNTGRASS 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X CO CAREX OBNUPTA SLOUGH SEDGE 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X DC DESCHAMPSIA CAESITOSA TUFTED HAIRGRASS 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X JA JUNCUS ARTICULATUS JOINTED RUSH 1 GAL CONTAINER 26" O.C. X SM SCIRPUS MICROCARPUS SMALL FRUITED BULLRUSH 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X SV SCIRPUS VALIDUS SOFTSTEM BULLRUSH 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 9 OF 16: PLANT LIST PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: ,o 40 ��/402��q� <c sT FOy •z?0•7)4-�'0/G, 1" —6041:esO6)4,O�� 0' 30' 60' 4iy5' �q A9T,S, GO<9� A9,p A9TS (0%"ZP 4, Thio �q),, O,� sOq qT l0� qQ�� coQ-10 gq�gti �'� FOS. )• O SSS, q/ - B 1" = 40' o N 0' 20' 40' tip'G�� LiGO�l o• sT• ��q,ti�OgTy BG���P A�°,e/o`qQ�G�`Op/�''AZ* qj io(S0� 4)/ -94)/ • 7 q4, B` PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) J\ TITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N ON(.ITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 10 OF 16: CROSS SECTIONS PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC RIPARIAN PLANTINGS, SEE PLANS 1' DIAM. DRILLED HOLE 7X9 GALV. STEEL CABLE W. CABLE CLAMPS ROOT WAD, SEE SPECIFICATIONS CABLE EYELET THREADED THROUGH ANCHOR MANTA RAY ANCHOR OR APPROVED EQUAL COBBLES, PER PLAN O.H.W. =I1 1 1-I 1 I-1 11-1 I I' 1 1 I I -I ROOT WAD NOT TO SCALE I I-1 I I -I 11-1 I I -I 11-1 1 1 -III -1 11= USE ONLY SOUND MATERIAL MANTA RAY DRIVABLE ANCHOR OR APPROVED EQUAL EXISTING SUBGRADE 25% OF LENGTH LOG NOTCHED 4" WIDE BY 3" DEEP (TOP OF LOG ONLY) TO SEAT CABLE WRAPS. 25% OF LENGTH 7X9 GALV. STEEL CABLE W. CABLE CLAMPS WOODY DEBRIS WITH ROOT WAD NOT TO SCALE PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 11 OF 16: DETAIL: ROOT WAD PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC LOG NOTCHED 4' WIDE BY 3' DEEP (TOP OF LOG ONLY) TO SEAT CABLE WRAPS LOG ANCHORED IN TIGHT CONTACT WITH SOIL 1/4' 7X9 GALVANIZED STEEL CABLE W. CABLE CLAMPS CABLE EYELET THREADED THROUGH ANCHOR OHW DRIVEABLE ANCHOR SYSTEM FOR LOAFING LOG ®TIDAL STREAM SECTION NOT TO SCALE PRUNE LIMBS FLUSH WITH COLLAR, TYP. PROVIDE 18"-24' CEDAR, DOUGLAS FIR, OR SPRUCE LOGS OHW SUBGRADE NOTE: SLOPE VARIES; SEE PLANS TIDAL STREAM LONGITUDINAL SECTION NOT TO SCALE o Z- < w Z - U) LL ":0 Z_ 15 BRANCHES MIN. 1"-3" DIA. MIN. CUT 6 CAVITIES (PROJECT TOTAL) AS DIRECTED BY OWNER. NEW SNAG TREE CEDAR, SPRUCE, DOUGLAS FIR OR PONDEROSA PINE FINISH GRADE COMPACTED SOIL r PROVIDE: VARIES, 1/3 OF TOTAL SNAGS @ 30' HEIGHT, 24" DIA. SEE NOTE 1/3 OF TOTAL SNAGS @ 20' HEIGHT, 20" DIA. 1/3 OF TOTAL SNAGS @ 15' HEIGHT, 18" DIA. '-2'-0" MAX. - HABITAT SNAG NOT TO SCALE PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N ONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 12 OF 16: DETAIL: TIDAL STREAM AND SNAG PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC SELECT % MAN TO 3 MAN BOULDERS PER PLAN ADJACENT MARSH OR 1-1/2" DRAIN ROCK MUDFLAT GROUND SURFACE PLAN VIEW COBBLE RIVER ACCESS TRAIL SCALE: 1/4" = 1' APPROX. 10', VARIES PER PLAN 1-1/2" DRAIN ROCK 4"-6" ROUNDED COBBLES 3:1 SIDE SLOPES MAX. SELECT % MAN TO 3 MAN BOULDERS PER PLAN ADJACENT MARSH OR MUDFLAT GROUND SURFACE SECTION VIEW 1/4" = 1' 151 0' 2' 4' PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 13 OF 16: DETAIL: COBBLE RIVER ACCESS TRAIL PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC ROW OF BVC POSTS ALONG 5 CONTOUR HOG WIRE, ATTACHED TO POSTS TUBERS CORMS, AND/OR ROOTS PLANTED & WEIGHTED WITH 8d NAIL PLACE TOPSOIL HOG WIRE, ATTACHED TO POSTS LOW MARSH PLANTINGS HIGH MARSH PLANTINGS MOIST RIPARIAN PLANTINGS 5' MAX. SPACING BETWEEN POSTS ROW OF BVC POSTS ALONG 5 CONTOUR d ROW OF BVC POSTS ALONG 10 CONTOUR EMERGENT PLANTING WITH GOOSE EXCLUDER NOT TO SCALE TOP VIEW (DIAGRAM, NOT TO SCALE) PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N oli1GITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 14 OF 16: DETAIL: EMERGENT PLANTING PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC NOTES: • STAKE TREES OVER 5' HEIGHT • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH THE FINISHED GRADE • SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING • FLAG GUYING WIRES WITH SURVEYOR TAPE 2 STRAND TWISTED 12 GAUGE GAL. WIRE ENCASED IN 1" DIAMETER RUBBER HOSE 8'-0" BVC TM' TREATED PINE STAKES DRIVEN TO REFUSAL INTO UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL MIN. 24" DEPTH. FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE REMOVE ALL WRAPPINGS FROM TOP Y, OF ROOTBALL 3" MULCH, KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK FORM SAUCER WITH 3" HIGH CONTINUOUS RIM SPECIFIED PLANTING MIX, WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE AIR POCKETS OE-) CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING NOT TO SCALE NOTES: • STAKE TREES OVER 5' HEIGHT • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH THE FINISHED GRADE • SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING • FLAG GUYING WIRES WITH SURVEYOR TAPE 2 STRAND TWISTED 12 GAUGE GAL. WIRE ENCASED IN 1" DIAMETER RUBBER HOSE 4 D � oD 4 8'-0" BVC TM' TREATED PINE STAKES DRIVEN TO REFUSAL INTO UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL MIN. 24" DEPTH. STAKE ABOVE FIRST BRANCHES OR AS NECESSARY FOR FIRM SUPPORT FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE REMOVE ALL WRAPPINGS FROM TOP v, OF ROOTBALL SPECIFIED PLANTING MIX, WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE AIR POCKETS 3" MULCH, KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK FORM SAUCER WITH 3" HIGH CONTINUOUS RIM 2 X BALL DIA. A DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING 6" NOT TO SCALE PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N LONGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 15 OF 16: DETAIL: TREE PLANTING PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC NOTES: • STAKE TREES AS SHOWN IN TREE PLANTING DETAILS AS APPLICABLE • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH THE FINISHED GRADE • SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING PLANTING HOLE TO BE 2 X DIA. OF ROOTBALL SHRUB ON SLOPE PLANTING NOT TO SCALE FORM SAUCER WITH 3" HIGH CONTINUOUS RIM, DOWNHILL SIDE ONLY 3" MULCH, KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE REMOVE ALL WRAPPINGS FROM TOP Y OF ROOTBALL AFTER PARTIAL BACKFILL SPECIFIED PLANTING MIX, WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE AIR POCKETS NOTE: • MULCH COMPLETELY BETWEEN ALL PLANTS EXCEPT IN SEEDED AND MARSH AREAS. • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH THE FINISHED GRADE. 3" MULCH. KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK. FORM SAUCER WITH 3" CONTINUOUS RIM FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE PLANTING SOIL. WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE ALL AIR POCKETS. SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING. /AM t, . terse r. =�2s=:ter`. %rt W ',r,, I-���-III III—� II -1I I-II1-= I 2 X DIA. OF ROOTBALL PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND —2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) ATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N NGITUDE: 122° 17' 19.69" W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 16 OF 16: DETAIL: SHRUB PLANTING PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC Attachment E - DNR Aquatic Use Authorization DUWAMISH GARDENS PROJECT, CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Archaeological Site Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Prepared for J.A. Brennan Associates, PLLC April 2013 r ESA Paragon Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Submitted to J.A. Brennan Associates, PLLC Prepared for The City of Tukwila Prepared by Chris Lockwood, Ph.D., Bryan Hoyt, and Colin Lothrop Principal Investigator Paula Johnson, M.A. Contains Confidential Information - Not for General Distribution Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 ABSTRACT ESA Paragon (formerly Paragon Research Associates, LLC) was retained by J.A. Brennan, PLLC on behalf of the City of Tukwila to assist with National Register of Historic Places (Section 106) compliance for the Duwamish Gardens project in King County, Washington. The proposed project will enhance fish habitat by creating mudflat and restoring riparian vegetation along the north (right) bank of the Duwamish River in the City of Tukwila. Although still in design and conceptual phase, it is anticipated that the project may remove up to 50,000 cubic yards of sediments from three parcels owned by the City. The project would also provide public access and interpretive signage. The project will require a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers, making it a Federal undertaking subject to compliance with Section 106. Recorded portions of a previously mitigated precontact archaeological site 45 -KI -703 extend into the Permit Area. Previous archaeological survey (i.e., Johnson and Hoyt 2008) also suggested the potential for additional precontact archaeological deposits associated with 45 -KI -703, as well as historic archaeological deposits associated with the historic Duwamish Gardens farmstead; the farmstead residence (Ray- Carrossino house) has been determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. ESA Paragon monitored geotechnical geoprobing, and conducted site delineation trenching and test excavations to delineate and characterize previously unrecorded portions of 45 -KI -703 within the permit area. ESA Paragon monitored a total of 20 two-inch geoprobes, and excavated 17 delineation trenches and seven test excavation units within the Permit Area. ESA Paragon encountered definitive precontact artifacts — five pieces of lithic debitage — only within a single trench nearest to the previously recorded portion of 45 -KI -703. ESA Paragon also recorded four concentrations of charcoal, oxidized soil, and ash (with or without fire modified rock and/or sparse shell/bone), interpreted as anthropogenic fire features; all were in relative proximity to the previously recorded portion of 45 -KI -703. Ephemeral pockets of highly crushed shell or bone (indeterminate) were neither identifiable to taxon, nor definitive human origin. ESA Paragon also noted the widespread presence of at least two buried palesols with associated diffuse charcoal, but devoid of precontact artifacts or features. ESA Paragon interprets the results of current investigations to indicate that precontact human occupation and land use was substantially less frequent and intensive in the delineation area, compared with previously recorded portions of 45 -KI -703. ESA Paragon recommends revising 45 -KI -703 boundaries to extend an additional 150 feet (45 meters) west of their current mapped location. However, ESA Paragon recommends that the Duwamish Gardens project will result in No Adverse Effect on 45 -KI -703, because further archaeological work is unlikely to result in new information that qualitatively differs from, or quantitatively exceeds, information collected previously during data recovery mitigation. Artifacts and ecological samples collected as part of the delineation are being curated at the Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, in Seattle, Washington. ESA Paragon April 2013 page i Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT I 1.0 PROJECT AREA AND DESCRIPTION 1 2.0 REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT 5 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 5 4.0 CULTURAL SETTING 7 4.1 HISTORIC BACKGROUND 7 4.2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH 9 5.0 FIELDWORK 9 5.1 MONITORING AND GEOARCHAEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF GEOTECHNICAL PROBES 10 5.2 SITE DELINEATION TRENCHING 12 5.2.1 Trench 1 14 5.2.2 Trench 2 14 5.2.3 Trench 3 15 5.2.4 Trench 4 16 5.2.5 Trench 5 16 5.2.6 Trench 6 17 5.2.7 Trench 7 17 5.2.8 Trench 8 18 5.2.9 Trench 9 19 5.2.10 Trench 10 19 5.2.11 Trench 11 20 5.2.12 Trench 12 20 5.2.13 Trench 13 21 5.2.14 Trench 14 21 5.2.15 Trench 15 22 5.2.16 Trench 16 22 5.2.17 Trench 17 24 5.3 POST -TRENCHING SITE VISIT 24 5.4 TEST EXCAVATION UNITS 24 5.4.1 Test Unit 1 26 5.4.2 Test Unit 2 29 5.4.3 Test Unit 3 32 5.4.4 Test Unit 4 35 5.4.5 Test Unit 5 38 5.4.6 Test Unit 6 41 5.4.7 Test Unit 7 44 6.0 INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS 47 6.1 PRECONTACT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 48 6.1.1 Distribution of Resources 49 6.1.2 Comparison with 2005 Data Recovery 50 6.1.3 Artifacts 50 6.1.4 Features 51 6.1.5 Paleo-Landscape 51 6.2 RECENT AND HISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 52 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 52 7.1 REVISE SITE BOUNDARIES 52 7.2 ASSESSMENT OF EFFECT 53 7.2.1 Design Considerations 53 7.2.2 Archaeological Resources Monitoring 53 ESA Paragon April 2013 page iii Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 54 APPENDIX A: MEMORANDUM DUWAMISH GARDENS — RESULTS OF CONTAMINATED SOIL GEOPROBE OBSERVATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES SOIL ANALYSIS (JULY 6, 2012) A-1 APPENDIX B: ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE DELINEATION PLAN (AUGUST 2012) B-1 APPENDIX C: TRENCH PROFILES C-1 APPENDIX D: ARTIFACT CATALOG D-1 APPENDIX E: SITE FORM 45 -KI -703 UPDATE E-1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Location of Duwamish Gardens Project 2 Figure 2. Duwamish Gardens Project Permit Area 3 Figure 3. Conceptual Design of Duwamish Gardens Project 4 Figure 4. East looking view of Duwamish Gardens with bunkhouse, Ray-Carrossino residence, and Central Link Light Rail in background. 6 Figure 5. Former and Current Structures at Duwamish Gardens 8 Figure 6. Location of geoprobes and results of LOI/SOM analysis of suspected buried paleosol.. 11 Figure 7. Trenching and test locations in relation to 45 -KI -703 and Sound Transit Central Link Light Rail work area 13 Figure 8. Lithic debitage from Trench 16 23 Figure 9. Test Unit 1, West Wall 26 Figure 10. Test Unit 1, West Wall 28 Figure 11. Test Unit 2, West Wall 29 Figure 12. Test Unit 2, West Wall 31 Figure 13. Test Unit 3, East Wall 32 Figure 14. Test Unit 3, East Wall 34 Figure 15. Test Unit 4, West Wall 35 Figure 16. Test Unit 4, West Wall 37 Page iv ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Figure 17. Test Unit 5, North Wall 38 Figure 18. Test Unit 5, North Wall 40 Figure 19. Test Unit 6, East Wall 41 Figure 20. Test Unit 6, East Wall 43 Figure 21. Test Unit 7, South Wall 44 Figure 22. Test Unit 7, South Wall 46 Figure 23. Trench 7, Feature 1 (Southeast facing view) 47 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Test Unit 1 Description 27 Table 2. Test Unit 2 Description 30 Table 3. Test Unit 3 Description 33 Table 4. Test Unit 4 Description 36 Table 5. Test Unit 5 Description 39 Table 6. Test Unit 6 Description 42 Table 7. Test Unit 7 Description 45 Table 8. Summary Results 48 Table 9. Comparison of 2005 and 2012 Artifact Counts and Densities at 45 -KI -703 50 ESA Paragon April 2013 page v Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 1.0 PROJECT AREA AND DESCRIPTION ESA Paragon (formerly Paragon Research Associates, LLC) was retained by J.A. Brennan, PLLC on behalf of the City of Tukwila to conduct archaeological site delineation for the City's Duwamish Gardens Project. The project is located in the City of Tukwila in the NW quarter of Section 10, Township 23, Range 4 East on the South Seattle, WA 7.5' series topographic map (Figure 1). The project is situated along the north/east (right) bank of the Duwamish River, and west of East Marginal Way South, on King County Tax Lots 1023049055, 1023049060, and 1023049071; the street address is 11271 East Marginal Way South. This area is known locally as River Bend (Blukis Onat 2010:1). The project area is approximately 2.2 acres. While the Duwamish Gardens project is still in the design phase, it proposes to construct shallow water salmonid habitat (mudflats) within the Duwamish River (Figures 2 and 3). As conceived, the project would sculpt the relatively flat urbanized landform (approximate elevation 22 feet amsl) by removing up to 50,000 cubic yards of material. The project will also install drainage, public access, and interpretive signage. The project will require removal of several buildings and structures, including the Ray-Carrossino residence, barn and shed associated with the historic Duwamish Gardens farmstead; the Ray-Carrossino house is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (Courtois et al. 1999; Sound Transit 2001). ESA Paragon's scope of work addressed subsurface archaeological resources only. Ground disturbing construction activities are anticipated to include excavation, grading, trenching, vegetation grubbing, and landscaping. In places, depth of disturbance is anticipated to extend to 25 feet and into the Duwamish River. The Duwamish Gardens Project Permit Area overlaps with previously recorded portions of archaeological site 45 -KI -703 (also known as the Duwamish River Bend Site), containing precontact features and lithic material. Sound Transit completed data recovery excavation in 2005 as part of mitigation during construction of the Central Link Light Rail. Sound Transit's data recovery efforts were constrained to the areas to be impacted by the Light Rail footings and the site boundaries were considered to extend to the east, west and south of their recorded boundaries (LeTourneau and Blukis Onat 2004). ESA Paragon April 2013 page 1 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 MURAL wqmiliv ,' meters z Base Maps• USGS 7 S Seattlea South. WA, 1983 and Des Moines N.2 9, �i n WA. 1949 rev. 1995Metric Quad,mu \ �'. wallinnaturantfil iiim.‘ Figure 1. Location of Duwamish Gardens Project. Page 2 ESA Paragon April 2013 Unn unii.ch t icn'c/ens De/ine aiunc cli -15-1\1--03 Figure 2. Duwamish Gardens Project Permit Arca 17.N.•1 Paragon .1/)ril 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 r5N/17" R7 Prom& DumnWth Gardens Engineer. B. Bernard Subfect: Canoepluel Pon Drawn by K. Corwin Dau' 1-22.10 Sher 4 of 12 Figure 3. Conceptual Design of Duwamish Gardens Project (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Alternate 1B Plan) Page 4 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 2.0 REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT The Duwamish Gardens Project will require a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), making it a Federal undertaking subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 ("Section 106"). The City of Tukwila is the project proponent. USACE is the lead Federal agency for the project. Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties, and includes steps to address discovery, identification, evaluation and mitigation of project effects on historic properties that are eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. USACE has initiated the Section 106 consultation process. Consulting parties include Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Snoqualmie Tribe of Indians, Suquamish Tribe, Tulalip Tribes, City of Tukwila, Washington SHPO, and King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks (Historic Preservation Program). 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The Permit Area is located within the Puget Lowland physiographic province, situated between the Cascade Range to the east, and the Olympic Mountains to the west. Near surface Quaternary deposits within the Puget Lowland consist of sediments deposited by the advance and retreat of ice during at least seven glacial episodes during the last 2 million years (Troost et al. 2003). During the most recent of these glacial periods — the Vashon stade of the Fraser glaciation — the Puget Lobe of the Cordilleran ice sheet extended into the Seattle area approximately between 17,500 and 16,500 BP (Troost and Booth 2008). Glacial ice and subglacial meltwater streams incised the bedrock surface and deposited compact glacial drift (Zehfuss et al. 2003). As the ice sheet retreated by 16,500 BP, meltwater proglacial lakes formed across the lowlands. As the ice retreated across the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Puget Sound was inundated by marine waters, which created an extensive embayment along the Duwamish Valley, and resulted in deposition of shell -bearing mud, sand and gravel (Zehfuss 2005). During the Holocene, a series of lahar sediments originating from Mount Rainier have been transported, reworked and redeposited as deltaic and alluvial deposits along the Duwamish Valley. The earliest of these was the Osceola Mudflow (5490-5600 BP) (Dragovich et al.1994). Subsequent clay -poor lahar episodes — Summerland (2200-2900 BP), Twin Creek (circa 1500 BP), and Fryingpan Creek (circa 1100 BP) — introduced abundant coarse material, particularly dark andesitic sands characteristic of the area. Within the last 1,000 years, fluvial processes have resulted in overbank flooding deposition of silt and fine sand, as well as burying and reworking earlier deposits. The Permit Area is situated on alluvial floodplain adjacent to the Duwamish River (a naturally sinuous channel) along an unusually straight, west -flowing stretch of the river. Approximately 0.3 miles (0.5 km) upstream of the Permit Area, the north -flowing channel makes a 90 degree left turn at the base of Beaver Lodge/Poverty Hill, an outcrop of resistant Tertiary -aged bedrock of the Tukwila Formation. ESA Paragon April 2013 page 5 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 The Permit Area has been substantially modified during the historic period by construction and demolition of buildings, structures, and roads and parking areas associated with the Duwamish Gardens farmstead. Agricultural activities also included an orchard and vineyard. The Permit Area is generally flat; however, imported fill from construction of East Marginal Way South creates approximately 5 feet (1.5 m) of elevation difference towards the eastern edge of the Permit Area. At the time of delineation activities, remnants of landscaped lawn remained, particularly in the eastern half of the Permit Area (Figure 4). Remnants of paved and gravel drives occupy much of the eastern half of the Permit Area, as well; angular and subangular gravels from the drives have become broadly dispersed across this area. Large areas in the western half of the Permit Area were covered with imported coarse sand. The river bank was covered by a dense stand of blackberries and several trees. Figure 4. East looking view of Duwamish Gardens with bunkhouse, Ray-Carrossino residence, and Central Link Light Rail in background. Page 6 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 4.0 CULTURAL SETTING 4.1 Historic Background Cultural background for Duwamish Gardens and the vicinity has been discussed at length previously by Courtois et al. (1999). Here we summarize the current state of historical and archaeological knowledge at Duwamish Gardens. The farmstead, which originally extended beyond the recent boundaries of Duwamish Gardens, was settled in 1882 by Thomas Ray, who maintained a market garden and orchard (Courtois et al. 1999:137). The farmhouse (Ray-Carrossino house) was constructed around 1896. By 1902, the Puget Sound Electric Railway bisected Ray's farm, as it passed over the Duwamish River. By 1915, the farmstead came into the possession of a group of Italian immigrant truck farmers, including the Carrossino family, who operated Duwamish Gardens as an orchard and vineyard, among other ventures (Courtois et al. 1999:137). Over several decades, the Carrossinos constructed multiple buildings on the parcels, including a barn, wash shed, boat building shed, metal shed, equipment parking shed, tool shed, greenhouses, and an additional residence in 1964 (Blukis Onat 2010:30) (Figure 5). Today, only the two residences, barn, bunkhouse, and three sheds remain standing. There are two known underground storage tanks (USTs) within the Permit Area; one is immediately south of the bunkhouse, and the other is north of the 1964 residence. Operation of the farmstead also involved construction of paved and gravel drives and parking areas. At one time, an asphalt road extended along the riverbank; some remnants of this road remain. ESA Paragon April 2013 page 7 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 E. MARGINAL WAY S. ZZ 0 ww 0 =O PARCEL BOUNDARY BRIDGE 1- z_. 4!'- o w za0. m6 1 1- m,.. n0 1 a 1 Z 01 0 w r xa zm 1-mrn 1 wm 1�� w CwK oQo 1 m - 1 wnm. zNn L1 — vain ! a^ om w 5 om ! • ¢ZZ - I �j Ntu h.0i U jl XzU ll (43 1 TZ0 Orr 0 ! 11-- 1 NU4. 1 WW I Yo I 1 O 7 U N J V O = N zo 1.7zrn 1 m'a�°n_ 0°� I 0 oacr. ,..ti on.• - 1 in 1 iff NN 3 v v n rirx- 1 Wo Wel IX 0 0 o� rn 1.0.17 fn o OI 1O 0. V a• ( o W 00 1tsi ZI 00 my 0 0 m 1. 2 Figure 5. Former and Current Structures at Duwamish Gardens (Source: King County) Page 8 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 4.2 Archaeological Research The earliest previous work at this location focused on the historic nature of the Ray-Carrossino farmstead (Courtois et al. 1999; Sound Transit 2001), but did not include archaeological investigations. The precontact site was discovered in 2004 during subsurface survey (shovel probes) prior to construction of Sound Transit's Central Link Light Rail (CLLR). Additional shovel probes, as well as test excavations, were subsequently performed in 2004; investigations were limited to the area affected by CLLR construction. Based on results from this work, Sound Transit, on behalf of the lead federal agency, the Federal Transit Administration and in consultation with SHPO, determined the site eligible to the NRHP as a significant historic property. Sound Transit determined data recovery to be the most viable alternative for mitigating adverse effects to the site, and developed a Supplemental Treatment Plan. The plan, which included data recovery excavation of nine 2m x 2m blocks, and one lm x lm test unit, was implemented in March 2005. A total of 1,938 chipped stone artifacts, 23 ground stone artifacts, and one battered stone (hammer stone) artifact were recovered during all phases of 2004-2005 fieldwork. A total of 2,102 fish, 17 bird, 307 mammal bone, and 1,217 shellfish specimens were also recovered. Data recovery identified multiple episodes of controlled fire, as evidenced by black sands and oxidized orange sands associated with charcoal, food remains, and 10,993 pieces of fire modified rock larger than 1/2 inch. Three distinct occupation zones— Lower, Main, and Upper — were identified. Radiocarbon dating suggests that the Lower Occupation dates 1010-1270 AD, and the Main Occupation dates 1280-1450 AD. In 2008, Paragon Research Associates, LLC (now known as ESA Paragon) performed 24 shovel and shovel -auger probes (2.25 m terminal depth) as part of due diligence prior to land acquisition, on behalf of King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks (DNRP) and City of Tukwila. ESA Paragon identified deeply buried precontact artifacts — a single basalt flake in each of two probes — within the eastern portion of the Permit Area. ESA Paragon also recorded abundant non-diagnostic contemporary and historic artifacts (e.g., glass, white ware, nails) spread broadly across the landscape. 5.0 FIELDWORK Preliminary fieldwork involved monitoring and geoarchaeological analysis of geotechnical probes (Lockwood 2010a) (Appendix A). Following geoprobes, ESA Paragon developed the Site Delineation Plan — Duwamish Gardens (Lockwood 2012b) (Appendix B) to guide the approach for site delineation trenching and test excavations. USACE provided consulting parties 30 days to comment on the plan. At stakeholder request, the order of delineation trenching was altered to proceed west to east, rather than east to west as originally proposed. Site delineation mechanical trenching and test excavations were conducted under the terms set forth in this plan. Site delineation was conducted for the purposes of: 1) delineating the extent of archaeological remains associated with archaeological site 45 -KI -703; 2) assessing the nature of archaeological deposits, including historic deposits, present outside of existing site boundaries; and 3) assisting the City of Tukwila and their design team with evaluating the feasibility of constructing fish ESA Paragon April 2013 page 9 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45-K1-703 habitat improvements, as well as understanding the potential cultural resources tasks that might be necessary if the project is to move forward. 5.1 Monitoring and Geoarchaeological Analysis of Geotechnical Probes On May 1 and 2, 2012, Chris Lockwood of ESA Paragon observed twenty, 2 -inch diameter, direct -push geoprobes (Figure 6), advanced to 12-16 feet below ground surface by ESN Northwest, under the direction of Cody Johnson of Shannon & Wilson, Inc. Soil geoprobing was conducted primarily for soil contamination testing, although additional depth was added to the probing protocol to provide archaeologically -relevant data about deep deposits. Soil samples were retrieved in 4 -foot long, plastic liners. Liners were immediately split lengthwise by ESN Northwest, and logged and subsampled by Shannon & Wilson. At that time, samples were preliminarily inspected by ESA Paragon, resealed with duct tape, and stockpiled for additional analysis by ESA Paragon. Subsequently for each geoprobe, individual soil layers were identified visually by color and matrix material, and passed through nested 1/4" and 1/8" geological sieves. Soil peds were broken by gently pushing them through the screens by hand. Material retained on the screens was visually inspected for artifacts; no prehistoric artifacts were encountered during screening. ESA Paragon screened all soil layers of all geoprobes to depths of 12 feet below ground surface. Subsamples of suspected paleosols (buried A -horizons, which represent relatively stable past ground surfaces) and comparative non-paleosols were submitted to ALS Chemex for loss -on - ignition (LOI) analysis for calculation soil organic matter (SOM), following the approach of Stein and Kiers (2010), whose previous use of soil organic matter analysis at 45 -KI -703 detected enhanced levels of anthropogenic organic matter within the black andesitic sands at the site. The results of LOI/SOM analysis indicated the presence of elevated levels of subsurface soil organic matter in suspected paleosol layers only within the eastern half of the Permit Area (Figure 6) (Appendix A). Page 10 ESA Paragon April 2013 Dra'amish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 43 -II --03 Figure 6. Location of geoprobes and results of LOI/SOM analysis of suspected buried paleosol. "Warmer" colors (red and yellow) indicate elevated levels of soil organic matter, while "cooler" colors (green and blue) indicate soil organic matter near or below natural background levels. ESA Paragon .9pri1 2013 page 11 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 5.2 Site Delineation Trenching Trenching was conducted between October 24 and 26, 2012 (Figure 7). Ralph Murch of the City of Tukwila operated the excavator outfitted with a 24 inch bucket with steel bar welded across the teeth. Chris Lockwood and Colin Lothrop of ESA Paragon directed the trenching. A total of 17 trenches were excavated. Trenches were placed generally in proximity to locations proposed in the Site Delineation Plan; Trench 12, intended to examine the nature of a small depression south of the bunkhouse, was relocated further south due to the documented presence of a gasoline UST in the proposed trench location. Trenches were excavated to attain target depth of 6.5 feet (2.0 m), target width of 4.0 feet (1.2 m), and target length of 16 feet (5.0 m). Internal benching at 4.0 feet (1.2 m) below ground surface was used at one or both ends of each to provide safe access; as a result, approximately only one-third to one-half of each trench was excavated to the maximum target depth. Spoils were laid out to the side of each trench and visually inspected. At least 15 gallons of spoils from each trench were collected directly from the backhoe bucket into a 5 gallon bucket and screened through 1/8" mesh. For each trench, a profile of one long -axis wall was drawn in the field (Appendix C), and conditions recorded in notes and photographs; due to a collapse of loose sands in Trench 9 and safety concerns, no profile was drawn for Trench 9. Page 12 ESA Paragon April 2013 Dtnramish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation al -15-K1--03 Figure 7. Trenching and test locations in relation to 45-1 1-703. Sound Transit Central Link Light Rail work area shown in purple (Source: Blukis Onat et al. 2010: Appendix B). Black dashed line indicates proposed revised site boundaries. ESA Paragon .April 2013 page 13 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 5.2.1 Trench 1 Trench 1 was excavated between the historic barn and modern sheds in the western half of the Permit Area. The trench extended to 2.2 meters depth and 5.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately north -south. Layers I, IIa, IIb: The upper 25 cm consisted of three layers of recent fill, including imported coarse sand at surface, underlain by sandy silt and silt containing small quantities of non- diagnostic recent/historic debris. Layer III: Between 25 and 40 cmbs was a distinctive, black/dark gray layer, containing abundant nails, bolts, brick fragments, ash and coal. This layer, which pinched out towards the south, is interpreted as a burn pit or clean out for farmstead waste. No strongly diagnostic artifacts were recovered in this layer; however, the presence of a fragment of bright orange clay pigeon suggests this layer likely does not date to the early development of the farmstead. Layer IV: The underlying layer of dark grayish brown fine sandy silt, between 40 and 65 cmbs, contained small amounts of angular and subangular gravel. Based on the stratigraphic pattern observed across the entire landform, the gravel is interpreted as being imported, which suggests that the associated sandy silt is either also imported or is disturbed native material that has had gravel worked into it. Layer V: The underlying layer of light gray fine to coarse sandy silt, between 50 and 75 cmbs, exhibited faint bedding consistent with native floodplain deposits formed by overbank flooding. The bedding did not dip in either direction. The bedding was not continuous across the entire trench, and contained areas of disturbance in which no bedding could be detected; one large pocket of loose gray silt may be a krotovina (bioturbated animal burrow). Layer VI: The lowermost layer, extending from 75 to 220+ cmbs, consists of alternating bands of gray silty very fine sand and brown very fine sandy silt. This material is consistent with oscillations in fluvial processes and competence in overbank flooding, swinging between higher energy and lower energy flooding events. No precontact artifacts and no ecofacts (e.g., charcoal, shell, bone) were observed during trenching. No evidence for soil development in the form of a buried paleosol was encountered. 5.2.2 Trench 2 Trench 2 was excavated southeast of the historic barn, relocated due to the presence of abundant recent debris and garbage at the original planned location. The trench extended to 1.5 meters depth and 5.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately east -west. Layers I, IIa, IIb, IIc: The upper 25 cm consisted of multiple layers (I-II) of recent fill, including imported coarse sand at surface, underlain by gravelly fine sandy silt and gravelly coarse sandy silt, containing moderate quantities of non-diagnostic recent/historic debris. Layer III: Between 25 and 40 cmbs was a distinctive, black/dark gray layer, containing metal, brick fragments, glass, ash and coal similar to Trench 1. Page 14 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45-K1-703 Layer IV: The underlying layer of dark grayish brown fine sandy silt, between 30 and 70 cmbs, contained small amounts of angular and subangular gravel, again similar to Trench 1. Layer V: The underlying layer of gray fine to coarse sand, between 55 and 100 cmbs, exhibited bedding laminations consistent with overbank flooding. The sands are interpreted as natural levee sands deposited; however, due to the orientation of the trench, it was not possible to determine whether the stratigraphy dipped towards the channel, as would be expected on the front face of a natural levee. In the southern wall within a zone mixing of Layers IV and V, ESA Paragon recorded a large orange soil oxidation feature containing charcoal and partially carbonized wood; this feature is interpreted as a relatively recent subsurface root burn. The presence of silty material within this feature further suggests the influence of bioturbation. Layer VI: The lowermost layer, extending from 100 to 150 cmbs, consists of relatively massive, light brown very fine sandy silt. No precontact artifacts, and apart from the root burn feature, no ecofacts were observed. No evidence for soil development in the form of a buried paleosol was encountered. 5.2.3 Trench 3 Trench 3 was excavated south of the modern metal sheds within an area covered by imported sand. The trench extended to 2.2 meters depth and 4.5 meters in length, and was oriented approximately north -south. Layers I, II: The upper 25 cm consisted of layers of recent fill of sand containing gravel and concrete rubble. Layer III, between 25 and 50 cmbs, consisted of organic dark brown silt containing gravels, with a clear, wavy lower boundary. Based on the organic material and dark coloration, this layer is interpreted as the recent plowzone A -horizon, associated with use of the farmstead, including the orchard and vineyard. Layer IV, between 30 and 55 cmbs, consisted of light brown silty very fine sand. This layer contained small amounts of brick fragments and glass. Below Layer IV is a series of layers (V, VII, IX, XI) of very dark gray medium -coarse andesitic sand that alternate with layers (VI, VIII, X) of brown silty very fine sand and very fine sandy silt. These layers appear to be evidence for fluvial oscillations similar to that seen below 75 cmbs in Trench 1. Significantly, Trench 3 contains probable evidence for two distinct and separate paleosols within silty layers. The upper paleosol was detected at 95 cmbs, near the base of Layer VI; it appeared as a discontinuous, 2-3 cm thick lens of dark brown silt with diffuse charcoal. The lower paleosol at 150 cmbs, near the top of Layer X; it appeared as a discontinuous, 3-4 cm thick lens of dark orange silt, also with diffuse charcoal. These layers differ substantively from root burns observed ESA Paragon April 2013 page 15 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 in other trenches due to their flat and horizontal orientation, dark color, presence of diffuse charcoal (rather than large chunks of charcoal), and absence of partially combusted wood. No precontact artifacts were observed. 5.2.4 Trench 4 Trench 4 was excavated south of the modern metal sheds and west of Trench 3 within an area covered by imported sand. The trench extended to 2.2 meters depth and 5.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately north -south. Layers I, II: The upper 40 cm consisted of a layer of recent fill sand with gravel, overlaying dense layer of imported angular cobbles and gravel with tan sand. Layer III: Between 40 and 50 cmbs, material consisted of very dark brown sand at the base of Layer II. This layer was discontinuous and may have been disturbed by placement of Layer II. If it is analogous to Layer III in Trench 3 (recent A -horizon), its relative thinness suggests that it may have been graded prior to placement of Layer II. Below Layer III, is a series of layers (IV, VI, VIII, X) of very dark gray medium -coarse andesitic sand that alternate with layers (V, VII, IX, IX) of brown silty very fine sand and very fine sandy silt. These layers appear to be evidence for fluvial oscillations similar to that seen in other trenches. Trench 4 contains probable evidence for one paleosol within Layer VII at 95 cmbs. The paleosol is consistent in appearance with the upper paleosol in Trench 3. No precontact artifacts were observed. 5.2.5 Trench 5 Trench 5 was excavated south of the modern metal sheds, near the edge of landform. The trench extended to 1.9 meters depth and 4.2 meters in length, and was oriented approximately north - south. Layers Ia-d: The upper 50 cm consisted of a series of fill layers including gravelly sand, coarse sand, silty coarse sand, and a black coal/ash layer similar to that seen in Trenches 1 and 2. In the northern portion of the trench, recent disturbance extended below 80 cm in depth, evidently to accommodate installation of PVC pipes. Layer II, between 40 and 65 cmbs, consisted of gray and brown fine sandy silt containing sparse brick debris. Layer III, between 50 and 120 cmbs, consisted of laminated gray fine -coarse sand. This layer, probably levee sand, shows a gentle dip towards the river channel. Layer IVa, between 100 and 150 cmbs, consisted of brown very fine sandy silt, with bands of sand. Page 16 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45-K1-703 Layer IVb, between 145 and 190 cmbs, while similar to Layer IVa, contains fewer bands of sand. Layer IVb contained a thin, wavy line of charcoal flecks between 150 and 170 cmbs; the charcoal was not associated with dark matrix indicative of a buried paleosol, but is at the approximate level of the lower charcoal observed in Trench 3. No precontact artifacts were observed. 5.2.6 Trench 6 Trench 6 was excavated near the southeastern corner of the modern metal sheds within an area that appeared hummocky at the surface. The trench extended to 2.1 meters depth and 5.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately north -south. Layers I, II: The upper 30 cm consisted of a layer of very dark brown gravelly sand, overlaying light brown gravelly sand with coal, brick fragments, terra cotta flower pot fragments, and shards of flat window glass. The material appears to be recent or historic fill that has developed an A - horizon and accumulated debris derived from the farmstead operations. Layer III, between 30 and 65 cmbs, consists of very dark brown silty sand; this layer, evidently a thick, buried A -horizon, may represent the original ground surface at time of historic occupation. Below Layer III, is a series of layers (IV, VI, VIII) of brown very fine sand to very fine sandy silt alternating with layers (V, VII, IX) of very dark gray fine to coarse andesitic sand. These layers appear to be evidence for fluvial oscillations similar to that seen in other trenches. Trench 5 contains probable evidence for one paleosol within Layer IV at 93 cmbs. The paleosol is consistent in appearance and depth with paleosols in Trench 3 and 4. No precontact artifacts were observed. 5.2.7 Trench 7 Trench 7 was excavated south of Trench 6, in a flat, grassy area. The trench extended to 1.75 meters depth and 5.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately north -south. Layers I, II: The upper 30 to 50 cm consisted of a layer of very dark brown gravelly silt, overlaying brown gravelly sandy silt with coal, metal, brick fragments, terra cotta flower pot fragments, and shards of flat window glass. The material appears to be recent or historic fill that has developed an A -horizon and accumulated debris derived from the farmstead operations. Layer III, between 30 and 50 cmbs, consists of discontinuous, light gray very fine sandy silt. The irregular upper boundary of this layer indicates disturbance, possibly grading, prior to deposition of overlying layers. Between approximately 30 and 70 cmbs, Layer III sandy silt is mixed with sands from the underlying Layer IV. Layer IV, between 70 and 110 cmbs, is composed of gray fine to coarse andesitic sand. Very dispersed charcoal was observed between 70 and 80 cmbs. ESA Paragon April 2013 page 17 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Layer Va, between 105 and 120 cmbs, consists of light grayish brown fine sandy silt and silty fine sand. Layer Vb, from 115 to 175+ cmbs, consists of light brown to brown very fine sandy silt. A pocket of oxidized silt with dispersed charcoal was partially exposed in the west wall profile between 135 and 155 cmbs. No precontact artifacts were observed. Charcoal at approximately 70 cmbs and also at 140 cmbs may be consistent with the two paleosols observed in Trench 3. However, these materials were not associated with any well expressed A -horizons; the nearby presence of rodent back dirt piles at ground surface suggests that bioturbation may have disturbed and muted traces of any paleosols. 5.2.8 Trench 8 Trench 8 intersected the middle of the east wall of Trench 7 perpendicularly, forming a T. The trench extended to 1.75 meters depth and 4.2 meters in length, and was oriented approximately east -west. Layer I: The upper 20 cm consisted of a layer of very dark brown gravelly silt, containing moderate amounts of metal, brick fragments, terra cotta flower pot fragments, and shards of flat window glass. Layer II, between 20 and 50 cmbs, consisted of light gray silty very fine sand/very fine sandy silt. The layer contained whole brick, as well as a lens of ashy coal and charcoal. The lower boundary of the layer was irregular and sloped downward to the east. This layer is interpreted as recent or historic imported fill. Layer III, between approximately 30 and 50 cmbs, extended across the western half of the trench. This layer contained gray very fine, massive sand. The absence of horizontal laminations suggests this layer is composed is fill. Layer IV, between 40 and 95 cmbs, underlies Layer III, and like the overlying layer did not extend across the entire trench. Interestingly, Layer III had been previously disturbed during installation of a metal pipe. The layer also contained a partially combusted, fire hollowed log. Layer IV appeared highly disturbed and contained mixed silt and sands. The northeast corner of the trench contained an additional area with a fire -hollowed log or root, but surrounding sediments appear disturbed. Layer V, between 55 and 110 cmbs, consists of gray fine -coarse, laminated sands. The top of this layer is significantly higher in the eastern extent of the trench; in the western two-thirds of trench, the upper 30 cm of this layer has been disturbed and incorporated into Layer IV. Layer VI, between 110 and 135 cmbs, is a transitional zone between Layer V sands and Layer VII very fine sandy silt. Sediments appear mixed within this zone Layer VII, between 130 and 180+ cmbs, consists of light brown to brown, very fine sandy silt. Page 18 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 No precontact artifacts or features were observed in this trench. The presence of a partially - combusted logs and metal irrigation pipes suggests a significant amount of disturbance resulting from historic and recent operation of the farmstead. 5.2.9 Trench 9 Trench 9 was excavated southwest of the bunkhouse and towards the edge of the landform. The trench extended to 2.0 meters depth and 4.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately north -south. During excavation a 5 cm by 5 cm pocket of highly crushed shell or bone was observed in the west wall profile in layer of gray sand at approximately 170 cmbs. At the discovery, it was not possible to determine the taxonomy of the material, or whether it had been deposited by humans, or reworked by rodents within a krotovina. The trench collapsed immediately after excavation, but before a profile could be drawn or further study conducted. Due to safety concerns, no attempt was made to reenter the trench. Native soils within the trench consisted of a series of very loose, gray, medium and coarse sands that dipped towards the channel. The sands are interpreted as levee deposits. 5.2.10 Trench 10 Trench 10 intersected the northern end of the east wall of Trench 9 perpendicularly, forming an L. The trench extended to 1.2 meters depth and 4.5 meters in length, and was oriented approximately east -west. Due to excessively loose sands and wall slumping, no attempt was made to extend this trench deeper than 1.2 meters. Layers I, II, III: The upper 40 cm consisted of a layer of brown gravelly coarse sand, underlain by black gravelly sandy silt, and gray gravelly sandy silt. All three layers contained scrap metal, slag, coal, and large chunks of charcoal. Layer IV, between 40 and 70 cmbs, consisted of brown fine sandy silt with horizontal streaks of gray sand. Charcoal flecking was observed just above the lower boundary. Layer V, between 60 and 120+ cmbs, consisted of gray and brown, fine -coarse laminated sands Characteristic of natural levee deposits. This layer contained several dark root stains and krotovina. Layer VI was exposed in the southeastern corner of the bottom of the trench, but was not fully examined due to safety concerns. The layer consists of light brown, very fine sandy silt. No precontact artifacts or features were observed in this trench. Charcoal at the top of Layer IV may indicate the presence of a poorly expressed paleosol, although the top of Layer IV lacked dark coloration indicative of soil formation. ESA Paragon April 2013 page 19 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 5.2.11 Trench 11 Trench 11 was excavated south of the bunkhouse, near the edge of the landform. The trench extended to 1.85 meters depth and 5.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately north - south. Layer I consisted of dark gray sandy silt, between 0 and 10 cmbs. It was heavily rooted, but the absence of significant accumulation of organic matter suggests this layer was deposited relatively recently. Layer II consisted of reddish brown and yellowish brown, very gravelly coarse sand. The top of this layer was located at 10 cmbs across the entire trench, but the lower boundary sloped steeply towards the channel, from 50 cmbs in the north to 120 cmbs in the south. Layer III consisted of dark gray gravelly sand with large pieces of broken asphalt and fragments of split wood. The asphalt is likely the remains of a trucking road that once ran parallel to the river. Like the overlying Layer II, Layer III sloped towards the river, with a terminal depth of 135 cmbs in the south. Layer IV consisted of gray very fine sandy silt to a depth of 185+ cm. Wood observed within Layer III extended into this layer. All layers contained non-diagnostic recent/historic artifacts, such as brick fragments, glass, and metal. The profile is interpreted as exhibiting multiple episodes of fill, possibly placed to stabilize the landform edge and river bank. 5.2.12 Trench 12 Trench 12 was excavated south of the bunkhouse. The trench extended to 1.7 meters depth and 5.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately east -west. Due to the presence of a gasoline UST, the trench was relocated from its originally planned location across a small depression adjacent to the south wall of the bunkhouse. Layers I, II, and III: The uppermost 50 cm consisted of three layers of recent/historic gravelly silty sandy fill. These layers contained angular and subrounded (pea) gravel, as well as non- diagnostic corroded metal fasteners, flat and bottle glass, and white ware. Layer IV, between 50 and 90 cmbs, consisted of gray, fine -coarse sand interbedded with brown fine sandy silt. This layer is interpreted as largely intact native soil. Layer V, between 90 and 170+ cm, consisted of brown very fine/fine sandy silt. At 170 cmbs, the excavator uncovered an irregularly shaped, 50 cm x 30 cm concentration of charcoal, oxidized soil, ash and shell/bone dust, with a second, smaller concentration approximately 50 cm to the west; thickness of the feature was not determined. Excavation was discontinued, and the feature was covered to preserve it for examination by stakeholders and further controlled excavation. (The feature was examined by stakeholders during the October 29 field visit, but the trench walls later collapsed and reburied the feature). Page 20 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45-K1-703 5.2.13 Trench 13 Trench 13 was excavated north of the bunkhouse and west of the 1960s residence, in a grass covered area. The trench extended to 2.0 meters depth and 5.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately north -south. Layers I, II, III, IV: The uppermost 35-50 cm consisted of four layers of recent/historic fill. Layers I and II, found only across the southern half of the trench consisted of sandy angular imported gravels extending from 0 to 30 cmbs. These layers laterally truncate Layer III, very dark brown sandy silt, which is present in the northern half of the trench between 0 and 10 cmbs. Layer IV, very dark brown silty sand, underlies Layer III to depth of 20 cm, but slopes below Layer II in the southern half of the trench. One possible interpretation is that Layer II represents a former drive or parking area that became compacted, along with the southern portion of Layer IV, and that the surface was subsequently re -leveled (Layer I). Layer V, between 25 and 35/50 cmbs, consists of very dark brown sand. Based on its dark color, this layer evidently is a constituent of the active A -horizon; the thickness of this A -horizon may be related to historic use of the farmstead for agriculture. Layer VI, between 35 and 85 cmbs, consists of dark gray andesitic sand, but exhibits an exceptionally irregular and wavy lower boundary. Layer VII is a lens of brown sandy silt between 55 and 65 cmbs. Layer VIII is a lens of very dark gray sand that truncates Layer VII laterally, and at approximately the same depth. Layer IX consists of very dark gray, laminated andesitic sand across the northern half of the trench, between 80 and 150 cm. Layer X consists of brown very fine silty sand at approximately the same depth as Layer IX, although a small lens of Layer IX overlays Layer X, meaning that Layer IX postdates Layer X. Layer X contained a thin lens of oxidized soil at 110 cmbs, as well as a line of dispersed charcoal at 100 cmbs; no artifacts or shell/bone were found associated with the oxidized lens or the charcoal. The charcoal at 100 cmbs is at a depth consistent with the upper, charcoal -infused paleosol recognized in Trench 3 and elsewhere. Layer XI, between 150 and 200+ cmbs, consisted of brown, massive very fine sandy silt. Charcoal flecking was observed at approximately 170 cmbs; this depth is consistent with that of the lower, charcoal infused paleosol recognized in Trench 3 and elsewhere. 5.2.14 Trench 14 Trench 14 was excavated north and west of Trench 13 within the same grass covered area. The trench extended to 1.95 meters depth and 5.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately north -south. ESA Paragon April 2013 page 21 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Layers I, II: The uppermost 50 cm consisted of a layer of very dark brown, organic fine sandy silt (I), underlain by a brown fine sandy silt (II). Layer II was intersected by a north -south oriented irrigation pipe at 25 cmbs. Both I and II contained small amounts of angular gravel, flat glass, and slag. Layer III, between 50 and 85/100 cmbs, consists of light gray and gray bands of fine -coarse sand. Based on its dark color, this layer evidently is a constituent of the active A -horizon; the thickness of this A -horizon may be related to historic use of the farmstead for agriculture. Layer IV, between 85/100 and 195+ cmbs, consists of light brown very fine sandy silt. This layer is similar to the terminal very fine sandy silt layer (XI) in Trench 13, although no charcoal was observed in Trench 14. No artifacts or features were observed. No evidence for buried paleosols was observed in Trench 14. 5.2.15 Trench 15 Trench 15 was excavated south of the Ray-Carrossino house near the edge of landform. The trench extended to 1.6 meters depth and 5.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately north -south. Stratigraphy in this trench was complicated by the presence of buried telephone lines and multiple layers of asphalt, gravel, and gravelly sand fill with large amounts of recent and historic metal and wood. The uppermost 70 cm (Layers I and II) consist of multiple recent and historic fills, including angular gravel, asphalt, and sands. Layer I appears to be the most recent deposit, based on superposition; the brown sand caps a telephone conduit at 70 cmbs. Excavation was discontinued in this specific part of the trench once the telephone conduit was encountered. In the northern half of the trench below 70 cmbs, a steeply dipping layer (Layer III) of brown and gray, very fine sandy silt and silty very fine sand contained non-diagnostic historic artifacts, including metal fasteners and brick fragments. This layer did exhibit some remnant lamination, suggesting is a disturbed native soil layer. Layer IV, light brown fine sandy silt, also dips sharply toward the channel. No prehistoric artifacts or features were observed in Trench 15. 5.2.16 Trench 16 Trench 16 was excavated south of the Ray-Carrossino house and north of Trench 15. The trench extended to 1.3 meters depth and 6.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately east -west. Layer I, between 0 and 50 cmbs, consisted of very dark brown fine sandy silt with moderate rooting and animal bioturbation (krotovina). This A -horizon layer contained non-diagnostic recent/historic artifacts and pea gravel. This area was reportedly previously used as a household garden (Philippe LeTourneau, personal communication, 2012). The layer contained several saw cut mammal bones, including cow and pig. Page 22 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Layer II, between 50 and 90 cmbs, consisted of bands of gray, very fine sandy silt and silty very fine sand, indicative of fluvial deposition. This layer contained an intact terra cotta drain pipe inset in concrete that extended across the width of the trench. Layer III, between 80 and 130+ cmbs, consisted of light brown very fine sandy silt. Dispersed charcoal associated with an oxidized lens, interpreted as an anthropogenic fire feature, was observed at the base of this layer; continued collapse of wall material inhibited intensive investigation of this feature. Five pieces of chipped stone debitage — two CVR (crystalline volcanic rock), flakes, one quartz flake, one CVR shatter and one quartz shatter — were also recovered within Layer III (Figure 8). Layer IV, between 80 and 130+ cmbs, consisted of gray, laminated fine -coarse sand that sloped beneath Layer III. Layer V, between 90 and 130+ cmbs, was stratigraphically below Layer IV, and consisted of brown to dark brown very fine sandy silt; this layer contained dispersed charcoal at 110 cmbs. Figure 8. Lithic debitage from Trench 16 ti ESA Paragon April 2013 page 23 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 5.2.17 Trench 17 Trench 17 was excavated south of the 1960s house. The trench extended to 1.8 meters depth and 5.0 meters in length, and was oriented approximately east -west. Layers I,II: The uppermost 50 cm consisted of dark brown fine sandy silt (I) overlying yellowish brown gravelly coarse sand (II). Both layers appear to be fill. Layer III, between 50 and 100 cmbs, consists of gray fine -coarse sandy silt. Layer IV, between 100 and 180+ cmbs, consists of brown fine sandy silt and silt. A small (8 cm by 6 cm) ephemeral pocket of highly crushed shell/bone was encountered in the floor of the trench during excavation of this layer; the observed portion of the feature was approximately 0.5 cm thick; the material was not identifiable to taxon. 5.3 Post -Trenching Site Visit Following site delineation trenching, representatives of consulting parties — Lance Lundquist (USACE), Chris Jenkins (USACE), Lori Lull (USACE), Ryan Larson (City of Tukwila), Laura Murphy (Muckleshoot), Dennis Lewarch (Suquamish) — and interested parties visited the Permit Area on October 29, 2012 to examine and discuss exposed profiles; Philippe LeTourneau (KCDNRP) visited the site on October 26, 2012 during trenching. During on-site discussions, USACE, Muckleshoot, Suquamish, and the City of Tukwila concurred with ESA Paragon's recommendation to place seven test excavation units in locations described below to further delineate the site boundaries. Participants also reached consensus that extensive historic and recent landscape modifications, including introduction of various imported fills and grading, had largely negated the interpretability and provenience of the many non-diagnostic historic/recent artifacts encountered across the landscape, rendering them less informative than previously collected archival and oral information regarding historic use of the farmstead. 5.4 Test Excavation Units Between November 5 and 16, 2012, Bryan Hoyt, James McLean, Colin Lothrop, Lara Thoreson, and Chris Lockwood of ESA Paragon excavated a total of seven, lm x 1m test excavation units. Four test excavation units (Test Units 1, 2, 3, and 5) were each placed in proximity to a delineation trench (Trench 3, 7, 6, and 15, respectively) that had yielded evidence for one or more buried paleosols associated with diffuse charcoal; these units were placed to provide controlled testing of the paleosols for evidence for precontact human occupation. Two test units (Test Units 4 and 7) were each placed in proximity delineation trenches (Trench 12 and 16, respectively) that had provided evidence for suspected anthropogenic fire features (concentrations of charcoal associated with oxidized soils and ash); five pieces of chipped stone debitage was also recovered from Trench 16. The remaining test excavation unit (Test Unit 6) was placed arbitrarily between the Ray-Carrossino house and the bunkhouse; this location was selected to provide additional testing in relative proximity to Trenches 12 and 16. Page 24 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Prior to test unit excavations, contemporary/historic fill was mechanically stripped from the top of each test unit and adjacent areas to provide a safe working area during test excavations. Stripping of the contemporary/historic fill was monitored by Colin Lothrop. Test units were excavated using shovels and trowels to remove matrix in natural layers. Natural layers exceeding 10 cm thickness were subdivided into arbitrary 10 cm levels. Test units were excavated to a target depth of approximately 2.0 m below pre -stripped ground surface. Stratigraphic relationships and spatial relationships of artifacts and features were recorded on Unit/Level forms and Stratigraphic Profile forms. All sediments were screened through 1/4" or 1/8" mesh; in general, sand, silty sand, and sandy silt matrices were screened through 1/8" mesh, while silt matrices were screened through 1/4" mesh. All artifacts were collected; representative charcoal samples and bulk sediment samples from features were also collected. ESA Paragon April 2013 page 25 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 5.4.1 Test Unit 1 (Figures 9 and 10) Test Unit 1 was excavated immediately east of Trench 3. PO.ss!9LE IfvPztzoN 1flr;CAM tttAl.bY b? moves) ovEgat4RDEIV x,:‘,Charcoal Krotovina ® Root Figure 9. Test Unit 1, West Wall Page 26 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Table 1. Test Unit 1 Description Mechanically altered overburden consists of mixed matrix of overlying layers, including grass and historic/modern debris. Layer Type Stratigraphic Description I. 10YR 2/2 very dark brown sands. Soft, well sorted, appears massive. No gravel. Occasional charcoal flecks. Abrupt boundaries; no cultural materials. II. Bedded layers of 10YR 3/2, very dark grayish brown, very fine and fine sands. No gravel; appears massive. Layers separated by silt/very fine sand lenses (1-2 cm thick) in upper portion of this depositional unit (from possible A Horizon and above) some bioturbation noted in lower portion. Occasional organic/charcoal flecks, no cultural material. III. Bedded layers of 10YR 3/2 very dark grayish brown, slightly silty fine sand to 10YR 3/4 dark yellowish brown very fine sandy silts. No gravels. Soft to moderately firm. Layers appear massive, seem to trend toward fining upward. Not much observed bioturbation. Generally no charcoal. Comments within Ilb. It is 1 OYR 3/3 dark brown with some charcoal flecking and organic charcoal present at the top of III. It is 10YR 2/2 very dark brown, very fine sandy silt. Some flecking and staining but mainly darkened by organics. The horizon is thickest within and is discontinuous in south wall. There is a lens of oxidized sediment with associated no artifacts. - A -horizon staining; discontinuous. -A-horizon is scattered charcoal the west wall, charcoal, but ESA Paragon April 2013 page 27 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45-K1-703 Figure 10. Test Unit 1, West Wall Page 28 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 5.4.2 Test Unit 2 (Figures 11 and 12) Test Unit 2 was placed immediately west of Trench 7. TneatkwiCCi t4V 2EsnwED QvERLisl?DE,I OR6Anic .SM!W(N Yi'lakittNlc aN, nr:xQ x fCharcoat Krotovrna t Root Figure 11. Test Unit 2, West Wall ESA Paragon April 2013 page 29 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Table 2. Test Unit 2 Description Mechanically altered overburden consists of mixed matrix of overlying layers, including grass and historic/modern debris. Layer Type Stratigraphic Description I. 1 OYR 3/2 very dark grayish brown fine to medium sands. Soft, no gravel. Fairly abrupt, wavy lower boundary. No charcoal or staining. No oxidation. No artifacts. IIa. 2.5Y 3/2 very dark grayish brown slightly silty, very fine to fine sand. No gravel. Soft. Abrupt, wavy lower boundary. No charcoal or staining. Oxidation mottling (1OYR 3/6 dark yellowish brown) prevalent particularly in the lower portions of the layer. IIb. Similar to IIa, but lacking oxidation mottling. III. 2.5Y 4/3 olive brown silty very fine sand. Soft. Well sorted. No charcoal or staining. No FeO2, abrupt lower boundary. IV. 2.5Y 4/3 olive brown very fine sand/silt. No gravel, firm. No charcoal or FeO2, discontinuous. V. 2.5Y 3/3 Dark olive brown, very fine sandy silt. Soft. No charcoal or staining. No gravel. Abrupt discontinuous boundary. VI. 2.5Y 4/3 Olive brown. Alternating bedded layers of very fine sands and very fine sand/silts. No gravels. Soft. Diffuse boundaries. Comments 1OYR 3/2 very dark grayish brown loamy silt. Firm. Contains charcoal flecking and gravel, abrupt boundaries. Many insect casts. 10YR 3/2 very dark grayish brown loamy silt. Firm. Contains charcoal flecking and gravel, abrupt boundaries. Many insect casts. Layer dips towards the south. -A-horizon (Al): staining. No -A-horizon (A2): staining. No Page 30 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Figure 12. Test Unit 2, West Wall ESA Paragon April 2013 page 31 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 5.4.3 Test Unit 3 (Figures 13 and 14) Test Unit 3 was excavated immediately east of Trench 6. .;"Charcoal Krotovina 0 Root Figure 13. Test Unit 3, East Wall Page 32 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Table 3. Test Unit 3 Description Mechanically altered overburden consists of mixed matrix of overlying layers, including grass and historic/modern debris. Layer Type Stratigraphic Description I. Various bedded sands. Ranging from l OYR 3/3 dark brown, silty, very fine sand to 10YR 2/2 very dark brown fine -medium sands. Layers (at least 7 in number) generally appear massive although some lamina are discernible in restricted areas. Layers are wavy with abrupt boundaries and are continuous across the profile. Layer thickness ranges from 2- 7cm. All layers soft, though the finer ones tend to be more cohesive. No gravel. No associated cultural material. Some krotovina and root disturbance. There is a large root burn in south part of profile, but has no associated oxidation. The root is likely associated with the large burn of Feature 1 below. II. Various bedded silts and sands, ranging from 10YR 3/3 dark brown very fine sand, to 10YR 4/3 brown silt. There are at least 6 layers between 3 and 15 cm in thickness. There is a general fining upward trend. No gravel. The sandier matrix tends to be soft while the siltier is more firm. No cultural material. Boundaries are somewhat wavy and generally somewhat diffuse. There are no obvious lamina. There is quite a bit of bioturbation associated with the upper portion of II. The upper portion of profile (Ila) is strongly oxidized and was excavated as Feature 1. Comments There are two thin paleosols, both associated with the top of silty, very fine sand layers. The between Ia and Ib is discontinuous across the profile, and may have been eroded when The lower A -horizon, between Ib and Ic, is continuous, although it has been disturbed Both paleosols are 10YR 2/2 very dark brown silty very fine sand. Soft, no gravel, flecks and scattered charcoal staining. Insect casts are prevalent and range in size from cultural material. Matrix composition does not vary from the bedded silts of II, although there is no within the feature. Color, however, ranges from 7.5YR 3/4 dark brown to 7.5YR 4/6 strong 1 appears mixed; there is no internal stratification that might suggest the feature in multiple episodes. Feature boundaries are very abrupt. The north part of profile has been There is no associated cultural material, and no bone, shell, or ash are observed to be feature is interpreted as a stump or large root burn at high heat, causing soil oxidation. -A-horizons: upper A -horizon, Ia was deposited. by several krotovina. contains charcoal 0.5-2cm. No -Feature 1: stratification brown. Feature accumulated heavily bioturbated. associated. The ESA Paragon April 2013 page 33 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Figure 14. Test Unit 3, East Wall Page 34 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 5.4.4 Test Unit 4 (Figures 15 and 16) Test Unit 4 was excavated immediately north of Trench 12. ALTERED ovLatZENAROtN ,`Charcoal Krotovina Ci Root Figure 15. Test Unit 4, West Wall ESA Paragon April 2013 page 35 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Table 4. Test Unit 4 Description Mechanically altered overburden consists of mixed matrix of overlying layers, including grass and historic/modern debris. Layer Type Stratigraphic Description I. 2.5Y 3/1 to 3/2 very dark grayish brown fine to medium sands. Soft. No gravel. II. 2.5Y 4/3 olive brown silty/very fine sand. No gravel. I11. 2.5Y 3/2 very dark grayish brown, slightly silty very fine to fine sand. Soft. No gravel. Comments the west wall the feature has two layers. layer: 7.5YR 3/2 dark brown, slightly silty very fine -fine sand. Well sorted, soft. No Contains oxidized sediment, small flecks of calcined bone and shell, and charcoal with minor flecking. This matrix is not nearly as red (oxidized) as the feature fill which sampled. There are abrupt/very abrupt upper and lower boundaries, but laterally to south it is gradual having mixed with the surrounding matrix. The north boundary was truncated. layer: 10YR 2/2 very dark brown, slightly silty, very fine sand. Well sorted. Soft. No Contains charcoal staining and flecking. Characterized by numerous insect/worm casts in diameter or smaller. The lower boundary is abrupt/very abrupt. In the north the is the same as the lower layer though generally lighter in color due to more with the surrounding sediment. hole straddles the NW corner, though mostly contained in the west wall. It consists of postmold and the surround fill. The surrounding fill is generally uniform 2.5Y 3/2 brown fine -medium sands. There are a few small silty mottles, as well as a little bone, from Feature 1. The boundaries are abrupt to very abrupt. The fill of the post is 10YR brown, silty fine -medium sand mixed with 2.5Y 3/2 very dark grayish brown fine -medium of sediments suggests the post may have been removed and backfilled, rather than in place. The post appears to have bisected Feature 1, and therefore post-dates Feature 1. postmold also extended into the historic overburden removed prior to test unit excavation, the also date to the historic or even recent period. Feature 1: In • Upper gravel. staining was more • Lower gravel. lcm staining/matrix mixing Post hole: The two parts, a central very dark grayish shell and charcoal 2/2 very dark sands; the mixing decomposing Because the feature most • Page 36 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Figure 16. Test Unit 4, West Wall ESA Paragon April 2013 page 37 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45-K1-703 5.4.5 Test Unit 5 (Figures 17 and 18) Test Unit 5 was excavated immediately east of Trench 13. mEw*iI CALiy M.7EAeP of wQ Arry x ;xCharcoal .J Krotovina ( 400t Figure 17. Test Unit 5, North Wall Page 38 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Table 5. Test Unit 5 Description Mechanically altered overburden consists of mixed matrix of overlying layers, including grass and historic/modern debris. Layer Type Stratigraphic Description I. 10YR 2/2 very dark brown fine fine -medium sand to 10YR 3/3 dark brown very fine to fine sands. Soft. No gravel. Tend to appear massive though some lamina (horizontal) noted, particularly in uppermost portion, which tends to be courser than lower unit. Boundaries are fairly abrupt. The boundary with III is very abrupt. II. Various bedded slightly silty to silty very fine and fine sands. They range in color from 1 OYR 3/3 dark brown to 10YR 3/4 dark yellowish brown. There are at least five layers ranging in thickness from 3 to 7cm. The lower layers in the eastern part of profile are discontinuous. There is some organic root disturbance in the east. There is some light iron mottling associated with the uppermost layer adjacent to contact with I. III. 10YR 4/3 brown very fine sandy silts to loamy silts. No gravel. Firm. Though variable in texture, bedding could not be discerned. The layer has been truncated on the east flank creating a steep sided rounded trough. Lots of root disturbance. Comments There is a thin paleosol between IIa and IIb. It is 10YR 2/2 very dark brown silty very fine It is darkened by organic and charcoal staining, which is patchy and heavily influenced by cm). downdip of layers in Test Unit 5 is unanticipated. Dipping layers elsewhere within dip towards the south and perpendicular to the flow of the Duwamish River, as would be deposits laid down by overbank flooding. The evidence from Test Unit 6 suggests that a possibly a small gully, once existed to the east of this unit. -A-horizon: to fine sand. insect casts (0.5-2 The sharp, eastward the Permit Area expected of levee topographic low, ESA Paragon April 2013 page 39 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Figure 18. Test Unit 5, North Wall Page 40 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 5.4.6 Test Unit 6 (Figures 19 and 20) Test Unit 6 was excavated between the bunkhouse and Ray-Carrossino house. l"Gharcoal Krotovina 0 Root Figure 19. Test Unit 6, East Wall ESA Paragon April 2013 page 41 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45-K1-703 Table 6. Test Unit 6 Description Mechanically altered overburden consists of mixed matrix of overlying layers, including grass and historic/modern debris. Layer Type Stratigraphic Description I. Bedded sands. Range from slightly silty fine sand to fine -medium sand. Color varies from 10YR 2/2 very dark brown to 10YR 3/3 dark brown. Beds are generally distinct, but grade into one another. Matrix is soft and without gravel. Abrupt boundaries with II and III. No cultural material. II. Bedded silty fine and very fine sands ranging in color from 10YR 3/2 very dark brown to 1 OYR 3/4 dark yellowish brown. Matrix is moderately firm. No gravel. The unit has been heavily bioturbated making it difficult to discern bedding. The upper and lower boundaries of I are abrupt and wavy. Oxidation associated with root burn (south side of profile) is a 7.5YR 3/3 dark brown. III. Bedded silty very fine sands and very fine sandy silts. 10YR 4/3 brown. Generally uniform in color. Moderately firm. No gravel. No cultural material. Lots of bioturbation. A few roots. A little charcoal and some charcoal staining. No oxidation. Comments At the top of II is a thin discontinuous lens of light to moderate organic/charcoal staining, and flecking. Lots of insect casts (0.5-2cm diameter). The matrix is 10YR 2/2 very dark parts) silty very fine sand. No gravel. No cultural material. -A-horizon: some charcoal brown (in darkest Page 42 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Figure 20. Test Unit 6, East Wall ESA Paragon April 2013 page 43 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 5.4.7 Test Unit 7 (Figures 21 and 22) Test Unit 7 was excavated immediately south of Trench 16. KzClrarcoa! Krotovina0 Root Figure 21. Test Unit 7, South Wall Page 44 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Table 7. Test Unit 7 Description Mechanically altered overburden consists of mixed matrix from overlying layers, including saw -cut pig and cow bones (not collected). Layer Type Stratigraphic Description I. I. Bedded silty fine sand (10YR 3/3 dark brown) to fine -medium sand (10YR 2/2 very dark brown). Soft to slightly firm. 1% or less small gravels. Substantial bioturbation. Lenses are discontinuous or interrupted with root casts and krotovina. Scattered charcoal flecking. II. 10YR 5/3 brown slightly loamy silt. Moderately firm. Less than 1% small gravels. Some krotovina and occasional charcoal flecks. No cultural material. Comments in I, between 70 and 80 cmbs, contains upper oxidized layer and a lower charcoal sediment 7.5YR 4/6 strong brown silty very fine to fine sand, and contain a Little and charcoal flecks. It is patchy and mixed with charcoal stain and/or surrounding stained sediment: 7.5YR 3/1 very dark gray, slightly silty fine sand contains lots of 110 and 130 cmbs): Oxidized sediment, 7.5YR 3/4 dark brown, fine sand. It calcined shell flecking. There is charcoal flecking concentrated at the top (Figure 23). The fire modified rock (12 pieces). -Oxidized A -horizon rich layer. Oxidized burnt shell flecking sediment. Charcoal charcoal flecking. -Feature 1 (between contains some feature contains ESA Paragon April 2013 page 45 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Figure 22. Test Unit 7, South Wall Page 46 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Figure 23. Trench 7, Feature 1 (Southeast facing view) 6.0 INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS During site delineation at Duwamish Gardens, ESA Paragon monitored 20 geoprobes, and excavated 17 site delineation trenches (82.2 linear meters) and seven test excavation units (8.66 m3). The site delineation plan (Lockwood 2012b) refers to research questions (or domains), posed by Blukis Onat (2010c:333-3456) potentially addressed by site delineation. The research domains identified by Blukis Onat include site formation processes; resource specialization; environmental enhancement and settlement system development; artifact types and distributions, trade and regional contacts; ethnographic correspondence; and additional research questions, including (especially) determination of site boundaries and nature of remaining deposits (Blukis Onat 2010c:345). We believe that the results of 2012 site delineation address the issues of site boundaries and nature of remaining deposits, and site and landform formation processes (discussed below). Due to the paucity of prehistoric artifacts and features encountered during trenching and test excavations, our results do not shed new light on other research domains, such as ethnographic correspondence or resource specialization. ESA Paragon April 2013 page 47 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45-K1-703 6.1 Precontact Archaeological Resources Table 8. Summary Results Trench/Test Unit (TU) Recent/Historic Artifacts Precontact Artifacts Precontact Features Subsurface Paleosol/Charcoal 1 Yes No No No 2 Yes No No No 3 Yes No No Yes, 2 distinct with charcoal 4 Yes No No Probable, 1 faint with charcoal 5 Yes No No Probable, 1 faint, sloping, with charcoal 6 Yes No No Yes, 1 distinct with charcoal 7 Yes No No Yes, 2 faint, possibly disturbed with charcoal. 8 Yes No No Partially carbonized logs in disturbed context. 9 Yes No Small pocket of crushed bone/shell (possibly krotovina) No 10 Yes No No Charcoal 11 Yes, deeply buried milled wood. No No No 12 Yes No Oxidized soil with charcoal and ash. Yes 13 Yes No No Yes, 1 distinct with charcoal. 14 Yes No No No 15 Yes No No No 16 Yes 5 pieces of lithic debitage Oxidized soil with charcoal and ash. Charcoal 17 Yes No Small pocket of crushed bone/shell (possibly krotovina) No Page 48 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Trench/Test Unit (TU) Recent/Historic Artifacts Precontact Artifacts Precontact Features Subsurface Paleosol/Charcoal TU 1 Yes No No 2 with charcoal TU 2 Yes No No 2 with charcoal TU 3 Yes No No 2 with charcoal TU 4 Yes, plus postmold 1 large fire modified rock Oxidized soil with charcoal, bone and shell No TU 5 Yes No No 1 with charcoal TU 6 Yes No No 1 with charcoal TU 7 Yes No Oxidized soil with charcoal, shell, and fire modified rock (n = 12) 1 with charcoal and oxidation 6.1.1 Distribution of Resources Results from 2008 shovel and shovel -auger probes (Johnson and Hoyt 2008) and 2012 site delineation trenching and test units demonstrate that in situ, precontact archaeological deposits extend beyond previously recorded boundaries for 45 -KI -703. We suggest the site extends approximately 150 feet (45 m) west from East Marginal Way South (Figure 7). Although the origin of an ephemeral pocket of crushed shell or bone observed within Trench 9 could not be determined, the proximity of this find to the location of a 2008 shovel probe that produced a chipped stone flake suggests the site extends at least as far as the bunkhouse. Based on the presence of a negative 2004 shovel probe north of the asphalt driveway, and negative results in Trenches 13 and 14, the site does not appear to extend significantly north of its current boundaries; ESA Paragon is unable to conclude that an ephemeral pocket of crushed bone or shell observed in Trench 17 is anthropogenic. Due to a lack of provenience, the presence of a chipped stone core at ground surface southeast of the metal sheds does not support extending the site to this location; the specimen could have been moved upward by bioturbation in this location, or could have been moved to this location by recent and historic activities, such as grading, landscaping, and so forth. The site delineation corroborates results of 2008 subsurface survey that did not find evidence for precontact human activity west or north of the bunkhouse. It is possible that people did not use these parts of the landform in the past, or they may have used these parts of the landform in ways that did not leave a detectible archaeological signature. Depth of precontact resources is below 70 cmbs (28 inches); excavations exceeding this depth have the potential to disturb any buried precontact archaeological resources that may exist. ESA Paragon April 2013 page 49 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45-K1-703 6.1.2 Comparison with 2005 Data Recovery The types of precontact artifacts and features recorded during site delineation are consistent with those recorded during 2005 data recovery. ESA Paragon recorded chipped stone, fire modified rock, animal bone, shell, and anthropogenic fire features, each of which was represented in 2005. However, precontact resources recorded in 2012 differ from 2005 in important ways discussed below. 6.1.3 Artifacts Although the 2012 artifact assemblage is far smaller than the 2005 data recovery assemblage, it should be remembered that the volume of matrix subject to controlled excavation was also smaller — 8.6 m3 in 2012 versus 29.9 m3 in 2005. Rather than comparing absolute artifact count, it is density of artifacts (count/volume) that provides a better basis to compare the assemblages. Table 9 compares artifact densities in 2012 test units containing cultural material (Test Units 4, 6 and 7 only) to 2005 data recovery units. Test Units 1, 2, 3, and 5 are omitted from this discussion because they neither are within the expanded boundaries proposed for 45 -KI -703, nor did they yield any artifacts, so including them would further skew comparisons between the 2005 and 2012 assemblages. Table 9. Comparison of 2005 and 2012 Artifact Counts and Densities at 45 -KI -703 Artifact Type Precontact Artifact Count (NISP) and Density (NISP/m3) 2005 Data Recovery (volume = 29.2 m3)A 2012Site Delineation— Units 4, 6 and 7 (volume = 3.9 m3) Fire modified rock 10,308 (353.0) 15 (3.8) Chipped Stone 1,885 (64.6) 0 (0.0)B Bone 2,404 (82.3) 1 (0.3) Shell 1,217 (41.7) 5 (1.28) Ochre 89 (3.0) 0 (0.0) A. B. C. Excludes Test Unit T3. 5 chipped stone artifacts were recovered in Trench 16, near Test Unit 7. Shell flecks were observed in Test Units 4, 6, and 7, but were not quantified. Artifact densities within the newly mapped portion of 45 -KI -703 are well below those seen during 2005 data recovery at 45 -KI -703 (Table 1). For example, in 2005, 10,308 pieces of fire modified rock (FMR) were recovered from 29.2 m3 of matrix (Blocks A -K, excluding Test Unit T3), yielding an artifact density of 353.0 per m3, while in 2012, 15 pieces of FMR were recovered in 3.9 m3 of matrix for a density of 3.8 per m3; the difference in FMR density is nearly one hundredfold. A similar pattern of significantly lower artifact density is seen across all artifact types. Simply put, for same volume of matrix, there are far fewer artifacts within the newly mapped portion of 45 -KI -703. Richness is a measure of the number of types or kinds of a particular phenomenon — animal species, artifacts, stars — within a sample or assemblage. A sample or assemblage with a larger number of different types is described as having greater richness than one with fewer types. Page 50 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Comparing richness between different samples or assemblages is one approach to determining whether significant differences may exist. The 2012 assemblage is less rich than the 2005 assemblage in terms of number (or diversity) of artifact types, artifact forms, and raw materials represented. Some artifact types that were recorded in 2005, such as ochre pieces, were not found in 2012. Among artifact types that were found in both 2005 and 2012, the 2012 assemblage contains fewer artifact forms and raw materials. For example, LeTourneau (2010:174) recognized ten raw material types in the 2005 chipped stone assemblage, while only two raw material types were recognized in all 2012 work (a total of five chipped stone flakes came from Trench 16). Similarly, while the 2005 chipped stone assemblage contained cores, flakes and a variety of tools, the 2012 chipped stone assemblage contained only flakes (if the core found at ground surface is set aside). Conversely, the 2012 total assemblage does not contain any artifact types, artifact forms, or raw materials not previously recognized in 2005. Greater richness in the 2005 assemblage is not unexpected, if only because there is a simple relationship between sample size and richness: larger samples are more likely to include rare or new types, and, therefore, by definition, have greater richness. Conversely, smaller samples are less likely to contain rare or new types. Therefore, the low artifact densities seen in newly mapped portions of 45 -KI -703 (if representative of actual conditions) suggest that further archaeological work within this area would be likely to result in not only few finds, but also few new types of finds, when compared with the 2005 data recovery. 6.1.4 Features A comparison of features encountered in 2005 and 2012 corroborates the suggestion that human activity was more intensive or more frequent (or both) in the vicinity of the 2005 data recovery than in the newly mapped portions of the site. Features, particularly oxidized and/or charcoal - rich sandy features, were common in the 2005 work; many, but not all, of the features were thick (approximately thicker than 10 cm), laterally extensive, and contained bone, shell, ash, and/or fire modified rock. Features encountered in 2012 site delineation interpreted as anthropogenic fire features appear generally similar in thickness, color (orange or orange -black layered), and depth to several 2005 features, but they did not extend as far laterally, nor did they tend to contain the quantity (or quality) of food remains and fire modified rock found in some 2005 features. One exception is Test Unit 7, Feature 1, which produced 12 pieces of fire modified rock, one small bone fragment, and three seeds. One feature type not found in 2012 was the black charcoal -infused sand features (SB features) common in 2005. The absence of this type of feature in the 2012 site delineation may indicate some functional difference exists between them and the oxidized orange features, found in both years. 6.1.5 Paleo-Landscape Results from trenching suggest that two buried paleosols extend up to 330 feet (100 m) to the west of East Marginal Way South. The paleosols represent periods of time in the past during ESA Paragon April 2013 page 51 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 which sufficient landform stability existed to permit soil development. Based on depth, the paleosols appear to predate the historic use of the property, and may be contemporaneous with previously identified precontact occupations at 45 -KI -703. From an archaeological perspective, people might be expected to prefer stable landscapes for occupation and subsistence; if so, buried paleosols should be correlated with higher densities of cultural remains. Excavation and screening in Test Units 1, 2, 3, and 5, however, resulted in a lack of any artifact evidence for precontact human activity west and north of the bunkhouse. It is possible that portions of the landscape were stable for long periods of time but were not used by humans, or were used in ways that left no archaeological signature. Buried paleosols, in and of themselves, do not appear to be markers for precontact human activity at Duwamish Gardens. 6.2 Recent and Historic Archaeological Resources Recent and historic artifacts were encountered within the upper 30 to 50 cm of every trench and test unit. Artifacts, such as brick fragments, corroded metal fasteners, and window glass, lacked temporally -diagnostic traits. Some patterning related differential functioning in separate areas of the farmstead was discerned. For example, Trenches 6, 7, 8 and Test Units 2 and 3 near the location of former greenhouses contained abundant fragments of terra cotta flower pots and flat glass clearly related the structures. On the other hand, Trench 16 and Test Units 6 and 7, located in the residential area defined by the Ray-Carrossino house and bunkhouse, contained abundant saw -cut pig and cow bones (not collected), representing domestic food waste accumulated during recent and historic occupation of the farmstead . Although these broad patterns are easily detectable, they do not appear to provide significant new information regarding the history of the farmstead beyond that which has already been recorded by Courtois et al. (1999) and Blukis Onat (2010). Coupled with the widespread appearance of recent/historic remains is the presence in places of thick layers of historic fill, including imported sand, gravel, cobbles, and even concrete rubble and asphalt. Fill extends 5 feet (1.5 m) or more in depth along the southern and eastern edges of the Permit Area. Although fill is thinner towards the center of the Permit Area areas, its widespread presence suggests significant remodeling of the landform, likely including grading, during the historic period. 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 Revise Site Boundaries The presence of sparse cultural material discovered during of delineation at 45 -KI -703 support extending site boundaries approximately 150 feet (45 m) westward from previously mapped site boundaries. The revised western extent of the site encompasses the location of a positive shovel - auger probe that yielded a single basalt flake in 2008 (Johnson and Hoyt 2008) near the bunkhouse, as well as Trench 9, which exhibited an ephemeral deposit of highly crushed shell or bone during the current delineation study. However, the revised site boundaries do not include any artifact or other cultural material concentrations; artifacts and fire modified rock densities recovered from the 2005 excavation are 100 times higher than those found in the extended site boundary. As revised, the boundaries of 45 -KI -703 encompass approximately 0.25 acres. Page 52 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Additionally, the site also likely extends beneath East Marginal Way South, and an unknown distance towards the east. Future projects in this area should take into account the likelihood for encountering additional archaeological resources associated with 45 -KI -703. 7.2 Assessment of Effect Based on the National Register nomination form 45 -KI -703 "is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D in the area of prehistoric archaeology...It has the potential to provide information regarding several aspects of late prehistoric settlement in this region, including chronology, technology, geomorphic setting, settlement organization, and trade" (LeTourneau and Blukis Onat 2004:11). Data recovery excavations in 2005 recovered significant information about the site, and confirmed its NRHP eligibility. As described above, the site boundary has been expanded. Proposed project construction excavations to finish elevations of 20 feet or deeper have the potential to intersect precontact archaeological deposits associated with 45 -KI -703. These project activities will take place in a peripheral portion of the site, as evidenced by artifact densities 100 times lower than in the 2005 data recovery area. The core areas of the site will not be affected by this project. The recent evaluation work to delineate the site boundaries indicates the information potential in the peripheral areas is limited. The peripheral area of the site does not appear to contain any new or additional information about chronology, technology, geomorphic setting, settlement organization or trade. The proposed work will not adversely affect the integrity or characteristics of the site that qualify it for inclusion in the National Register. ESA Paragon recommends the project will result in No Adverse Effect to the Criterion D information potential of 45 -KI -703. In order to support the finding of No Adverse Effect (36CFR800.5(b)), ESA Paragon extends two recommendations. 7.2.1 Design Considerations With the completion of site delineation efforts, the Duwamish Gardens design team will resume developing a preferred design. It is unlikely that the project can be designed to completely avoid 45 -KI -703 while still fulfilling the intent of the project. However, ESA Paragon recommends the design team should attempt to minimize impacts to the site by confining the ground disturbing to the peripheral portions of the site. 7.2.2 Archaeological Resources Monitoring ESA Paragon recommends archaeological monitoring by a professional archaeologist during construction under the terms of a Corps -approved archaeological resources monitoring plan (ARMP). The ARMP will specify preconstruction training requirements, appropriate levels of monitoring effort, and protocols to be followed in the event that new and significant archaeological resources are discovered during construction. ESA Paragon April 2013 page 53 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY Blukis Onat, Astrida R. 2010a 1. Introduction. In The Duwamish River Bend Site, Data Recovery at 45 -KI -703, edited by Astrida R. Blukis Onat, pp. 1-8. Prepared by BOAS, Inc. Submitted to Sound Transit. On file at DAHP, Olympia. 2010b 2. Background. In The Duwamish River Bend Site, Data Recovery at 45 -KI -703, edited by Astrida R. Blukis Onat, pp. 9-30. Prepared by BOAS, Inc. Submitted to Sound Transit. On file at DAHP, Olympia. Blukis Onat, Astrida R., Philippe D. LeTourneau, Julie K. Stein, Roger A. Kiers, Timothy L. Cowan, George B. Bishop, Kathryn Bernick, Michael Etnier, Kristine Bovy, Sissel Johannssen, Linda Scott Cummings, R.A. Varney 2010 The Duwamish River Bend Site, Data Recovery at 45 -KI -703. Prepared by BOAS, Inc. Submitted to Sound Transit. On file at DAHP, Olympia. Courtois, Shirley L., Katheryn H, Crafft, Catherine Wickwire, James C. Bard, and Robin McClintock 1999 Final Technical Report [on] Historic and Prehistoric Archaeological Sites, Historic Resources, Native American Traditional Cultural Properties, [and] Paleontological Sites, Final Environmental Impact Statement. Central Link Light Rail Transit Project. Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Seattle), Seattle. On file at ESA Paragon, Seattle. Dragovich, Joe D., Patrick T. Pringle, and Timothy Walsh 1994 Extent and Geometry of the Mid -Holocene Osceola Mudflow in the Puget Lowland — Implications for Holocene Sedimentation and Paleogeography. Washington Geology 22(3):3- 26. Johnson, Paula, and Bryan Hoyt 2008 Letter to Dennis Clark, King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks, RE: Subsurface Investigation of the Proposed Duwamish Gardens. Prepared by Paragon Research Associates, Seattle. On file at DAHP, Olympia. LeTourneau, Philippe 2010 8. Lithic Artifacts. In The Duwamish River Bend Site, Data Recovery at 45 -KI -703, edited by Astrida R. Blukis Onat, pp. 165-212. Prepared by BOAS, Inc. Submitted to Sound Transit. On file at DAHP, Olympia. 2004 Archaeological Site Form, 45 -KI -703. Prepared by BOAS, Inc. On file at DAHP, Olympia. LeTourneau, Philippe and Astrida R. Blukis Onat 2004 National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form — 45KI703. Prepared by BOAS, Inc., Seattle. On file at DAHP, Olympia. Page 54 ESA Paragon April 2013 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 Lockwood, Christopher C. 2012a Duwamish Gardens — Results of Contaminated Soil Geoprobe Observation and Cultural Resources Soil Analysis. Prepared by ESA Paragon. Prepared for J.A. Brennan Associates, PLLC, Seattle, and the City of Tukwila. On file, ESA Paragon, Seattle. 2012b Site Delineation Plan — Duwamish Gardens. Prepared by ESA Paragon. Prepared for J.A. Brennan Associates, PLLC, Seattle, and the City of Tukwila. On file, ESA Paragon, Seattle. Sound Transit 2001 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Tukwila Freeway Route. Central Link Light Rail Transit Project: Seattle, Tukwila and SeaTac, Washington. Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority and U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle. Stein, Julie K., and Roger A. Kiers 2010 4. Geoarchaeology. In The Duwamish River Bend Site, Data Recovery at 45 -KI -703, edited by Astrida R. Blukis Onat, pp. 51-72. Prepared by BOAS, Inc. Submitted to Sound Transit. On file at DAHP, Olympia. Troost, Kathy G., and Derek B. Booth 2008 Geology of Seattle and the Seattle area, Washington. In Landslides and Engineering Geology of the Seattle, Washington, Area, edited by Rex L. Baum, Jonathan W. Godt, and Lynn M. Highland, pp. 1-36. Reviews in Engineering Geology XX. Geological Society of America, Boulder. Troost, Kathy G., Derek B. Booth, and William T. Laprade 2003 Quaternary Geology of Seattle. In Western Cordillera and Adjacent Areas, edited by Terry Swanson, pp. 267-284. Field Guide No. 4. Geological Society of America, Boulder. Zehfuss, Paul F. 2005 Distal Records of Sandy Holocene Lahars from Mount Rainier, Washington. Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle. Zehfuss, Paul F., Brian F. Atwater, James W. Vallance, Henry Brenniman, and Thomas A. Brown 2003 Holocene Lahars and Their By -Products along the Historical Path of the White River between Mount Rainier and Seattle. In Western Cordillera and Adjacent Areas, edited by Terry Swanson, pp. 209-223. Field Guide No. 4. Geological Society of America, Boulder. ESA Paragon April 2013 page 55 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 APPENDIX A: MEMORANDUM DUWAMISH GARDENS - RESULTS OF CONTAMINATED SOIL GEOPROBE OBSERVATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES SOIL ANALYSIS (JULY 6, 2012) ESA Paragon April 2013 Appendix A ESAParagon memorandum 5309 Shilshole Avenue lV\„ Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 206.789.9658 phone 206.789.9684 fax www.esassoc.com date July 6, 2012 to Jim Brennan and Mike Perfetti, J.A. Brennan & Associates from Chris Lockwood, Principal Investigator subject Duwamish Gardens — Results of Contaminated Soil Geoprobe Observation and Cultural Resources Soil Analysis In support of the City of Tukwila's Duwamish Gardens project, ESA Paragon conducted a site visit on May 1 and 2, 2012, to observe contaminated soil geoprobing to assess the potential for buried resources associated with archaeological site 45 -KI -703 (Duwamish River Bend Site) within the project Permit Area (Figure 1). This report provides preliminary results of this observation, including soil organic matter analysis. Project Background The Duwamish Gardens project would construct shallow water salmonid habitat area along the north (right) bank of the Duwamish River, on three parcels located at 11245 East Marginal Way South in Tukwila (Parcels 102304- 9060, 102304-9055, and 102304-9071). The legal description for the project area is the NW 1/4 of Section 10, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, on the Seattle South Quadrangle 7.5' Series topographic map. The project will require a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), making it subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Site 45 -KI -703, a precontact Native American archaeological site, is located at the southeast corner of the Permit Area. Data recovery at 45 -KI -703 was conducted by BOAS, Inc. between 2004 and 2005 (Blukis Onat 2010). Precontact archaeological remains were encountered between approximately 80 cm and 160 cm (31 to 63 inches) below ground surface A large footing for the Sound Transit Light Rail is now situated at the location of 45 -KI - 703. At completion of data recovery, site boundaries had not been delineated beyond Sound Transit's Area of Potential Effects, and the site was believed to extend outside the mapped boundaries. As part of due diligence prior to property acquisition by the City of Tukwila, Paragon Research Associates, LLC (now known as ESA Paragon) conducted archaeological shovel/auger probes within the parcels in 2008 (Johnson and Hoyt 2008). Sparse evidence for additional precontact cultural resources (lithic flakes) were encountered in two shovel probes, up to approximately 45 meters west of 45 -KI -703. Several other probes contained non- diagnostic, modern/historic artifacts. ESA Paragon was retained by J.A. Brennan & Associates to assist with Section 106 compliance for the current phase of the Duwamish Gardens project. Observation of Contaminated Soil Geoprobes On May 1 and 2, 2012, ESN Northwest, under the direction of Cody Johnson of Shannon & Wilson, advanced and sampled 19 geoprobes (#1-19) within the Permit Area; Chris Lockwood of ESA Paragon observed this geoprobing. At the request of ESA Paragon, ESN Northwest advanced one additional geoprobe (#20 in Figures 2 and 3); this probe was not sampled by Shannon & Wilson (and is not the hand-augered probe appearing as "GP - 20" in Shannon & Wilson's "Limited Environmental Characterization Report" [in prep]). Geoprobes were direct push with a 2 inch outside -diameter (O.D.) casing advanced using percussive force. Soil samples were retrieved in 4 foot long, 2 inch diameter plastic liners. Liners were immediately split lengthwise by ESN Northwest, and logged and subsampled by Shannon & Wilson. At that time, samples were preliminarily inspected by ESA Paragon, resealed with duct tape, and stockpiled for additional analysis by ESA Paragon. Analysis ESA Paragon anticipated limited artifact recovery in the small diameter geoprobes; as a result our initial research design called for post -field quantification (and taxonomic identification, if possible) of macrobotanical remains (i.e., charcoal and carbonized seeds) from the geoprobes as a proxy for precontact cultural activity across the landform. ESA Paragon's preliminary inspection of the geoprobes indicated the presence of little to no charcoal in the majority of the probes, and macrobotanical analysis was ruled out as a viable analytical approach ESA Paragon interpreted the 2A horizon as a possible continuation of the culture -bearing black sand (SB) unit reported during data recovery (Blukis Onat and LeTourneau 2010:77). ESA Paragon revised its research design to include soil organic matter quantification using the loss -on -ignition (LOI) method, following the approach of Stein and Kiers (2010), who used soil organic matter analysis at 45 -KI -703 and detected enhanced levels of anthropogenic organic matter within the black sand at the site,. LOI is a relatively quick and inexpensive chemical method to quantify combustible material, primarily organic matter, within a soil sample. Under ESA Paragon's revised approach, for each geoprobe, individual soil layers were identified visually by color and matrix material, and passed through nested 1/4" and 1/8"geological sieves. Soil peds were broken by gently pushing them through the screens by hand (gloved). Material retained on the screens was visually inspected for artifacts; no prehistoric artifacts were encountered during screening. ESA Paragon screened all soil layers of all geoprobes to depths of 12 feet below ground surface. Soil layers observed in the geoprobes generally consisted of a series of alluvial sands and silts capped by a thick layer of recent/historic anthropogenic fill containing mixed gravel and sand, extending across most of the landform from surface to approximately 3.3-3.5 feet below surface. The anthropogenic fill, which contained small amounts of brick, concrete, window glass, coal and charcoal, was divisible into two layers — an upper, dark brown sandy silt/silty sand layer (1A horizon), and upper lower brown sandy silt/silty sand layer (1B horizon). Below the 1B horizon was a layer of dark brown/gray, silty sand/sandy silt, extending from approximately 3.3-3.5 feet to 7-10 feet below surface. As with the anthropogenic 1A/1B horizons, this layer was divisible into an upper, dark brown/gray, sandy silt/silty sand layer (2A horizon), and a lower, brown, sandy silty/silty sand layer (2B horizon). Soil color of the 2A horizon tended to be darker in probes in the eastern half of the Permit Area. Below the bottom of the 2B horizon, soils consisted primarily of brown/light brown sand and silt. For the 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B soil horizons (see below) for each geoprobe, the pan fraction was homogenized by mixing with a spoon, and a 5-10 gram subsample withdrawn, bagged, and shipped to ALS Minerals in Reno, Nevada for LOI analysis and quantification; 2B horizon samples were not submitted for geoprobes #10, #18, and #20 due to poor recovery. After arriving at ALS Minerals, samples were dried at 60°C, pulverized, weighed, heated to 1000°C, and then reweighed. Heating soils samples to this temperature causes combustion of all organic matter and carbonates, and vaporization of any remaining pore water. The difference between pre -heating sample 2 weight and post -heating sample weight represents the total amount of combined organic matter, carbonates, and pore water. Since pore water content is statistically insignificant or negligible, and no evidence for shell or other probable carbonate materials were noted by ESA Paragon during LOI sample preparation, all weight difference for Duwamish Garden LOI samples is assumed to represent organic matter combustion. Results are presented in Table 1. Soil Organic Matter Results Unit 1A Unit 1A (Figure 2), the modern soil surface A -horizon, contained an average of 6.69% organic matter (range: 2.19-16.10%). This average value conforms with values of 6-7% obtained by Stein and Kiers (2010:63) from 0 cm to 20 cm below surface. They suggest that organic matter levels of 6% to 7% are "low for surface soils maintaining grass vegetation" Stein and Kiers (2010:63). One explanation for values below this level is the extensive use of imported fill material, such as sand and driveway gravel, across much of the site; these inorganic materials would tend to return lower than expected values. One pattern that emerged in the current work is the tendency for higher organic matter levels the southern half of the Project Area, near the river channel; this pattern may reflect the introduction of inorganic materials in the northern half of the Permit Area. Unit 1A contained significant amounts of imported gravel in many geoprobes. Geoprobes # 10, #15, #18, and #20 contained non- diagnostic brick or window glass in Unit 1A. Unit 1B Unit 1B is the modern soil B -horizon underlying Unit 1A. This unit contained an average of 2.94% organic matter (range: 1.14-8.13%), which conforms to values obtained by Stein and Kiers (2010:62) from 30 cm to 80 cm below surface for 45 -KI -703. Soil organic matter content was higher in Unit 1B than Unit 1A in only two probes (#10 and #13); in both cases it was the Unit IA values that were exceptionally low, due probably to the presence of inorganic fill materials. Unit 2A Unit 2A (Figure 3) contained an average of 4.07% organic matter (range: 1.10-21.90%). This average value is skewed by an outlier value (21.90%) in geoprobe #15. Stein and Kiers (2010:62-63) report values of 8-10% from 90 cm to 100 cm within the black sand at 45 -KI -703; a value of 7.66% in geoprobe #11 is comparable. The geoprobe #15 value of 21.90% is unusually high, but would require further study to determine the reason for this. Values of 4.85% in geoprobe #8, and 4.73% in geoprobe #18 fall within the upper 75th percentile for all probes, and although below Stein and Kiers' values may denote some residual degree of anthropogenic enhancement that decreases with increasing distance from 45 -KI -703. The general pattern seen is that organic matter levels are highest in the eastern half of the Project Area. Low organic matter in geoprobe #17 is unexpected, given its proximity to 45 -KI -703. Unit 2B Unit 2B contained an average of 2.77% organic matter (range: 1.17-4.91%). Stein and Kiers (2010:63) obtained values less than 2% from a similar unit beneath the black sand, suggesting these results are generally comparable. Interpretation of LOI Results Results of the LOI analysis exhibit spatial patterning of organic matter levels in both lA and 2A. For Unit 1A, soil organic matter levels are higher in the southern half of the Permit Area. For Unit 2A, soil organic matter levels are higher in the eastern half of the Permit Area, with organic matter levels are above average in geoprobes #8, #11, #15, and #18. Lower 2A values in geoprobes closer to 45 -KI -703 (#9, #12, #13, #16, #17) may be attributable to subsurface disturbance from previous building construction, including basement excavation. Additional Field Observations ESA Paragon conducted random, informal surface survey of the Permit Area during observation of the contaminated soil geoprobing. Extensive areas of low mole hills were observed in the northeast quadrant of the 3 Permit Area. Most mole hills contained some admixture of non-diagnostic brick, window glass, coal and charcoal at their surface. Significantly, one mole hill north of geoprobe #20, and approximately 70 meters northwest of 45 - KI -703, had a small chalcedony lithic core, along with brick and charcoal, at the surface. ESA Paragon's interpretation of this surface find is that it is precontact archaeological material disturbed and brought to the surface through bioturbation (turning and mixing of sediments by rodents or insects) , suggesting the possible presence of additional (probably disturbed) precontact archaeological remains in this location. If this artifact is assumed to be roughly in its primary lateral context, then archaeological materials associated with 45 -KI -703 appear to extend somewhat west of geoprobe #7. Recommendations Field survey results from 2008, in conjunction with the findings of this study, suggest that archaeological remains associated with 45 -KI -703 extend into the Permit Area within a buried A -horizon located at approximately 3.3-3.5 feet below surface. Limited chemical and artifact data indicate that 45 -KI -703 extends only into the eastern half of the Permit Area, and that artifact density may be low to very low, especially when compared to artifact density results from data recovery at 45 -KI -703. Furthermore, portions of the Permit Area, including archaeological remains, have been previously disturbed due to construction and bioturbation. Current designs for the Duwamish Garden project call for extensive excavations (Figure 4) with the potential to expose additional archaeological resources associated with 45 -KI -703. The significance and research potential of these additional areas of 45 -KI -703 is currently unknown. A program of expedient test units and shallow trenching would aid in further delineating the site and assessing the impact of bioturbation and construction on precontact archaeological remains. ESA Paragon recommends excavating eight, 1.0 meter by 1.0 meter test units in the eastern half of the Permit Area to assess the types, quantity, and research potential of artifacts and/or features associated with 45 -KI -703, including the extent of bioturbation. Approximately three units would be placed in the northeast quadrant and five units in southeast quadrant of the Permit Area, but precise unit locations would be determined in reference to the waste designation grid map being developed by Shannon & Wilson (in prep). A backhoe would be used to remove the top 2.5 feet of soil in thin lift; this material would be screened through 1/4" mesh. Shovel skim excavation would then extend from 2.5 to 5.0 feet below surface in arbitrary 10 cm (4 inch) levels. Soil stains, krotovina, and other features would be documented, but would not be excavated as natural stratigraphic layers. All materials would be screened through 1/4" mesh. Unit profiles would be photographed and drawn. Summary Recent archaeological observations (informal survey and chemical analysis) at Duwamish Gardens indicate that archaeological site 45 -KI -703 extends into the eastern half of the project Permit Area, at an approximate depth of 3-4 feet below ground surface. Excavations for the project, as currently designed, could intersect these archaeological remains. Due to bioturbation and previous construction, it is not known whether the remains are in stratigraphic context, or what research potential they retain. If avoidance is not feasible, ESA Paragon recommends limited test excavation in the eastern part of the Permit Area to assess the types, quantity, and research potential of these precontact archaeological remains. 4 References Blukis Onat, Astrida R. (editor) 2010 The Duwamish River Bend Site Data Recovery at 45 -KI -703. Prepared by BOAS, Inc. Seattle. Submitted to Sound Transit. On file at ESA Paragon, Seattle. Blukis Onat, Astrida R., and Philippe D. LeTourneau 2010 Section 6. Cultural Stratigraphy. In The Duwamish River Bend Site Data Recovery at 45 -KI -703, edited by Astrida R. Blukis Onat, pp. 77-132-73. Prepared by BOAS, Inc. Seattle. Submitted to Sound Transit. On file at ESA Paragon, Seattle. Johnson, Paula, and Bryan Hoyt 2008 Subsurface Investigation of the Proposed Duwamish Gardens. Letter report to Dennis Clark, King County Water and Land Resources Division. Prepared by Paragon Research Associates, Seattle. On file at ESA Paragon, Seattle. Stein, Julie K., and Roger A. Kiers 2010 Section 4. Geoarchaeology. In The Duwamish River Bend Site Data Recovery at 45 -KI -703, edited by Astrida R. Blukis Onat, pp. 51-73. Prepared by BOAS, Inc. Seattle. Submitted to Sound Transit. On file at ESA Paragon, Seattle. 5 Table 1.Soil Organic Matter 6 Percent Soil Organic Matter by Soil Layer BORING 1A 1B 2A 2B 1 4.39 3.03 2.84 3.57 2 16.10 1.87 2.49 3.09 3 5.87 2.43 2.35 3.58 4 3.76 1.82 3.01 3.74 5 2.64 1.67 1.43 1.35 6 11.85 5.50 1.61 2.37 7 5.21 1.14 2.92 3.20 8 5.31 1.75 4.85 1.71 9 12.10 8.13 3.91 1.57 10 2.99 4.56 2.98 No Sample 11 7.19 1.96 7.66 4.91 12 3.63 1.57 2.96 1.26 13 2.19 3.39 3.07 1.17 14 6.37 3.61 3.46 3.19 15 4.77 1.18 21.90 3.29 16 6.61 2.77 2.66 4.20 17 12.25 2.31 1.10 1.25 18 6.97 5.10 4.73 No Sample 19 4.31 1.70 3.06 3.63 20 9.38 3.33 2.44 No Sample 6 0 500 Ea==3 meters Base Maps: USGS 7.5' Seattle South, WA, 1983 and Des Moines WA, 1949 rev. 1995 Metric Quad. Figure 1. Duwamish Gardens Project Vicinity. 7 Figure 2. Soil Organic Matter in Soil Horizon 1A. 8 Figure 3. Soil Organic Matter in Soil Horizon 2A. 9 N t C C `4 O u SCI Ccn .- c •O C G = S 4 _< m N O a1 2o`—° o oN Figure 4. Schematic of Proposed Excavation Disturbance in Relation to Soil Horizon 2A r..proximate extent of area o be excavated to or below 2A soil horizon n A w a me 20 Ott s &tr. si A} r a f 0 IV • 5 'r Q • • �9 • • 9 s• ♦ 10 �• • s_ Or 14 •rMi.is*rr ♦4+� Q • 4112 17 Cr8 4.+ its.a.ea Rrr.•■.r.. Ir Oat. w•1P legend • Oeoprobea(#j 1 ( Parcel Boundary 11 Hgkr Soil Organic LCaref Matter SOURCE:ESA. 2012 AEX Express (7000) Aeriat Duusemrsh Gardens .120122 Soil Organic Matter 2A Horizon Tukwila, Washington Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 APPENDIX B: ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE DELINEATION PLAN (AUGUST 2012) ESA Paragon April 2013 Appendix B ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE DELINEATION PLAN — DUWAMISH GARDENS Prepared by Chris Lockwood, Ph.D., ESA Paragon At the direction of the US Army Corps of Engineers, ESA Paragon has developed this archaeological site delineation plan for the City of Tukwila's Duwamish Gardens project. Archaeological survey and archaeological monitoring of geotechnical geoprobing suggests that archaeological remains associated with precontact site 45 -KI -703 extend into the Duwamish Gardens Permit Area. The Permit Area also has a lengthy history of use as a farmstead and residence since the 1880s. Further investigations are being conducted for the purposes of: 1) delineating the extent of archaeological remains associated with archaeological site 45 -KI -703, and 2) assessing the nature of site deposits that may be present outside current site boundaries. The delineation efforts will also be used to determine if there is a separate historic archaeological site related to the historic farm. The purpose of the site delineation is to assist the City of Tukwila and their design team with evaluating the feasibility of constructing fish habitat improvements as well as understanding the potential cultural resources tasks that might be necessary if the project is to move forward. PROJECT LOCATION The proposed fish habitat project is located along the Duwamish River in the City of Tukwila on Parcels 1023049060, 1023049055, and 1023049071 (Figure 1). REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT This project is expected to require a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) which would require compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The City of Tukwila has prepared a pre -application submittal and has conducted several meetings with Section 106 consulting parties including the Corps, King County Historic Preservation Program, Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP), and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. COMMUNICATION PROTOCOLS As a courtesy, ESA Paragon will keep the consulting parties notified about field schedule so that field visits can be conducted if desired; notifications will be via email. The Corps will retain responsibility for consultation with Section 106 consulting parties. 45 -KI -703 Site Delineation Plan Page 1 August 2012 General Project Vicinity meters Base Maps: USGS 7.5 Seattle South, WA, 1983 and Des Moines WA, 1949 rev. 1995 Metric Quad. Figure 1. Duwamish Gardens Project Vicinity 45 -KI -703 Site Delineation Plan August 2012 Page 2 FIELD METHODOLOGY Delineation efforts will commence with mechanical trenching, followed by excavation of up to 10 controlled test units. The exact number and location of test units will be determined based upon the results of trenching. Test units will be advanced only after all trenching has been completed; it is possible that test units will not be advanced if the trenching provides clear information about the boundaries and integrity of the site. Trenching ESA Paragon will direct excavation of 17 backhoe trenches across the Duwamish Gardens Permit Area (Figure 2). Trenches will be 1.0-1.5 m wide, 2.0 m deep, and approximately 10 m long. Trenches will be stepped and/or benched for safety. Width of trenches will depend upon equipment availability. Sediments will be excavated in thin lifts, and spoils will be laid out for archaeological inspection. Trench walls will be inspected, photographed, and stratigraphic profiles drawn. Opportunistic screening (1/8" mesh) and hand sampling may be conducted in areas containing artifacts, features, or other cultural evidence. If an intact, archaeological feature (e.g., midden, hearth, postmold, etc.) is observed during trenching, the excavator will stop, and will move a minimum of 2.0 m from the feature before resuming trenching. The feature will be preliminarily documented, stabilized, covered, and temporarily reburied (if necessary) until test excavation. The order of trenching will proceed from east to west on the landform to provide the greatest probability to observe archaeological remains early in the trenching program. Trenches will be generally oriented to evaluate the stratigraphy that has developed from the river towards the higher elevation riverbank in order to expose the greatest stratigraphic variability and to provide greater environmental information. Because natural depositional units should be oriented parallel to the river, the trenches will be oriented perpendicular to expose these in cross section. Other trenches will be oriented parallel to the river to test the hypothesis that there is a discernible change in stratigraphy as highlighted in the organic matter testing (Lockwood 2012). One trench will be excavated to specifically investigate the depression in front of the bunkhouse building. Test Units Based on the results of trenching, ESA Paragon may excavate up to 10 test excavation units in locations estimated to have the greatest potential to address research questions, including those set forth in Blukis Onat et al. (2010:333-348). If archaeological features are encountered during trenching, test units on or in proximity to these features to evaluate them. Units will be 1 m wide by 1 m long. Test units will extend to 1.3 m below ground surface or 30 cm beyond sterile, whichever is deeper, and may require safety benching. Excavation will be conducted by natural 45 -KI -703 Site Delineation Plan Page 3 August 2012 stratigraphic layer; natural stratigraphic layers thicker than 10 cm will be subdivided into arbitrary 10 cm levels. Test unit walls will be inspected, photographed, and stratigraphic profiles drawn. All material will be screened through 1/8" mesh; the use of 1/8" mesh may allow recovery of small rodent bone as an indicator of degree and origin of bioturbation at the site appears to have significantly moved artifacts within the stratigraphy. Artifacts and samples will be collected for analysis and curation. Approximate extent of area :o be excavated to or belom 2A soil horizon J 2 41) 6 .• • P]tb a e A e Jh W7: '. a _ ra ll 0.0 16 fff ff. iJ •• 1••wf.•• f rIIftw ••' 16 15 16 �1 J 1.3 t J •f•f f Ril- Legend • Geopfobes(it) n Pcrcd aow:try r "gk' Sa9 Ory9rlic L., 1 6191169 Figure 2. Proposed Trenching Plan at Duwamish Gardens; note that test unit locations will be determined based on trenching results. EXPECTED DATA CATEGORIES Prehistoric archaeological remains recovered in 2005 during testing and data recovery at 45 -KI - 703 include flaked stone and ground stone tools, animal and fish bones and shell, botanical remains, pollen, fire modified rock, fire features, postmold, depressions/pits, and pebble/rock concentrations. The archaeological site is characterized by organic -rich sand layers. Historic archaeological materials in archaeological deposits may include: food bone from processing and consumption of mammal (including domesticates), avifauna (including domesticates), and fish; manufactured items (e.g., glass, ceramic, metal, wood) associated with domestic life within residences; tools, equipment and/or materials associated with agriculture; 45 -KI -703 Site Delineation Plan Page 4 August 2012 and foundations, post molds, pits, privies, oxidized matrices, and other soil stains associated with residential and agricultural use. ARTIFACT AND SAMPLE COLLECTION AND PROCESSING Artifacts encountered during Duwamish Gardens archaeological testing are planned for curation at the Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture in Seattle. Collections are not expected to exceed 1 cubic foot in volume. Artifacts will be collected and bagged in inert polyethylene 4 mil ziptop bags with exact proveniences recorded. Artifacts will be transported to the ESA Paragon archaeological analysis laboratory for description, photography, illustration, and analysis, and prepared for curation. Analyses will be conducted concurrently with fieldwork. All analyses will be completed within 30 days of fieldwork. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS Analyses of artifacts and samples collected during site delineation at Duwamish Gardens will be conducted for the purpose of assessing whether deposits have the potential to address research questions and provide new information about 45 -KI -703. INADVERTENT DISCOVERY OF HUMAN SKELETAL REMAINS Although no human remains are expected to be present in the project area, the following protocols will be adhered to if any member of the project team believes he/she has discovered human skeletal remains. Following the discovery all work adjacent to the discovery shall cease immediately and the King County Medical Examiner's Office and King County Sheriffs Office shall be notified. A 50 -foot work stoppage area shall be maintained around the discovery, in accordance with Washington State law (RCW 27.44). Vehicles, equipment, and unauthorized personnel shall not be permitted to traverse or enter the discovery site. After notification of the King County Medical Examiner and King County sheriff, the City project manager will be contacted. The project manager will contact the USACE Archaeologist and the KCHPP Archaeologist. The Medical Examiner will assume jurisdiction over the human skeletal remains and make a determination as to whether those remains are forensic or non -forensic. If the remains are forensic, the Medical Examiner will determine appropriate procedures for their disposition. If the remains are non -forensic, the State Physical Anthropologist (at DAHP) will assume jurisdiction over the remains and will contact appropriate tribes and cemeteries. 45 -KI -703 Site Delineation Plan Page 5 August 2012 The State Physical Anthropologist will make a determination as to whether the remains are Indian or Non -Indian and report that finding to appropriate tribes and cemeteries. The DAHP will handle all consultation with the affected parties as to the future preservation, excavation, and disposition of the remains. No persons other than the proper law enforcement personnel, professional archaeologists, KCHPP, and DAHP staff shall be authorized direct access to the discovery location after the area is secured. Further archaeological work may continue outside the work stoppage area. CURATION Artifacts collected during archaeological site delineation at Duwamish Gardens will be curated at the Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, in Seattle, WA, which has agreed to act as repository for collections, records, photographs and data from the Duwamish Gardens project. The collections from 2005 excavations at 45 -KI -703 are curated at the Burke. Collections will be curated to meet the Burke's Curation Guidelines. REPORTING Reporting will occur after analysis of fieldwork has been completed. A summary technical report will present all data from the delineation efforts, evaluate the potential for additional archeological deposits and their ability to address the various relevant research domains. A site form update for 45 -KI -703 would be prepared and included as an appendix to the report. If a historic site is identified it will be recorded as well. REFERENCES Blukis Onat, Astrida, Philippe D. LeTourneau, and Timothy L. Cowan 2010 3. Research Design and Data Recovery Investigation Methods. In The Duwamish River Bend Site Data Recovery at 45 -KI -703, edited by Astrida Blukis Onat, pp.31-50. Prepared by BOAS, Inc., Seattle. Submitted to Sound Transit. On file, ESA Paragon, Seattle. Lockwood, Chris 2012 Memorandum: Duwamish Gardens, Results of Contaminated Soil Geoprobe Observation and Cultural Resources Soil Analysis. Prepared by ESA Paragon, Seattle. Submitted to JA Brennan Associates. On file, ESA Paragon, Seattle. 45 -KI -703 Site Delineation Plan Page 6 August 2012 Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 APPENDIX C: TRENCH PROFILES ESA Paragon April 2013 Appendix C Trench 1 — West Wall E U Vl E U E U E U O O O E U Otn U O O U O E U O O N Milled wood y O OCC G) o. F_ 4• A■ ■NMI, UMW OMNI ver 1■ Trench 2 — North Wall E[ E § e § 0 / 0 - \ \ Not Excavated Not Excavated [ § § § 0 § 0 0 e \ § 0 \ } 0 \ X X X Trench 3 — West Wall E U N E • TJ A. cue¢ O g❑ 7G W y .a as d y .b o > 0.l CO X U O O U O U O O N U O Milled wood 0 O O 0 OC c 0 0 0 AMR OMEN ■..I ■■■1 ISM Trench 4 — West Wall z 0 E 0 0 O 00 On C O� O V1 — — N N x •._ > r< Not Excavated Not Excavated > x> O 0 U O O E U O E U O Milled wood 0 0 0 ccO o. a 0 5 0 0 0 cm 50 cm 100 cm 150 cm 200cm 250 cm Trench 5 — West Wall South North 0 cm Not Excavated la Ib Ic Id 11 Dark brown gravelly silty coarse sand; recent historic debris. (Fill). Light brown coarse sand and pea gravel. (Fill). Black silty coarse sand with ash, charcoal, historics. (Fill). Reddish brown and yellowish brown gravelly medium -coarse sand. (Fill) Gray/black ash, charcoal, slag, historic artifacts. (Fill). III N Va Vb Not Excavated Gray and brown fines sandy silt with gray fine sand streaks. (Alluvium). Gray fine -coarse sand. (Alluvium). Brown very fine sandy silt with bands of gray sand. (Alluvium). Brown very fine sandy silt. (Alluvium). r'ar"a c'a Charcoal Krotovina .i/%1/lam Pipe ® Rock R Root Milled wood 50 cm 100 cm 150 cm 200cm 250 cm Trench 6 — West Wall O z 0 0 0 0 0 0.n 0 ..n.. .-. N N E U 0 0 U O 0 U 0 0 0 U O E U O tfl 0 U O Milled wood 0 0 0 O f0 0 0 O ro 0 0 0 L U x B Trench 7 — West Wall 5 O E E 5 E 0 0 0 0 O )n O V') N N Not Excavated E U O Milled wood i•. uu 1••■ SUM Trench 8 — North Wall U O O O O O O, O - ON N Not Excavated 22 0 0 2 2 2 2 O O00 O tr,C O '-' N N Milled wood 40 C O O 0 V r0 L x x x Trench collapsed before profiling y N Trench 10 — South Wall 0 U 8 U O 0E U O 0 0 U 0 E 0 0 O N 0 U O 1) Not Excavated Not Excavated U 0 0 U O O E U O O Milled wood 1 0 0 0 O 0 O O ■■u, 1..■ u. ..' co 0 co t U R x Trench 11 — East Wall .Jy 0 0 z E 0 U OO OV1 .--- 0 O E E 0 U OO O v1 N N a s U U U U O OO O n O v1 E U O O E U O Milled wood 0 0 0 0 0 cC co c 0 0 .. u MINN 1.•■ ro 0 0 co L U Trench 12 — South Wall 0) U O 0 0 0 0 n to ... N ("1 Not Excavated ro ro 0) d Not Excavated rr rr r�-i > GC C G U U U U 0 0 0 0 WI Okr) U O O U 0 Milled wood 0 0 V 0 CC f0 0 O 0 0 0 f0 t U x x x 0 2 0 20 O O O 8 0 O Not Excavated E 0 O E 0 O 5 0 O O 2 0 O 0 0 O 0 N E 0 O Milled wood 0 0 oc 02 0 cc 03) 2L CZ 0 0 0 ii► •■ r ■uu •u. UMW nr CO 0 0 i co L U x x B Trench 14 — East Wall O z 8 U 0 E 2 0 0 OO 0 O kr) 2 E OOkr) N Not Excavated 2 0 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 OO 0 0 0 '.,--1 (V N Milled wood 0 0 0 U 0 0 UJ D. ro .> 0 0 0 ... ••••I iuur CO •ur ■u■ O 0 L U x x B czt U N 0 0 z U O 00 O 00 O Not Excavated Not Excavated E U O 0 U O Milled wood 0 0 Y 0 O cc co C '5 O O 0 U u R x Trench 16 — South Wall G 0 E 0 E 0 O 2 0 E O U O O O N N Not Excavated Not Excavated 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 WI E 0 O Milled wood 0 O co c .05 0 0 ■. u•• MEW nu 'NUS MN 0 co v x x Trench 17 — South Wall 2 0 O 2 0 O 8 0 O O 2 0 O Not Excavated 0 O O 0 V O 2 0 O O Not Excavated 2 0 O rn N cd 2 0 O Milled wood 0 0 0 cc 0 0 cc0 Q co c .> 0 0 4. N/MOW MMMI •u�r ■ u' ■irr 1\■ co 0 t0 t v x Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 APPENDIX D: ARTIFACT CATALOG ESA Paragon April 2013 Appendix D Duwamish Gardens Project 45 -KI -703 Excavated 2012 Excavated By: ESA Pa agon Duwamish Gardens Project (45 -KI -703) Master Specimen Catalog Date Printed: 12/19/2012 Site # Year Catalog it Material Gass Material Object Name Description Unit/ Trench Layer level Depth below datum (cm) Other Location Info Excavated By Excavation Date Field Bag # Weight (includes bag) C Box # Comments 45-1(1-703 2012 45(1703/2012/1 Plant Plant, Modified Charcoal Charcoal sample. Unit 2 3 2 26 cm 55 cm east of west wall, 93 cm south of north wall BH, CWL 11/5/2012 1 9.2 gm 1 1 45-1(I-703 2012 45(1703/2012/2 Composite Bulk Sample Bulk Sample Bulk sample of upper oxidized component in Feature 1. Unit 4 1 1 28 cm Feature 1, top BH, JWM 11/5/2012 2 3.25 lbs 1 1 45-6I-703 2012 45(1703/2012/3 Composite Bulk Sample Bulk Sample Bulk sample of lower layer of black stained charcoal component in Feature 1. Unit 4 1 1 "30 cm Feature 1, base BH, JWM 11/5/2012 3 97.2 gm 1 1 45 -KI -703 2012 45(1703/2012/4/1 Bone Bone, Modified Bone Fragment Fragments (n=4) of bone: two large and two small. Possible saw marks visible on the two larger fragments. Unit 4 1 1 `30 cm Taken at top of Layer 1, likely disturbed in surface scrap. BI -1, JWM 11/5/2012 4 11.4 gm 4 1 45 -KI -703 2012 45(1703/2012/4/2 Glass Undetermined Glass Type Glass Fragment Fragments (0=3) of glass: 1 light green, 2 clear. One of the clear fragments has an irredescent sheen; the other is very thin (possibly from a light bulb?). All have a slight curve. Unit 4 1 1 —30 cm Taken at top of Layer 1, likely disturbed in surface scrap. BH, JWM 11/5/2012 4 4.5 gm 3 1 45 -KI -703 2012 45(1703/2012/4/3 Ceramic Ceramic Ceramic Fragment g Fragments (n=2) of white glazed ceramic. One has an intact rim and features an embossed Floral design (possibly from a tea cup saucer?). Most likely these are from two different objects as the glaze and thickness do not match. Unit 4 1 1 " 30 cm Taken at top of Layer 1, likely disturbed in surface scrap. BH, JWM 11/5/2012 4 9.9 gm 2 1 45-1(1-703 2012 45(1703/2012/4/4 Metal Undetermined Metal Metal Fragment Fragments of metal (n=2), heavily oxidized. Unit 4 1 1 "30 cm Taken at top of Layer 1, likely disturbed in surface scrap. BH, JWM 11/5/2012 4 17.4 gm 2 1 45 -KI -703 2012 45(1703/2012/4/5 Metal Undetermined Metal Nail One intact nailmeasuring 1 inch long with intact round head that is 3/8 inch in diameter. Unit 4 1 1 "30 cm Taken at top of Layer 1, likely disturbed in surface scrap. BH, JWM 11/5/2012 4 5 g 1 1 45 -KI -703 2012 45(1703/2012/4/6 Ceramic Brick Brick Fragment Fragments (n=2) of red brick. Unit 4 1 1 `30 cm Taken at top of Layer 1, likely disturbed in surface scrap. BH, 1WM 11/5/2012 4 26.6 gm 2 1 45 -KI -703 2012 45(1703/2012/5 Stone Stone, Modified Fire Modified Rock Fire Modified Rock. Unit 4 1 1 39 cm Found in situ within undisturbed portion of Layer 1. BH, JWM 11/5/2012 5 39.2 gm 1 1 45 -KI -703 2012 45(1703/2012/6 Glass Undetermined Glass Type Glass Fragment Fragment of clear glass with curved shape. Found within Feature 2 (post hole with in situ wood debris). Unit 4 1 1 39-40 cm Feature 2 OH, JWM 11/5/2012 6 4.3 gm 1 1 45 -KI -703 2012 45(1703/2012/7 Plant Plant, Modified Charcoal Charcoal sample. Unit 2 5 1 52 cm NW corner of Unit 2, does not appear to be a feature. BH, CWL 11/6/2012 7 16.9 gm 1 1 45 -KI -703 2012 45(1703/2012/8 Bone Bone, Unmodified Bone, Bird Avian (hollow) bone fragment, possibly from a chicken. Unit 4 1 2 40-50 cm Feature 2 BH, JWM 11/6/2012 8 3.5 gm 1 1 45 -KI -703 2012 45(1703/2012/9/1 Glass Undetermined Glass Type • Glass Fragment Fragment of thick clear glass with curved shape and fluting. Unit 4 1 3 50-60 cm Feature 2 BH, JWM 11/6/2012 9 8.4 gm 1 1 45-6I-703 2012 45(1703/2012/9/2 Plant Wood, Modified Post Fragments of Feature 2: an in situ wood post, highly friable. Unit 4 1 3 50-60 cm Feature 2 BH, JWM 11/6/2012 9 83.8 gm 1 1 45 -KI -703 2012 451(1703/2012/10 Glass Undetermined Glass Type Glass Fragment Fragment of thin, curved dear glass (possibly from a light bulb?). Unit 4 1 4 60-70 cm NW corner of Unit 4. BH, JWM 11/6/2012 10 3.8 gm 1 1 City of Tukwila Page 1 of 3 Acid -Free Copy Comments E E E Culled 12/7/2012 - not historic tt m .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .r .. .. .. .. .. .� .. .. .. .. .. w 1) u Alb ., .. .. .. ry m .. .. .. .. .. ., m .. .. ., .. .. .. .. m 9 m d m m .. mm b C m m m m m .. m - .. m ti m ti m . E° m .. E .. m m m E°° mm m mc a tt W A - •. .. 3 .a. 3 .. .. .. 2 N ry ry ry ry ry N N ry c , ry r ry .9 ry n ry n ry .9 ry o0 ry ry ry PI ry n 91 ry ry ry n ry ry ry Excavated By BH, JWM BH, JWM BH, JWM BH, CWL x m BH, CWL •O x m BH, CWL G x m G x m x m G x m G x m BH, CWL G x m BH, 1WM BH x m BH BH Other Location Info Taken from root in north 1/2; near FMR but likely not associated. Taken near burned root in north 1/2 but likely not associated. Possible krotovina. From top of Layer 2. Taken from large root burn. Taken at transition from coarse / medium sand to fine sand. Possible krotovina. Taken from floor of level - layer change, center of Unit 3. Feature 1 Feature 1; near SE corner of Unit 3. Feature 1; found in krotovina A Horizon Component Taken from burn in south wall Possibly associated with burn layer OR discontinuous A Horizon cE d_ `E' G ill " N E " a i E 9 m 3t Y m t 9 m 4 .e u m n E �n E n E o E m E E m 2 E n a E n n E n E e .c E E ro n n w o o ,y ." .. n .. ry ry !V m .. .. ry .. c 0 - xo ry On v 3 .. .. ., .. ., .. IN ry ., ry 00 m .. .. .. .. .. c 7 F o 7 c 7 a r 7 e 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 e'ag 7 7 7 7 7 7 c o. c u'o Charcoal sample. Fragment of Fire Modified Rock. Fragment of Fire Modified Rock. Fragment of unpainted white porcelain base with partial rim. Fragments (n=2) of oxidized undetermined metal, most likely nails. Fragements (n=3) of glass including 2 clear flat pieces of possible window pane glass and 1 curved, thick aquamarine piece. Charcoal sample. Charcoal sample. Charcoal sample. Charcoal sample. Charcoal sample. Bulk sample of oxidized / burnt material in Feature 1. i'. Em E — u Small (lmm x 5mm) clear glass shard. Charcoal sample. Charcoal sample exposed / sampled during profile. Charcoal sample. o v i- f Fragment of clear glass. Compressed layers of aluminum foil. Object Name - Fire Modified Rock Fire Modified Rock Porcelian Fragment w E Pe m Glass Fragment Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Bulk Sample Charcoal Glass Fragment Charcoal Charcoal Charcoal Fire Modified Rock Glass Fragment Foil Wrapper Material Plant, Modified Stone, Modified Stone, Modified 0 Undetermined Metal Undetermined Glass Type Plant, Modified ; o Plant, Modified Plant, Modified v iE E o 2 Undetermined Glass Type Plant, Modified Plant, Modified o F. 13 Undetermined Glass Type Aluminum Material Class d Stone `0 Ceramic 5"i i i Plant a d n v Composite 'Es d 2 m l7 Plant u a Stone m l7 2 tt 4511703/2012/11 451(1703/2012/12 0 45K1703/2012/14/1 4511703/2012/14/2 0 4511703/2012/15 0 45K1703/2012/17 o 451(1703/2012/19 45K1703/2012/20 451(1703/2012/21 451(1703/2012/22 4511703/2012/23 45/(1703/2012/24 451(1703/2012/25 a 4511703/2012/27/1 451(1703/2012/27/2 sry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry tt B v 4 4 4 e v e 4 a a v a a a e a 4 4 4 a Acid -Free Copy Date Printed: 12/19/2012 Comments Culled 12/7/2012 - not cultural sample moist - extra drying time. I sample moist - extra drying time. sample moist - extra drying time. sample moist - extra drying time. sample moist - extra drying time. h 0 Le Alb .. m .M1 m ., . .. .. ., tn .. m 9 m e a 00 E m E - a E aa E ry m r E m m m m 9 u N m LLm N N N N N m m m m 'a/I e M 'r : I g3 m T. d G Excavated By CWL, BH, LT h m 2 G F m 3 1- m - u CWL, BH, LT CWL, BH, JWM CWL, BH, JWM CWL, BH, JWM CWL, BH, JWM CWL, BH, JWM CWL, BH, JWM CWL, BH, JWM CWL, JWM U U U U Other Location Info Feature 1 Feature 1 Feature 1 Feature 1 Feature 1 Feature 1 Feature 1 Feature 1 Feature 1 Feature 1 LL 1/4" Screen Western 1/2 of trench, below historic fill Y og ig x '0 ° `u =_ 3 .. LL 2 ' 3 _E -F6.1§1 a E R E m E m E m of 'o E E m Eoo m EEEmE E m 'ta n '12'" " c c ii 7 F 7 7 0 0 7 7 n 7 n 7 n 7 0 0 n 7 3 H E N Description Charcoal sample. n v` 0 Small white bone fragment, burned. Fragments of charcoal. Small (gravel sized) rock. Fire Modified Rock of various sizes: 3 are 6-8 cm in diameter, 6 are 4-6 cm in diameter, and 3 are 3 cm in diameter. Charcoal sample. Bulk sample of oxidized material in Feature 1. Bulk sample of oxidized material in Feature 1. Bulk sample of black charcoal sediment below oxidization in Feature 1. Bulk sample of black charcoal sediment below oxidization in Feature 1. Bulk sample of mussel shell and surrounding sediment. E n E Chipped stone debitage: 2 are quartz and 3 are crystalline volcanic rocks. One chalcedony chipped stone core fragment. Object Name Charcoal Seed Bone Fragment Charcoal Fire Modified Rock Charcoal EEEEE11111 Shell, Unmodified Debitage A' Material Plant, Modified - - E 67 Bone Plant, Modified Stone, Unmodified o Plant, Modified E m E m E m E m E m E �7 0 v -' u Material Class a a m Plant „� 0 „� Plant 0 E u° o E u° n E 0 u n E 0 u n E 0 u m Stone Stone u 0 ti R a 45KI703/2012/29/1 4561703/2012/29/2 45K1703/2012/29/3 a 0 v 0E/ZTOZ/£OLINSO 45K1703/2012/31 4561703/2012/32 4561703/2012/33 4561703/2012/34 4561703/2012/35 4561703/2012/36 45KI703/2012/37 \ a 45K1703/2012/39 in n r n N r r R R r N R N n R ' 0 o v 0 4 0 4 4 0 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 City of Tukwila Duwamish Gardens Project Archaeological Delineation at 45 -KI -703 APPENDIX E: SITE FORM 45 -KI -703 UPDATE ESA Paragon April 2013 Appendix E HAEOtOGY d HISTORIC PRESERVATION b.nOse, icq sw ba1. STATE OF WASHINGTON ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 Smithsonian No.: 45KI703 update *County: King *Date: 12/10/2012 *Compiler: Chris Lockwood, Human Remains? ❑ Location Information Restrictions (Yes/No/Unknown): Yes DAHP Case No.: SITE DESIGNATION Site Name: Duwamish River Bend Site Field/ Temporary ID: *Site Type(s) (Refer to the DAHP Survey and Inventory Guidelines Page 19): Precontact Feature, Precontact Lithic Material SITE LOCATION *USGS Quad Map Name(s): Seattle South 7.5' x 15' *Legal Description: T 23 R 4 East Section: 10 Quarter Section(s): NW UTM: Zone 10 Easting 553761 Northing 5260894 Latitude: Longitude: Elevation (ft/m): 25ft/7.6m Other Maps: Type: Scale: Source: Drainage, Major: Duwamish River Drainage, Minor: River Mile: Aspect: Slope: 0° *Location Description (General to Specific): Central King County, City of Tukwila, Duwamish area, north/east (right) bank of Duwamish River, immediately west of East Marginal Way *Directions (For Relocation Purposes): From Interstate 5 in Seattle, go west on Boeing Access Road, go south on East Marginal Way. Site is north of bridge over Duwamish River at 11271 East Marginal Way South. *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Page 2 of 12 Smithsonian Number: 45KI703 update SITE DESCRIPTION *Narrative Description (Overall Site Observations): The precontact site is within the Ray-Carrossino farmstead (Photograph 1), of which the Ray- Carrossino house is on the NRHP (Courtois et al. 1999; Sound Transit 2001). See LeTourneau 2004 and Blukis Onat et al. 2010 for original site description. Due to easement restrictions, the site was not conclusively delineated in 2004. The site was determined eligible to the NRHP and was subjected to data recovery excavations in 2005 as a measure to mitigate construction of Sound Transit's Central Link Light Rail. Based on 2012 site delineation (17 trenches) and testing (7 test excavation units), the site extends approximately 150 feet (45 meters) west of previously mapped boundaries (i.e., LeTourneau 2004; see USGS Map and Sketch Map); the long axis of the site parallels the contemporary channel of the Duwamish River. Precontact cultural remains, including Iithic debitage, fire modified rock, and anthropogenic fire features (including charcoal, oxidized soil, and ash) were observed within the newly documented part of the site, but at frequencies and densities substantially below than those recorded during 2004-2005 testing and data recovery at 45KI703. These results corroborate earlier results (i.e., LeTourneau 2004; Blukis Onat et al. 2010; Johnson and Hoyt 2008), which suggest that precontact human occupation/use/deposition was concentrated in the area east of the location of the Ray-Carrossino house, and that archaeological remains become increasingly sparse towards the north and west. The results of site delineation and test excavations also indicate the presence of at least two distinct, buried paleosols extending north and west beyond the revised site boundaries. These paleosols, recognized as thin, brown loam strata, contained diffuse charcoal, but did not contain artifacts or other anthropogenic indicators, such as shell, bone, or fire modified rock. The paleosols suggest periods of relative landscape stability, and are possibly contemporaneous with the previously identified "Lower" and "Main" occupations at 45KI703 (Blukis Onat et al. 2010). *Site Dimensions (Overall Site Dimensions): *Length: 180ft/55m *Direction: E -W x *Width: 90ft/27m *Direction: N -S *Method of Horizontal Measurement: Aerial mapping *Depth: 80-200 cm * Method of Vertical Measurement: tape measure *Vegetation (On Site): landscaped yard with trees, shrubs, and grasses *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Page 3 of 12 Smithsonian Number: 45KI703 update Local: industrial land with scattered patches of blackberry and grasses Regional: Western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) zone Landforms (On Site): alluvial floodplain Local: alluvial terraces, rock outcrops Water Resources (Type): Brackish Distance: Adjacent Permanence: Permanent CULTURAL MATERIALS AND FEATURES *Narrative Description (Specific Inventory Details): See Blukis Onat et al. 2010 for narrative description of cultural materials and features recorded in 2004-2005. Precontact cultural remains, including lithic debitage, fire modified rock, and anthropogenic fire features (including charcoal, oxidized soil, and ash) were observed within the newly documented portion of the site. A total of five pieces of chipped stone lithic debitage, all from a single trench (Trench 16), were recovered during trenching in native soils (Photograph 2). Four anthropogenic fire features (concentrations of charcoal, oxidized soil, and ash, with or without fire modified rock) were also recorded (Trench 12 and 16; Test Unit 4 and7) (Photograph 3). Ephemeral pockets of crushed shell and/or bone were also encountered within native soils in Trench 9 and 17, but none of this material was taxonomically identifiable. These cultural materials are consistent with (and redundant with) the types of artifacts and features recorded during 2004 data recovery at 45KI703; their sparseness suggests that human precontact occupation/use/deposition occurred mainly east of the location of the Ray-Carrossino house. *Method of Collection: Mechanical trenching, followed by shovel/trowel test excavation units; 1/4" and 1/8" screening. *Location of Artifacts (Temporary/Permanent): Temporary: ESA Paragon, 5309 Shilshole Avenue *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Page 4 of 12 Smithsonian Number: 45KI703 update NW, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98017; Permanent: Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, University of Washington, Box 353010 Seattle, WA 98195. SITE AGE *Component: Precontact *Dates (Overall Site Age Approximation): 1010-1270 AD; 1280-1450 AD (Blukis Onat et al. 2010) *Dating Method: Radiocarbon AMS Phase: N/A Basis for Phase Designation: N/A (Only those historic sites that meet the minimum National Register (36CFR60) age threshold (50 years of age or older) will be retained as historic archaeological records and assigned Smithsonian Trinomials by DAHP.) *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Page 5 of 12 Smithsonian Number: 45KI703 update SITE RECORDERS Observed by: Address: *Date Recorded: Original: 10/15/2004; Update: 11/2012 *Recorded by (Professional Archaeologist): Philippe LeTourneau (2004); Chris Lockwood (2012) *Organization: ESA Paragon *Organization Phone Number: 206-789-9658 *Organization Address: 5309 Shilshole Ave. NW, Suite 200; Seattle, WA 98107 *Organization E-mail: clockwoodesassoc.com Date Revisited: 11/2012 Revisited By: Chris Lockwood, Bryan Hoyt, James McLean, Colin Lothrop, Lara Thoreson SITE HISTORY *Previous Archaeological Work (Done at Site): Earliest previous work at this location focused on the historic nature of the Ray-Carrossino farmstead (Courtois et al. 1999; Sound Transit 2001). The prehistoric site was discovered in 2004 during subsurface survey (shovel probes) prior to construction of the Sound Transit's Central Link Light Rail. Additional shovel probes, as well as test excavations, were subsequently performed in 2004; Sound Transit, on behalf of FTA and in consultation with SHPO, determined the site eligible to the NRHP as a significant historic property. Sound Transit determined data recovery to be the most viable alternative for mitigating adverse effects to the site, and developed a Supplemental Treatment Plan. The plan, which included data recovery excavation of nine 2m x 2m blocks, and one 1m x 1m test unit, was implemented in March 2005. Results from data recovery indicated the presence of two distinct occupation zones dating to 1010-1270 AD and 1280- 1450 AD. In 2008, ESA Paragon (then Paragon Research Associates, LLC) performed 24 shovel -auger probes 2.25 m terminal depth) as part of due diligence prior to land acquisition, on behalf of King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks (DNRP) and City of Tukwila. ESA Paragon identified buried precontact artifacts — a single "basalt flake" in each of two probes — within site boundaries as revised in this archaeological site form update (see sketch map). ESA Paragon also recorded non- diagnostic contemporary and historic artifacts (e.g., glass, whiteware, nails) spread broadly across the landscape. In 2012, Chris Lockwood of ESA Paragon conducted archaeological monitoring of twenty (20) 2 -inch diameter geotechnical probes performed by Shannon & Wilson. In addition to observing widespread presence of contemporary/historic fill (e.g., rubble, sand, asphalt), Lockwood noted broad presence of *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Paae 6 of 12 Smithsonian Number: 45KI703 update a dark layer (possible paleosol) at approximately 1 m below ground surface in across the eastern half of the farmstead. Lockwood also observed strong evidence for bioturbation in the form of widespread rodent holes. Many of the associated back dirt piles contained contemporary/historic artifacts, including brick, window glass, coal, and clinker; a small chalcedony chipped stone core was also recovered at the surface of a back dirt pile located outside of the revised site boundaries. LAND OWNERSHIP *Owner: City of Tukwila *Address: 11271 East Marginal Way South *Tax Lot/ Parcel No: 1023049055, 1023049060, 1023049071 RESEARCH REFERENCES *Items/Documents Used In Research (Specify): Blukis Onat, Astrida R., et al. 2010 The Duwamish River Bend Site, Data Recovery at 45K1703. Prepared by BOAS, Inc. Submitted to Sound Transit. On file at ESA Paragon, Seattle. Courtois, Shirley L., Katheryn H, Crafft, Catherine Wickwire, James C. Bard, and Robin McClintock 1999 Final Technical Report [on] Historic and Prehistoric Archaeological Sites, Historic Resources, Native American Traditional Cultural Properties, [and] Paleontological Sites, Final Environmental Impact Statement. Central Link Light Rail Transit Project. Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Seattle), Seattle. On file at ESA Paragon, Seattle. Johnson, Paula, and Bryan Hoyt 2008 Letter to Dennis Clark, King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks, RE: Subsurface Investigation of the Proposed Duwamish Gardens. Prepared by Paragon Research Associates, Seattle. On file at ESA Paragon, Seattle. LeTourneau, Philippe 2004 Archaeological Site Form, 45KI703. Prepared by BOAS, Inc. On file at DAHP, Olympia. Sound Transit 2001 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Tukwila Freeway Route. Central Link Light Rail Transit Project: Seattle, Tukwila and SeaTac, Washington. Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority and U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle. *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Page 7 of 12 Smithsonian Number: 45KI703 update USGS MAP *Quad Name(s): Seattle South *Series: 7.5' *Date(s): 1983 �1 45 -KI -703 Revised Site Boundaries .11 45 -KI -703 Existing Site Boundaries *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. dOZ/L pawed Sound tranxit Protect Aron L t 45 -KI -703 Revised Site Boundaries UM 45-K1.703 Existing Site Boundaries X Surface Precontact Find 2012 • In situ Precontact Artifact Finds 12008i O Negative Shovel Probe i20041 Trench and Test Unit ITU} Results CI) 7C cD 0 13 0 CD 0 13 o' dWW H313)1S V O3 A?1O1N3ANI 311S 1V31OO1O3VH321d Smithsonian Number: 45KI703 update ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Page 9 of 12 Smithsonian Number: 45KI703 update PHOTOGRAPH(S) *Photograph Description(s) (Include a representative sample of inventoried archaeological material and features, site location overviews, etc): Photograph 1. East looking site overview with Ray-Carrossino farmstead and light rail tracks. *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Page 10 of 12 Smithsonian Number: 45KI703 update Photograph 2. Lithic debitage recovered in Trench 16. *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Pa. e 11 of 12 Smithsonian Number: 45K1703 update Photograph 3. Concentration of charcoal, oxidized soil, and fire modified rock (Test Unit 7, Feature 1, southeast facing photo). *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Page 12 of 12 Smithsonian Number: 45KI703 update CONTINUATION/ ADDENDUM SHEET Label all additional pages by corresponding headings. (e.g. Site Description, Site History, Research References) *Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 7/2011 SITE PLAN CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT j.. brew= e.rodates, euc In association with Shannon a Mo., nn. Cardno7EC. Inc CM, Webb a Assodate, CASCADE Interyrerve Consuhing ESA Paragon March 28, 2013 i et* of Ju11wiea Department Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, _Teri Svedahl , HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Associated File Number (s): E13-015 x Notice of Application Notice of Decision /A Notice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Meeting Determination of Non- Significance Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit Shoreline Mgmt Permit Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Official Notice Notice of Action Other: Was mailed to each of the addresses listed/attached on this _4 day of _March , _2013_ Project Name: Duwamsih Gardens Project Number: PL13-038 Associated File Number (s): E13-015 Mailing requested by: Br do " Miles Mailer's signature: � 7c/ I', i /A W:\USERS\TERI\TEMPLATES-FORMS\AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC US Corps of Engineers ( Federal HWY Admin ( ) Federal Transit Admin, Region 10 Dept of=F sh=&_WiidIife AGENCY LABELS E/_ -t9L Section 1 FEDERAL AGENCIES =lUS EnviforMmental=Pr teetion--Agerney (E.P.A.) ( )US Dept of HUD .NVationalliarineEsheries Service -N=0ffiee of Arehaealogy ( ) Transportation Department (WSDOT NW) Naep_tEofdlaturai=Reseurces- ) Office of the Governor WA State Community Development WA Fisheries & Wildlife, MillCreek Offic WA Fisheries & Wildlife, Larry Fisher 1775 12th Ave NW Ste 201, Issaquah WA 98027 Section 2 WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES Dept of Social & Health Services Dept of Ecology NW Regional Office, Shoreland Div. ******* NOD REQUIRES RETURN RECEIPT Dept of Ecology, SEPA **Send Electronically ( ) Office of Attorney General ( ) Office of Hearing Examiner 5011 etitfrth mil ( ) KC Boundary Review Board ( ) Fire District # 11 ) Fire District # 2 KC Wastewater Treatment Div ICC Dept of Parks & Recreation ( ) KC Assessor's Office Section 3 KING CQ. JTY AGENCIES ealth Department ( ) Port of Seattle KC Dev & Enviro Services-SEPA Info Center ( ) KC Metro Transit Div-SEPA Official, Environmental Planning KC Dept of Natural Resources C Dept of Natural Resources, Andy Levesque ( ) KC Public Library System ( ) Foster Library ( ) Renton Library ( ) Kent Library ( ) Seattle Library Section 4 SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES ( ) Westfield Mall Library ( ) Tukwila School District ( ) Highline School District ( ) Seattle School District ( ) Renton School District QWEST Communications ,eattle City Light uget Sound Energy N'S -.,..k) ''ighline Water District Seattle Planning &Dev/Water Dept ( )' omcast Section 5 UTILITIES ( ) BP Olympic Pipeline ( ) Val-Vue Sewer District ( ) Water District # 20 ( ) Water District # 125 ( ) City of Renton Public Works ( ) Bryn Mawr-Lakeridge Sewer/Water Dist ( ) Seattle Public Utilities ( ) Allied Waste Services ( ) Tukwila City Departments ( ) Public Works ( ) Fire ( ) Police ( ) Finance ( ) Planning ( ) Building ( ) Parks & Rec ( ) Mayor ( ) City Clerk Section 6 CITY AGENCIES ( ) Kent Planning Dept ( ) Renton Planning Dept ( ) City of SeaTac ( ) City of Burien City of Seattle trategic Planning *Notice of all Seattle Related Projects 1y Puget Sound Regional Council KC Chamber of Commerce Muckleshoot Indian Tribe * N Cultural Resources Fisheries Program* 419114 Wildlife Program N)uwamish Indian Tribe * Section 7 OTHEW ,OCAL AGENCIES ',Puget Sound Clean Air Agency nd Transit/SEPA uwamish River Clean Up Coalition * r Washington Environmental Council ;People for Puget Sound * Futurewise * send notice of all app ications on Green/Duwamish River ( ) Seattle Times ( ) South County Journal Section 8 MEDIA ( ) Highline Times ( ) City of Tukwila Website P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist Public Notice Mailings For Permits SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of EcoloQv Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Tribes — For any application on the Green/Duwamish River, send the checklist and a full set of plans with the Notice Of Application Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (from PermitsPlus) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The Notice of Application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the Notice of Application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Notice is sent to Ecology's NW Regional Office Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date of filing with DOE) — Notice to DOE must be by return receipt requested mail (this requirement included in SSB 5192, effective 7-22-11). Department of Ecology Shorelands Section, NW Regional Office State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (printed out from PermitsPlus) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) — Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements — Cross-sections of site with structures & shoreline - Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist eri vedahl From: Teri Svedahl Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 10:36 AM To: sepa (sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov); ECY RE SEPA REGISTER (separegister@ecy.wa.gov) Cc: Brandon Miles Subject: Duwamish Gardens NOA, Tukwila, Checklist Attachments: Duwamish_Gardens_NOA.pdf; Duwamish_Gardens_checklist_plans.pdf Attached is the NOA and SEPA checklist for Tukwila project, Duwamish Gardens. If you have any questions, please contact Senior Planner, Brandon Miles at Brandon.Miles@TukwilaWA.Kov Ter2Sve��ar. i Administrative Support Technician City of Tukwila - Building & Planning Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard - Ste 100 Tukwila WA 98188 Teri.Svedahl@TukwilaWA.gov SEATTLE SEAHAWKS, SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS The City of opportunity, the community of choice. Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Carosino Property 11245/11269 East Marginal Way S. RECEIVED Tukwila, Washington SEP 1 0 2009 COMMUNITY November 26, 2008 DEVELOPMENT Prepared For: King County Water/Land Resources Division 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98104 and City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Prepared By: 11811 NE 1St Street, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 CDM Project No. 19897-68024 Ul King County Prepared For: King County Water/Land Resources Division 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98104 and City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT CAROSINO PROPERTY 11245/11269 EAST MARGINAL WAY S. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON November 26, 2008 Va44/ A6 Mary u Fox Environmental Scientist Lance E. Peterson, LHG Senior Hydrogeologist CDM 11811 N.E. 1st Street, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 425/453-8383 CDM Project No. 19897.68024 Contents Executive Summary iv Section 1 Introduction 1-1 1.1 Purpose and Scope 1-1 1.2 Site Description and Background 1-2 1.3 Previous Investigations 1-2 1.4 Topography and Subsurface Conditions 1-5 Section 2 Field Investigation 2-1 2.1 Subsurface Investigation 2-1 2.2.1 Soil Sampling 2-1 2.2.2 Groundwater Sampling 2-3 Section 3 Analytical Testing Results 3-1 3.1 Analytical Testing Methods 3-1 3.2 Analytical Testing Results 3-1 Section 4 Findings and Conclusions 4-1 Section 5 References 5-1 Distribution Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Tables Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Appendices Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Vicinity Map Site Plan Laboratory Analyses by Boring Locations Analytes and Analytical Reporting Limits Summary of Analytical Detections - Soils Summary of Analytical Detections - Waters Field Exploration and Sampling Procedures Boring Logs Analytical Laboratory Reports D:\11000-19999119897-Kng County\68024-Carosino Phase II\Draft Carosino Phase II ESA .docs Executive Summary This report presents the results of a Phase II environmental site assessment (ESA) conducted in October 2008 by Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM) at the Carosino property (site) at 11249/11269 East Marginal Way S. in Tukwila, Washington. This Phase II ESA was conducted to investigate possible contamination of the site from Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) identified in a Phase I ESA completed by CDM dated September 30, 2008. The approximate 2.16 acre site is located adjacent to the Duwamish River. Structures on the site include a residence, an old farmhouse, and several structures relating to a former farm operated at the property as well as several sheds and a shipping container. An elevated portion of the Sound Transit light rail (Link) line runs along the easternmost edge of the site. Two underground storage tanks (USTs) are known to be present on the site. Subsurface conditions were explored on the property by drilling nine soil borings to depths ranging from 15 to 24 -feet below ground surface (bgs). Soil and groundwater samples collected from the soil borings were analyzed for gasoline -range total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) by Northwest Method NWTPH-Gx; benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) by EPA Method 8021B; diesel -range and lube -oil range total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) by Northwest Method NWTPH-Dx; Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260B; and total metals by EPA Methods 6010B, 200.8, 7470A, and 7471A. Selected soil samples from the borings were also analyzed for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) by EPA Method 8082, total cyanide by Standard Method 4500CN-E, and dioxins/furans by EPA Method 8290. Selected water samples from the borings were also analyzed for dissolved lead by EPA Method 200.8. The investigation identified no contamination in the soil samples above Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A cleanup levels or the MTCA Ecological Indicator Soil Concentrations. Detections above the laboratory's reporting limits include lube oil - range hydrocarbons at 62 milligram per kilogram (mg/kg) in the western -most boring along the north side of the site (GP7) at 2 feet belowground surface (bgs). Total barium and chromium were also detected above the laboratory's reporting limits in boring GP7, GP6 (the boring to the east of GP7 along the north side of the site), and GP5 (the boring near a heating oil UST) at 2 feet, 5 feet, and 2 feet bgs, respectively. Total lead was also detected in boring GP7 at 2 feet bgs. All concentrations were below their respective MTCA Method A or MTCA Method B (for barium) cleanup levels and Ecological Indicator Soil Concentrations. Total tetrachlorodibenzo-p- dioxins (TCDD) and octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (OCDD) were detected in boring GP3 at 23 feet bgs. OCDD was also detected in boring GP8 at 14 feet bgs. The dioxin toxic equivalency (TEQ) values for these two samples are less than the MTCA Method B cleanup level and the Ecological Soil Screening criterion. Trichloroethene and tetrachloroethene were detected in the water sample from boring GP7 at concentrations are well below their respective MICA Method A cleanup levels. Total arsenic was detected in the water samples from borings GP5, GP6, and GP7 at concentrations that are greater than the MTCA Method A cleanup level for O:\11000-19999\19897-IGng County168024-Carosino Phase II\Draft Carosino Phase II ESA .docz Executive Summary arsenic of 5 µg/L. Total barium, total chromium, and total lead were also detected in the water samples from these three borings at concentrations are less than their respective MTCA Method A or Method B (barium) cleanup levels except for the detection of total lead in the water sample from boring GP3 at 32 µg/L, which exceeds the MTCA Method A cleanup level of 15 µg/L. This sample was also analyzed for dissolved lead. The concentration of dissolved lead in this sample was well below MTCA Method A cleanup level. D:\11000.19999\19897-IGng County168024-Carosino Phase 110raft Carosino Phase II ESA .docx Section 1 Introduction This report summarizes Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) activities performed by Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM) on behalf of King County (the County) and the City of Tukwila (the City) at the Carosino property located at 11245/11269 East Marginal Way S. in Tukwila, Washington (site). Figure 1 shows the site location and Figure 2 shows a site plan. The Carosino property carries the tax parcel numbers 1023049055, 1023049060, and 1023049071 and is an approximately 2.16 acre site located adjacent to the Duwamish River. The site ownership of the site is currently shared by Rinaldo M. Carosino and Lorraine (or Loraine) Carosino who own tax parcel 1023049055 and an undivided interest in tax parcel 1023049071 and Magda Torghele who owns tax parcel 1023049060 and an undivided interest in tax parcel 1023049071. The site is located at the intersection of East Marginal Way S. and South 15th St. CDM's services were performed in accordance with our October 7, 2008 proposal, under Work Order No. 14, Contract No. E00025E. 1.1 Purpose and. Scope The purpose of this Phase II ESA was to investigate soil and groundwater impacts from Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) identified in a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) completed by CDM dated September 30, 2008. These RECs were: Possible contamination from petroleum hydrocarbons from a heating oil UST on the north side of the residence and a gasoline UST on the south side of the bunkhouse. • Pesticides found in surface/near surface soils by a consultant working for Sound Transit. a Dioxins/furans found in surface/near surface soils by a consultant working for Sound Transit. ▪ Possible contamination from petroleum hydrocarbons and tetrachloroethene that were found in groundwater at the Husky Truck Center located to the east of the site, across East Marginal Way S. ▪ Possible contamination from petroleum products found in soil and suspected to be in groundwater and solvents and metals/cyanide suspected to be in soil and groundwater at the Overnite Trucking Facility located north and west of the site. Although not identified as a REC, the County and City requested the area of the barn on the west end of the site be investigated during the Phase II ESA for contamination related to possible surface spills of motor oil and from the former use of the barn for boat manufacturing. 011100049999\19697-10ng Counly\66024-Carosino Phase 111Draft Carosino Phase 11 ESA .docx Section 1 Introduction CDM's scope of services for the Phase II included: • Reviewing data obtained for pesticides and dioxins/furans in near surface soils by Garry Struthers Associates (consultant to Sound Transit) to determine if further evaluation of the site for these contaminants was necessary. • Conducting a private utility locate prior to initiating drilling activities. • Drilling nine borings and collecting soil and groundwater samples from the borings. Selected soil and water samples collected from the nine borings were analyzed for gasoline -range total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) by Northwest Method NWTPH-Gx; benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) by EPA Method 8021B; diesel -range and lube -oil range total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) by Northwest Method NWTPH-Dx; Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260B; and total metals by EPA Methods 6010B, 200.8, 7470A, and 7471A. Selected soil samples from the borings were also analyzed for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) by EPA Method 8082, total cyanide by Standard Method 4500CN-E, and dioxins/furans by EPA Method 8290. Selected water samples from the borings were also analyzed for dissolved lead by EPA Method 200.8. ■ Preparing this report documenting the field activities and analytical laboratory sample results. 1.2 Site Description and Background The site is located in a commercial and industrial area with some residential areas on minor streets to the east and southeast of the site. The subject property consists of three parcels totaling approximately 2.16 acres. The three parcels together form an approximately trapezoid -shaped property. The site includes an old farmhouse, a newer residence, and several structures relating to a former farm operated at the property (including a barn, bunkhouse, and tool shed). Several newer sheds are located along the northern property line (including a large metal shed, two wooden sheds, and a shipping container all grouped together). The majority of the site is unpaved, except for asphalt driveways located near the residence and the farmhouse. An elevated portion of the Sound Transit light rail (Link) line runs along the easternmost edge of the site. Two underground storage tanks (USTs) are known to be present on the site. An approximately 750 -gallon, circa 1964 heating oil tank is located on the north side of the residence, and an approximately 100 -gallon, circa 1950 gasoline tank is located on the south side of the bunkhouse. Neither UST has been used for approximately 30 years. Figure 2 shows general site features. 1.3 Previous Investigations A Phase I assessment was completed for the subject property in March 2003 for Sound Transit's Central Link Light Rail Transit Project (Garry Struthers Associates, 2003). 1-2 D:\11000-19999\19097-Kng Counte\68024-Carosino Phase II\Draft Carosino Phase 11 ESA .docx Section 1 Introduction The assessment identified six recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection with the subject property, which are summarized below: • Historical use of agricultural herbicides and insecticides at the site and potential release from the UST south of the bunkhouse (the heating oil tank north of the residence had not been identified at that time) ■ Potential contamination of the subject site from the adjacent Duwamish River, which is designated as a National Priority List site downstream of the subject property • Potential impacts from groundwater contamination at the Overnite Trucking facility adjacent to and north of the subject property ■ Potential impacts from contaminated groundwater at Boeing A&M Development Center, 924 feet northeast of the subject property • Potential impacts from groundwater contamination at the Boeing Drum site, also located 924 feet northeast of the subject property • Potential contamination from impacted groundwater at the Duwamish Fill Site DOT facility, located 3080 feet south of the subject property A Phase II assessment was conducted at the subject property in December 2003 for the Sound Transit Link Light Rail Transit Project (Garry Struthers Associates, 2004a). The purpose of the Phase II assessment was to investigate the potential presence of environmental impacts from RECs identified in the 2003 Phase I ESA. Contaminants of concern associated with the RECs included petroleum products, herbicides, pesticides, dioxins, selected non -chlorinated volatile organic compounds, and metals. The scope of the assessment included soil and groundwater sampling from direct - push borings, and collection of composite surface soil samples. Results of soil sampling and groundwater sampling are summarized in the following sections. Ten direct -push borings were advanced to maximum depths of 12 to 20 feet bgs. For collection of surface soil samples, the site was divided into four areas (Al through A4). Within each of these areas, soil was collected from the top six inches at seven locations and composited into one analytical sample to represent conditions with that area. Soil samples from the direct -push borings were analyzed for TPH-HCID, TPH- Gx/ BTEX, TPH-Dx, selected volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), organochlorine pesticides, chlorinated acid herbicides, and metals. Composite soil samples were analyzed for SVOCs, PCBs, organochlorine pesticides, chlorinated acid herbicides, total metals, dioxins, and furans. Analytical results were compared to Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) 1-3 O:\11000-19999\19B97-Kng County168024-Carosino Phase IIWraft Cassino Phase II ESA .docs Section 1 Introduction Method A cleanup levels for unrestricted land use or to Terrestrial Ecological Evaluation (TEE) concentrations for those analytes not on the MTCA Method A table. In the direct -push borings, benzene was detected at Sample Location TUK022-2 (near the southwest corner of the house) at 5 feet bgs at a concentration of 0.032 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg), which only slightly exceeds the MTCA Method A cleanup level (0.03 mg/kg). No other direct -push samples contained concentrations in excess of MTCA Method A or TEE criteria. To evaluate results from the composited soil samples, the sample results were adjusted to account for potential composite dilution before comparing to MTCA Method A or TEE values. When adjusted for dilution, Gary Struthers Associates (GSA) stated all four samples contained cPAHs, DDT, chromium, and lead in excess of either MTCA Method A or TEE values. In addition, dioxin and furan concentrations were in excess of TEE values in Areas Al, A2, and A3; and chlordane, DDE, and dieldrin were detected in excess of TEE values in Area A3. Groundwater was encountered in three of the direct -push borings (TUK025-1, TUK025-3, and TUK025-8) at approximately 15 feet bgs and water samples were collected at these locations. The groundwater samples were analyzed for TPH- Gx/BTEX, TPH-Dx, selected VOCs, PAHs, PCBs, organochlorine pesticides, and total metals. No analytes were present at or above laboratory detection limits in any of the groundwater samples. The direction of groundwater flow could not be determined based on the information collected during the Phase II assessment. A Supplemental Phase II assessment was conducted in April 2004 for the Sound Transit Link Light Rail Project (Garry Struthers Associates, 2004b). The purpose of the supplemental assessment was to further define the extent of impacts identified in the initial Phase II assessment. Specifically, the investigation was focused on evaluating the depth of pesticides and dioxins identified in shallow soils and the potential for "hot spots" contributing to elevated concentrations in composite samples. The scope of the assessment included soil sampling from eighteen direct -push borings completed to a depth of four feet bgs. Sample locations were selected based on information regarding historical use and activities including pesticide mixing, washing, and application. Two soil samples were collected from each boring: one sample from near the surface (0-1 foot bgs) and one from the bottom of the boring (3-4 feet bgs). Samples were analyzed for organochlorine pesticides, dioxins, furans, and PCBs. Soil analysis results detected dioxin and furan concentrations in excess of TEE values at seven locations (Sample Locations 3, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18). At Sample Location 14, the elevated concentrations were present at both the 0-1 and 3-4 foot intervals. At 1-4 D:\11000.19999\19897-IOng County168029-Carosino Phase II1Draft Carosino Phase 11 ESA .docx Section 1 Introduction the remaining six locations, elevated dioxin and furan concentrations were only detected at the 0-1 foot interval. DDT in excess of the TEE value, but below the MTCA Method A cleanup level, was detected at one location (Sample Location 15) at the 0-1 foot interval. Dieldrin in excess of the TEE value was detected at one location (Sample Location 4) at the 04 foot interval. GSA speculated the source of dioxins detected on the property could be from the degradation of pentachlorophenol -treated wood products. GSA stated the occurrence of DDT and dieldrin are assumed to be associated with pesticides used during past agricultural activities at the property. CDM completed a Phase I ESA dated September 30, 2008 for the site. The RECs identified in this Phase I ESA are presented in Section 1.1. 1.4 Topography and Subsurface Conditions The property lies at an elevation of approximately 20 feet above mean sea level (MSL). Land surface at the site is generally flat and level, with a steep drop of approximately 15 feet along the bank of the Duwamish River at the southern property boundary. The site is located within the Puget Sound Lowland physiographic province, a topographic basin extending from the Cascade Mountains on the east to the Olympic Mountains on the west (Liesch, et al., 1963). The area is characterized by gently rolling plains mantled with glacial drift deposited by the most recent (Vashon) glaciation. The plains are separated by broad -floored north -south trending valleys underlain by deposits of Recent age and bound by steeply sloping valley walls. The subject property lies within one of these valleys, specifically in the floodplain of the Duwamish River Valley. Subsurface investigations performed at the subject property in 2004 (summarized in Section 1.3) found that the site is underlain primarily by light to dark brown sand to depths of approximately 12 feet below ground surface (bgs). The sand was loose and uniform in size with little or no fines. Beneath the brown sand were layers of silty and clayey sand extending to approximately 16 feet bgs. One soil boring was extended beyond 16 feet bgs and revealed silt extending from that depth to the maximum depth explored (20 feet bgs) (Gary Struthers Associates, 2004a). D:\11000 -19999\19897 -Fling County\68024-Carosino Phase F(1Draft Carosino Phase 11 ESA .docx 1-5 Section 2 Field Investigation CDM's field investigation was conducted on October 14, 2008. The following describes the field activities. Subsurface exploration and sampling procedures are summarized in Appendix A. CDM's original scope of work anticipated a contingency for collecting near surface soil samples for pesticides and dioxins/furans analyses, if deemed appropriate following our review of near surface pesticides and dioxins/furans data generated by GSA. Evaluation of the data generated by GSA indicated that it was sufficient to assess the presence and concentrations of these compounds in surface/near surface soils and no further sampling for these analyses in surface/near surface soils was necessary. Two soil samples from the boring near the barn (GP8) and the boring near the gasoline UST (GP3) at 14 feet below ground surface (bgs) and 23 feet bgs, respectively, were analyzed for dioxins/furans to assess the bottom and side of the planned excavation of the site to create tidal marshland. The soil sample from 23 feet bgs from the GP3 boring was also analyzed for PCBs to assess possible effects at the approximate elevation of the base of the future tidal marshland from PCB contamination known to be present in the lower Duwamish River. 2.1 Subsurface Investigation Prior to drilling, potential soil boring locations were marked in the field and the locations were assessed for possible conflicts with underground utilities. The Utilities Underground Location Center (UULC) was notified prior to drilling. In addition, CDM contracted a private utility locate service, Applied Professional Services, Inc. (APS), to use geophysical methods to check each proposed exploration location for underground utilities. In addition to using geophysical methods to check for conductible utilities, APS assisted in identifying sanitary sewer, water, storm drain, telephone, and natural gas lines in the field by inspection of manholes, sewer clean - outs, and meter vaults, and overhead lines. 2.2.1 Soil Sampling A truck -mounted Direct Push Technology (DPT) drill rig was utilized to explore subsurface conditions and collect soil samples on October 14, 2008. ESN Northwest (ESN) of Lacey, Washington was the drilling contractor. A CDM geologist observed the soil borings. The DPT sampling method utilizes a hydraulically powered percussion direct push machine that drives a tool string connected to a split -spoon sampler or sample barrel containing a clear acetate liner directly into the ground with minimal sample disturbance. Acetate liner sampling was used exclusively during the investigation. The acetate liner was cut to expose the soil cores. A total of nine DPT borings (denoted GP1, GP1-B, and GP2 through GP8) were completed at the locations shown on Figure 2. Boring GP1 was terminated at a depth of 15 feet bgs after a concrete -like material and asphalt debris was encountered at 15 feet bgs. Boring GP1B was completed to a depth of 23 feet bgs approximately 30 feet 2-1 Q:\11000-19999\19897-Kng Count1\68024-Carosino Phase II\Draft Carosino Phase!! ESA .docc Section 2 Field Investigation to the west of GPI for collection of groundwater. Borings GP5, GP6, GP7, and GP8 were completed at 22 feet bgs. GP2, GP3, and GP4 were completed at 23, 24, and 21 feet bgs, respectively. All of the DPT borings were abandoned by backfilling the borehole with bentonite chips after soil and/or groundwater sampling. Borings GPI and GP1-B in the southeast corner of the site and boring GP2 to the east of the farm house were completed to investigate possible groundwater contamination from the Husky Truck Center to the east of the site across East Marginal Way South. Boring GP3, south of the bunk house and near the gasoline UST, was completed to investigate the possibility of contamination from the gasoline UST. Boring GP4 to the north of the residence and near the heating oil UST was completed to investigate the possibility of contamination from the heating oil UST. Borings GP5, GP6, and GP7 were completed along the north side of the property to investigate the possibility of migration of contamination from the Overnite Trucking facility to the north and west of the site. Boring GP5 was also located in an area that detected benzene at a concentration just above the 0.03 mg/kg MTCA Method A cleanup levels during the previous Phase II ESA conducted by Garry Struthers Associates. Boring GP8 at the south end of the barn was completed to investigate the possibility of surface motor oil spills and contamination resulting from the former use of the barn for boat manufacturing. Soil samples were collected continuously from the DPT borings using a 4 -foot long, 1.5 -inch inside diameter, Macro -Core sampler (manufactured by Geoprobe®) attached to the end of drive rods. The sampler contains a clear plastic liner to contain the soil samples. The liners are cut open to expose the soil cores. Soil in the sample cores was visually examined for indications of contamination (staining, noticeable odor, and volatile organic compound [VOC] field screening). Soils were screened for VOCs by placing a representative portion of each sample into a resealable plastic bag and disaggregating the soil. After approximately 1 minute, VOCs were field measured in the headspace of the bag using an organic vapor meter equipped with a photoionization detector (OVM-PID). This is not a compound -specific analysis and is affected by, among other influences, climate (e.g., temperature and humidity), soil type and conditions, instrument calibration and operation, and type of VOCs present. Depth -discrete OVM-PID readings were documented on the boring logs. No obvious signs of contamination were observed in any of the borings. The OVM-PID readings were all less than 5 ppm and not an artifact of volatile contamination and may be moisture related. Soil samples retained for analytical testing were collected in laboratory supplied pre - cleaned wide mouth jars 4 -ounce jars for non-volatile analyses and pre -cleaned 2 - ounce jars and a pre -weighed 40 -milliliter (mL) VOA vial pursuant to submittal to EPA Method 5035A for volatile analyses (NWTPH-Gx/BTEX and VOAs). The 5035 sampling entailed collecting 5 -gram core samples using disposable core samplers, which were then dispensed immediately into the 40 mL VOA vial. Soil samples were labeled with an identification number, date and time of collection, and project number. Soil samples were packed in a chilled cooler and transported under chain - Q:\11000 -19999\19897 -)Ong Countyt68024.Carosino Phase II\Draf Carosino Phase 11 ESA .docs Section 2 Field Investigation of -custody to CDM's Bellevue office for temporary storage in a locked refrigerator. Samples were then transported the following morning to the laboratory by a lab courier. Each soil unit was logged according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) as described on Figure B1 in Appendix B. Boring logs are also provided in Appendix B. In general the site is underlain by sand, silty sand, and sandy silt units of varying thickness. A water bearing alluvial sand is present at depth. The top of the alluvial sand was encountered at depths ranging from 13 to 19 feet bgs. Some wood material was encountered at approximately 9 feet bgs in boring GP1, in the southeastern corner of the site. Groundwater was encountered between 17 and 20.5 feet bgs in all DPT borings, except GP1, which was terminated at 15 feet bgs. 2.2.2 Groundwater Sampling Groundwater samples were collected from DPT borings GP1B, and GP2 through GP8. Groundwater was sampled directly through the DPT sampling device by inserting a decontaminated PVC pipe with a factory -slotted screen into the drill string. The drill string was then pulled back, thereby exposing the screen to the saturated zone. Groundwater samples were then collected using a peristaltic pump connected to clean plastic tubing inserted into the screen. New tubing was used to purge and sample each DPT boring. Approximately one gallon of groundwater was purged from each boring before a groundwater sample was collected. The eight water samples exhibited no field indications of hydrocarbon contamination (sheen or hydrocarbon -like odor). Groundwater samples were collected in laboratory supplied pre -cleaned high-density polyethylene (HDPE) and glass bottles containing preservatives as appropriate per the analytical methods. Water samples were labeled with an identification number, date, and time of collection, and project number. Groundwater samples were packed in a chilled cooler and transported under chain -of -custody to CDM's Bellevue office for temporary storage in a locked refrigerator. Samples were then transported the following morning to the laboratory by a lab courier. CIA11000-19999\19897-IGng County\68024-Carosino Phase II\Draft Carosino Phase II ESA .docx 2-3 Section 3 Analytical Testing Results 3.1 Analytical Testing Methods Soil and groundwater samples collected during the investigation were submitted for analytical testing to OnSite Environmental Inc. (OnSite) in Redmond, Washington. The samples were analyzed by one or more of the following methods: gasoline -range TPH by Northwest Method NWTPH-Gx; BTEX by EPA Method 8020; VOAs by EPA Method 8260B; diesel -range and lube oil -range TPH by NWTPH-Dx; total metals by EPA methods 6010B, 200.8, 7470A, and 7471A; PCBs by EPA Method 8082; dioxins/furans by EPA Method 8290; and total cyanide by Standard Method 4500CN- E. The original scope of work included analyses of soil and water for total cyanide. Soil samples were analyzed for total cyanide. The laboratory did not provide bottles with the appropriate preservatives for water cyanide analyses and therefore the water samples were not analyzed for total cyanide. However, we believe that the identification of cyanide as a potential contaminant is an artifact of EPA's historical inclusion of cyanide with metals in one contaminant category as determined from the October 2008 Phase I ESA research. There is no evidence that indicates the presence or likely presence of cyanide at the site or vicinity. The analyses requested for soil and water samples from each boring are listed in Table 1. Boring locations are shown on Figure 2. Lists of analytes reported for each analysis and their respective reporting limits are presented in Table 2. 3.2 Analytical Testing Results Detections above the laboratory's reporting limits are presented Tables 3 and 4 (refer to Table 2 for reporting limits). Laboratory reports are presented in Appendix C. Only three borings showed detections above the laboratory's reporting limits. Lube - oil range hydrocarbons were identified in GP7 at a concentration of 62 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) at a depth of 2 feet bgs. This concentration is well below the MTCA method A cleanup level of 2,000 mg/kg and the Ecological Indicator Soil Concentrations for Protection of Terrestrial Plants and Animals value of 200 mg/kg for diesel range organics (no value is listed for oil range organics) Total barium was detected in soil samples from borings GP5 at 3 feet bgs, GP6 at 5 feet bgs, and GP7 at 2 feet bgs. There is no established Method A cleanup level for barium in MTCA. Concentrations ranged from 33 to 69 mg/kg, which are well below the MTCA Method B soil non -carcinogen cleanup level of 16,000 mg/kg. Total chromium was detected in these same three samples at level at concentrations ranging from 9.7 to 12 mg/kg, which are less than the MTCA Method A cleanup levels for chromium VI at 19 mg/kg and chromium III at 2,000 mg/kg. Total lead was also detected in the sample from boring GP7 at 2 feet bgs at a concentration of 24 mg/kg, which is well below the MTCA Method A cleanup levet of 250 mg/kg. All detections of total metals are less than the Ecological Indicator Soil Concentrations for Protection of Terrestrial Plants and Animals for these metals. (:\11000-19999\19897-Kng County \68024-Carosino Phase II\Draft Carosino Phase II ESA .docz Section 3 Analytical Testing Results Total tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) and octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (OCDD) were detected in boring GP3 at 23 feet bgs at 0.38 and 5.40 nanograms per kilogram (ng/kg), respectively or 3.8E-7 and 5.40E-6 mg/kg. OCDD was also detected in boring GP8 at 14 feet bgs at 7.0 ng/kg or 7.0E-6 mg/kg. The toxic equivalency (TEQ) values calculated for these two samples are less than the dioxin cleanup value in MTCA Method B and the Ecological Indicator Soil Screening Concentration. Trichloroethene (TCE) and tetrachloroethene (PCE) were detected in the water sample from boring GP7, the western -most boring along the north side of the site, at 0.86 micrograms per liter (µg/L) and 0.64 µg/L, respectively. Both of these detections are well below the MTCA Method A cleanup level of 5 µg/L for these two compounds. Total arsenic was detected in the water samples from borings GP5, GP6, and GP7, along the north side of the site at 14, 13, and 18 µg/L, respectively. These detections exceed the MTCA Method A cleanup level of 5 µg/L. Total lead was detected in the water sample from borings GP3 which exceeds the MTCA Method A cleanup level of 15 µg/L. A follow-up analysis of the GP3 water sample for dissolved lead showed 2 µg/L indicating the lead in the initial sample (total lead) is an artifact of suspended solids in the sample. O:\11000.19999\19897-Kng County\68024-Carosino Phase IWraft Carosino Phase 11 ESA dont 3-2 Section 4 Findings and Conclusions Nine soil borings were drilled on the site to depths ranging from 15 to 24 -feet bgs. Soils encountered below the site generally consisted of sand, silty sand, and sandy silt overlying water bearing dark gray sand. Soil samples were collected from eight of the borings at depths ranging from 1.5 to 19 feet bgs. Groundwater was encountered at depths ranging between 16 and 19 feet bgs. None of the soil samples contained potential site contaminants of concern, based on RECs identified in an October 2008 Phase I ESA, at concentrations exceeding MTCA Method A or Method B cleanup levels or the MTCA Ecological Indicator Soil Concentrations. The findings of this investigation, combined with the GSA's prior investigations, indicate that the relatively low concentrations of carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (cPAHs), dioxins/furans, lead, benzene, dieldrin, and DDT identified by GSA is limited to surface and near surface soils. Total arsenic was the only analyte that was detected in the groundwater samples at concentrations greater than its MTCA Method A cleanup level of 5 µg/L. Total arsenic was detected in the groundwater samples from borings GP5, GP6, and GP7 concentrations of 14 µg/L, 13 µg/L, and 18 µg/L, respectively. Arsenic occurs naturally in groundwater within the Green/Duwamish River Valley. In CDM's judgment, the presence of arsenic in groundwater at the site does not warrant any further action. O:\11000-19999\19897-Kng County\66024-Carosino Phase IIWra11 Carosino Phase II ESA .docz 4-1 Section 5 References Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. 2003. Central Link Light Rail Transit Project, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Parcel No. TUK-022, TUK-024, TUK-025, Ray- Carrossino Farmstead. Prepared for Sound Transit. March 2003. Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. 2004a. Sound Transit Link Light Rail, Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Parcel R/W #'s TUK-022, TUK-024, TUK-025, Ray- Carrossino Farmstead. Prepared for Sound Transit. March 2004. Garry Struthers Associates, Inc. 2004b. Sound Transit Link Light Rail, Supplemental Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Parcel R/W # TUK-025, Ray-Carosino Farmstead. Prepared for Sound Transit. June 2004. Ecology. Undated. Evaluating the Toxicity and Assessing the Carcinogenic Risk of Environmental Mixtures Using Toxicity Equivalency Factors. Undated paper. Ecology. 2007. Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulation, Chapter 173-340 WAC Washington State Department of Ecology Toxics Cleanup Program. Publication No. 94-06, Revised November 2007. Liesch, Bruce A., Charles E. Price, and Kenneth Walters. 1963. Geology and Ground - Water Resources of Northwestern King County, Washington. State of Washington, Division of Water Resources, Water Supply Bulletin No. 20. 1963. C:\110D0-19999\19697-Fling County\66024-Carosino Phase II\Drafr Carosino Phase 11 ESA .docrr 5-1 Distribution 1 Copy (1 electronic) 1 Copy (1 electronic) 1 Copy King County Water/Land Resources Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98104 Attention: Ms. Linda Holecek City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attention: Mr. Ryan Larsen King County Solid Waste Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks King Street Station 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 701 Seattle, Washington 98104-3855 Attention: Mr. James Neely 0:\11000 -19999119897 -King Count1168024-Carosino Phase II\Final Documents\Distrubution page Carosino Phase II ESA .docx richlepj XRFFS; 0 0 0 0.\1989/\58024\Phose H\ hg -1 EARTH PRO. 20:"..13 Si in Ftt r<ING 2,DUN—Y CAROSINO PROPERTY — TUKWILA, WASHINST2N 'ic1,-e No. 1 REFS: 11x1780R, SITE n. N 0 0 P:\19897\68024\Phase II\ Fig -2 PAVED VEHICLE PARKING OVERNIGHT TRUCKING HEATING OIL UST MAINTENANCE BUILDING GP5 BUNK HOUSE FARM HOUSE 'GP2 GASOLINE UST NOTE; DETAILS INDICATED ARE BASED ON KING COUNTY PARCEL MAP AND SITE OBSERVATIONS ON SEPTEMBER 4, 2008. DUWAMISH RIVER SHED a 73 0 z A 1 S.15TH ST, HUSKY TRUCK CENTER GATE • GP1B GP1 SOUND TRANSIT ELEVATED LIGHT RAIL (LINK) m 0 0 P1 KING COUNTY CAROSINO PROPERTY — PHASE II TUKWILA, WASHINGTON LEGEND: UST UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK --- — PARCEL BOUNDARY 1"=80' 40 0 80 Figure No. 2 Site Plan Table 1 Laboratory Analyses by Boring Locations Carosino Property Phase II Tukwila, Washington nalytical Laboratory Tests oil and .Water ater only Husky Trucking Center/PCE Plume GP1 NWTPH-Dx, VOAs GP1-B NWTPH-Dx, VOCs GP2 NWTPH-Dx, VOAs Gasoline UST GP3 NWTPH-Gx/BTEX, Total Lead PCBs, Dioxins/Furans Dissolved Lead Heating Oil UST GP4 NWTPH-Dx Overnite Trucking GP5 GP6 GP7 NWTPH-Gx/BTEX, NWTPH-Dx, VOAs, Total Metals NWTPH-Gx/BTEX, NWTPH-Dx, VOAs, Total Metals NWTPH-Gx/BTEX, NWTPH-Dx, VOAs, Total Metals Total Cyanide Total Cyanide Total Cyanide Barn (Oil Spills) GP8 NWTPH-Dx Dioxins/Furans Notes: -- not analyzed. BTEX - Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes. NWTPH-Gx - Northwest Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons - Gasoline Range. NWTPH-Dx - Northwest Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons - Diesel and Lube Oil Ranges. PCBs - Polychlorinated Biphenyls. PCE - Tetrachloroethene. UST - Underground Storage Tank. VOC - Volatile Organic Compounds. Q:\11000 -19999\19897 -King County\68024-Carosino Phase II\ReportTables.xlsx Table 2 Analytes and Analytical Reporting Limits Carosino Property Phase II Tukwila, Washington e-; Analyte soil Reporting Lis a : mit Water Reporting _. Limn .: BTEX ma/kq ail EPA Method 802113 Benzene 0.020 1.0 Toluene 0.050 1.0 Ethylbenzene 0.050 1.0 m,p-Xylene 0.050 1.0 o -Xylene 0.050 1.0 NWTPH-Gx mglkg l.9 /1. Gasoline 5.0 100 NWTPH-Dx mg/kg Diesel 25 0.25 Lube Oil 50 0.40 Total Metals mg/kg EgLI__ EPA Methods 6010B/ 200.8/7470A Arsenic 10 3.3 Barium 2.5 28 Cadmium 0.50 4.4 Chromium 0.50 11 Lead 5.0 1.1 Mercury 0.25 0.5 Selenium 10 5.6 Silver 0.50 11 PCBs mgLgk -- EPA Method 8082 Aroclor 1016 0.050 -- Aroclor 1221 0.050 -- Aroclor 1232 0.050 -- Aroclor 1242 0.050 -- Aroclor 1248 0.050 -- Aroclor 1254 0.050 -- Aroclor 1260 0.050 - Arocior 1262 0.050 -- Aroclor 1268 0.050 - Volatile Organic Compounds mg/kg al EPA Method 8260B Dichlorodifluoromethane 0.0010 0.20 Chloromethane 0.0050 1.0 Vinyl chloride 0.0010 0.20 Bromomethane 0.0010 0.20 Chloroethane 0.0050 1.0 Trichlorofluoromethane 0.0010 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethene 0.0010 0.20 Acetone 0.0050 5.0 lodomethane 0.0050 1.0 Carbon Disulfide 0.0010 0.20 Methylene Chloride 0.0050 1.0 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.0010 0.20 Methyl t -Butyl Ether 0.0010 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.0010 0.20 Vinyl Acetate 0.0050 2.0 2,2-Dichloropropane 0.0010 0.20 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.0010 0.20 2-Butanone 0.0050 5.0 Bromochloromethane 0.0010 0.20 Chloroform 0.0010 0.20 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane 0.0010 0.20 Carbon Tetrachloride 0.0010 0.20 1,1-Dichloropropene 0.0010 0.20 Benzene 0.0010 0.20 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.0010 0.20 Q:\11000 -19999\19897 -King County\68024-Carosino Phase II\Report Tables.xlsx Page 1 of 3 Table 2 Analytes and Analytical Reporting Limits Carosino Property Phase 11 Tukwila, Washington Analyte Soil Reporting Limits a,': Water Reporting` L1mit b, ... Volatile Organic Compounds mq/kq ug/L. EPA Method 8260B continued Trichloroethene 0.0010 0.20 1,2-Dichloropropane 0.0010 0,20 Dibromomethane 0.0010 0.20 Bromodichloromethane 0.0010 0.20 2-Chloroethyi Vinyl Ether 0.0050 1.0 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.0010 0.20 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone 0.0050 2.0 Toluene 0.0050 1.0 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.0010 0.20 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane 0.0010 0.20 Tetrachloroethene 0.0010 0.20 1,3-Dichloropropane 0.0010 0.20 2-Hexanone 0.0050 2.0 Dibromochloromethane 0.0010 0.20 1,2-Dibromoethane 0.0010 0.20 Chlorobenzene 0.0010 0.20 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane 0.0010 0.20 Ethylbenzene 0.0010 0.20 m,p-Xylene 0.0020 0.40 o -Xylene 0.0010 0.20 Styrene 0.0010 0.20 Bromoform 0.0010 1.0 Isoprophylbenzene 0.0010 0.20 Bromobenzene 0.0010 0.20 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane 0.0010 0.20 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 0.0010 0.20 n-Propylbenzene 0.0010 0.20 2-Chlorotoluene 0.0010 0.20 4-Chiorotoluene 0.0010 0.20 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 0.0010 0.20 tert-Butylbenzene 0.0010 0.20 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.0010 0.20 sec-Butylbenzene 0.0010 0.20 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene 0.0010 0.20 p-Isopropyltoluene 0.0010 0.20 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene 0.0010 0.20 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene 0.0010 0.20 n-Butylbenzene 0.0010 0.20 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.0050 1.0 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.0010 0.20 Hexachiorobutadiene 0.0050 0.20 Naphthalene 0.0010 1.0 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 0.0010 0.20 Polvchlorodibenzo-P- dioxins/polvchlorobenzofurans ng/kq -- EPA Method 8280 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.19 Total TCDF 0.19 -- 2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.190 -- Total TCDD 0.19 - 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.94 -- 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.94 -- Total PeCDF 0.94 -- 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.94 -- Total PeCDD 0.94 -- 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.94 -- 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.94 -- 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.94 -- 1.2.3.7.8.9-HxCDF 0.94 -- Total HxCDF 0.94 -- 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.94 -- 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.94 -- 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.94 -- Q:\11000-19999\19897-King County\68024-Carosino Phase II\Report Tables.xisx Page 2 of 3 Table 2 Analytes and Analytical Reporting Limits Carosino Property Phase II Tukwila, Washington tLimits Analyte Soil Reporting a _.. Water Reporting : Lund b Polvchlorodibenzo-P- dioxins/Aolvchlorobenzofurans no/k4 -- EPA Method 8280 Total HxCDD 0.94 -- 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.94 -- 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.94 -- Total HpCFD 0.94 -- - 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,-HpCDD 1,2,3,4,6,7,8;HpCDD 0.94 -- Total HpCDD 0.94 -- OCDF 1.90 OCDD 1.9 Total Cyanide (mq/ko) 0.1 - Standard Method 4500CN-E Notes: a) Reporting limits in table assume 100% total solids. Actual reporting limits for sample analyses vary with moisture content and are shown on the laboratory's analytical reports. b) Reporting limits in table assume specific sample volumes. Actual reporting limits may vary slightly and are shown on the laboratory's analytical reports. -- Not analyzed in this matrix. HpCDF - Heptachlordibenzofuran. HpCDD - Heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. HxCDF - Hexachlorodibenzofuran. HxCDD - Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram. pg/L - micrograms per liter. mg/L - milligrams per liter. ng/kg - nonograms per kilogram. PeCDF - Pentachlorodibenzofuran. PeCDD - Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. TCDF - Tetrachlorodibenzofuran. TCDD - tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. Q:\11000.19999\19897 -King County\68024•Carosino Phase II\Report Tables.xlsx Page 3 of 3 Table 3 Summary of Analytical Detections - Soils Carosino Property Phase 1I Tukwila, Washington t i ti Analysts O.,MTCA Method A a � Cleanup Level (mglkg) •Ecological Indicator} Soil Concentrations } `(mglkg) d .. - 'A.-. Toxic r Sample I D DateSampletl _ u :x \ , Equivalency - ,:-Factor , .; GP3 23 + _ ...,1011412008' ' 'GPS 3 s � .1011412008 :% GP6.75 101145108, „ ' GP7 2s t :1011412008 i S GP8 14 ` .1011412008 Diesel and Lube -Oil Range Hydrocarbons (mglkq) WDOE Method NWTPH-Dx Lube -Oil Range Hydrocarbons 2,000 200 a NA — <58 <57 62 — Total Metals (mglkul EPA Methods 6010B and 7471A Barium 16,000 b 102 NA — 33 42 69 — Chromium 19/2,000 c 42 NA — 9.7 11 12 — Lead 250 50 NA — <5.8 <5.7 24 -- Polvchlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and polvchlorodibenzofurans (mglkgl EPA Method 8290 Total Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins f NE NE NA 3.8E-07 — — — 1.9E-07 Octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin NE NE 3.D0E-04 5.4E-06 — — -- 7.0E-06 TEQ Dioxins 1.1E-059 2E-06 g 5.4E-09 — — — 7.0E-09 Notes: a) Washington Administrative Code Chapter 173-340, Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulation, Method A suggested soil cleanup level; promulgated August 15, 2001. b) Soil, Method B, Non -carcinogen, Standard Formula Value, Direst Contact (ingestion only), unrestricted land use retrieved from Washington State Department of Ecology Cleanup Levels and Risk Calculations (CLARC) database (https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/clarc/CLARCHome.aspx) on October 30, 2008. c) Cleanup level is 19 mg/kg for Chromium VI and 2,000 mg/kg for Chromium III. d) Washington Administrative Code Chapter 174-340, Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulation, Table 749-3, Ecological Indicator Soil Concentrations for Protection of Terrestrial Plants and Animals. The lowest of three values (Plants, Soil Biota, and Wildlife) is listed. e) Value is for Diesel Range Organics. No value for Oil Range Organics is listed. f) Value is for tetra isomers other than 2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-p-dioxin TCDD. g) Toxic equivalency (TEQ) value uses 2,3,7,8-TCDD as the reference compound. mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram. NA - not applicable. NE - No value is established. Toxic equivalency factor (TEF) methodology described in the Washington State Department of Ecology paper, "Evaluating the Toxicity and Assessing the Carcinogenic Risk of Environmental Mixtures Using Toxicity Equivalency Factors," is used. WDOE - Washington State -Department of Ecology. O:\11000 -19999\19897 -King County\68024-Carosino Phase II\Report Tabies.xlsx Table 4 Summary of Analytical Detections - Waters Carosino Property Phase II Tukwila, Washington =Analysis. '"MICA Method A Cleanup Level; (N9/L): a r Sample I.D.rte- : {_ . Date'Sampled <- r rn . •' GP3 W' ; ,:: , , ,GPS -W GP6 W ..� .... ,,- GPT W , .., 10/14/2008-=' ,:10114/2008 . i- , 1 0/1412008:C! _10/14/2008ige Volatile Organic Compounds (uq/L) EPA Method 8260B Trichloroethene 5 -- <0.2 <0.2 0.86 Tetrachloroethene 5 -- <0.2 <0.2 0.64 Total Metals (ug/L) EPA Methods 200.8 Arsenic 5 — 14 13 18 Barium 3,200 b -- 140 110 210 Chromium 50 — 30 20 25 Lead 15 32 8.6 6.6 13 Dissolved Metals (uq/L) EPA Method 200.8 Lead 15 2 — -- — Notes: Values in bold exceed cleanup criteria. a) Washington Administrative Code Chapter 173-340, Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulation, Method A suggested groundwater cleanup level; promulgated August 15, 2001. b) Groundwater, Method B, Non -carcinogen, Standard Formula Value retrieved from Washington State Department of Ecology Cleanup Levels and Risk Calculations (CLARC) database (https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/clarc/CLARCHome.aspx) on October 30, 2008. — not analyzed. pg/L - micrograms per liter. Q:\11000 -19999\19897 -King County\68024-Carosino Phase II112eport Tables.xlsx Appendix A Field Exploration and Sampling Procedures 0:\11000-19999\19897-Kng County\68024-Carosino Phase II\Draft Carosino Phase 11 ESA .docx Appendix A Field Exploration and Sampling Procedures Drilling ESN Northwest of Lacey, Washington drilled nine borings on October 14, 2008 for the Carosino Phase II Environmental Site Assessment project. A total of nine borings, denoted GP1, GP1-B, and GP -2 through GP8, were completed at the site (Figure 2) to depths ranging from 15 to 24 feet below ground surface (bgs). A Camp Dresser &McKee (CDM) geologist observed the drilling and monitoring well installation. The borings were advanced using a truck mounted DPT rig. Soil Sampling Nine borings (denoted GP1, GP1-B, and GP2 through GP8) were completed using direct -push technology (DPT). Boring GP1 was completed to a depth of 15. Borings GP1-B and GP2 were completed to a depth of 23 feet bgs and boring GP3 was completed to a depth of 24 feet bgs. Boring GP4 was completed to a depth of 21 feet bgs and borings GP5 through GP8 were completed to a depth of 22 feet bgs. During drilling, soil was sampled by driving a 4 -foot long, 1.5 -inch inside diameter, 2.5 -inch outside diameter Macro -Core sampler (manufactured by Geoprobe®) attached to the end of the drive rods. The sampler contains a clear plastic liner to contain the soil sample. The liners are cut open to expose the soil cores. Driving was terminated when either the. full 4 feet drive was completed or the drill encountered refusal. Each sampled interval was logged according to the Unified Soil Classification System. The following procedures were used to collect subsurface soil samples during drilling: 1. Driller retrieved sampler with plastic liner or split -spoon sampler from borehole. 2. The plastic liner or the split -spoon sampler was opened and sample recovery was measured. 3. Soil samples to be analyzed for non-volatile analyses were collected in laboratory supplied pre -cleaned 4 -ounce wide mouth jars. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and NWTPH-Gx analyses were collected using approximately 5 -gram core samples, dispensed immediately into a pre -weighed 40 mL VOA vial. The samples were collected and the containers were sealed in accordance with EPA Method 5035A. An additional sample was collected into a 4 -ounce glass jar for moisture determination and non-volatile analyses as appropriate. Sample containers were labeled, secured with a chain -of -custody seal and placed in a chilled cooler. 4. A representative sample was placed in a resealable plastic bag to measure headspace using an organic vapor meter equipped with a photoionization detector (OVM-PID). 5. The contents of the sampler were described on the field log. 6. When used, the split -spoon sampler was decontaminated by the procedures described later in this appendix. x:\11000.19999\19897-Wng County \68024 -Carmine Phase 11\ Draft Carosino Phase 11 ESA .docz A-1 Appendix A Field Exploration and Sampling Procedures Field Screening An OVM-PID was used to screen samples from the soil borings as follows: soil samples were placed in a plastic resealable bag and disaggregated; after approximately 1 minute, the OVM-PID probe was inserted through the bag in the space (headspace) above the soil and the maximum reading on the instrument was recorded. This screening technique is not a compound -specific analysis and is affected by climate (e.g., temperature and humidity), soil type and condition, and instrument calibration and operation. The intent of this analysis is to qualitatively compare samples and assist in selecting samples for chemical analysis. DPT Boring Water Sampling Groundwater samples were collected from soil borings GP1-B and GP2 through GP8 directly through the DPT sampling device at the time of drilling by inserting decontaminated PVC pipe with a factory -slotted screen into the drill string. The drill string was then pulled back, thereby exposing the screen to the saturated zone. Groundwater samples were then collected using a peristaltic pump connected to clean plastic tubing inserted into the screen. New tubing was used to purge and sample each DPT boring. Approximately one gallon of groundwater was purged from each boring before a groundwater sample was collected. After water samples were collected, the temporary well pipe was extracted and the borings were filled with bentonite. Decontamination Procedures The following decontamination procedures were used to decontaminate drill rods, soil sampling equipment, and temporary well sampling piping: 1. Rinse and scrub in potable water. 2. Wash and scrub with nonphosphate-based detergent and potable water. 3. Rinse in potable water. 4. Rinse with deionized water. 5. Store on clean plastic between sample collection. Sample Handling and Shipping Soil samples were kept out of direct sunlight and were checked for label completeness and cap tightness. Each sealed sample container was placed in packing material upright in a cooler and chilled with Blue Ice. The samples were stored and transported under chain - of -custody procedures. Copies of the completed chain -of -custody forms are presented with the laboratory reports in Appendix D. C:\71000-19999\196974 ng County \66024.Carosino Phase IlDraft Carosino Phase II ESA .docx Appendix A Field Exploration and Sampling Procedures Materials Generated During Fieldwork Soil cuttings and decontamination/well development /well purge water generated during fieldwork were placed in dedicated 55 -gallon drums, labeled to identify the contents, and temporarily stored onsite pending appropriate disposal. Other waste generated during assessment activities (rubber gloves, used PVC well casing, empty bags, etc.) were placed in plastic garbage bags and sealed shut. The garbage bags were placed in commercial waste collection containers. Documentation Daily Field Report The CDM representative reported daily activities on a Field Investigation Daily Report form. Personnel on site, visitors, weather, and general activities planned and performed, and any problems were included on the Daily Report. Daily Field Reports and other documentation of field activities are contained in the project file. Drilling and Well Construction Drilling was conducted by ESN Northwest and documented by a CDM geologist. Documentation of drilling, soil sampling, and well construction was made on a Field Log of Exploration. The log was completed in the field by the CDM representative. CDM documented field activities associated with soil and groundwater sampling. This included a comprehensive discussion of field observations, including visual observations, field parameter measurements, QA observations, and problems encountered. Samples selected for analytical testing were kept stored in a chilled container, out of direct sunlight and were checked for label completeness and cap tightness. Sample containers were labeled with the following information: v Project identification • Date • Time ® Sampler's initials • Sample identification number. The samples were stored and transported under chain -of -custody procedures. A-3 Q:\1 1000-19999\19697-1Gng County\66024-Ca osino Phase II\Oraft Carosino Phase 11 ESA .docx Appendix B Boring Logs Q:111000 -19999119897 -King County\66024-Carosino Phase II\Draft Carosino Phase 11 ESA .docx w 0 0 J 0 0 U a cs o 0 0 N 0 0 z w 0 a U N CO a, m z w w z 0 0 U LL N N Q U -J N SOIL CLASSIFICATION LEGEND MAJOR DIVISIONS TYPICAL NAMES —J rn - • and O co ,t Luy'y Z.: L V, @o z w -. 9 0) N <5 0 0 GRAVELS More than half coarse fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve size Clean gravels with little or no fines Gravel with over 12% fines ..71.11 GW ;. . GP 6. GM GC Wei graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures Poorly graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures Silty gravels, gravel -sand -silt mixtures Clayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay mixtures SANDS More than half coarse fraction is smaller than No. 4 sieve size Clean sands with little or no fines SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands Sands with over 12% fines SM Silty sand, sand -silt mixtures SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures -J OOm V) y N • N y w ig z ON L o mZ w dL z. LL SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limit less than 50 ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour silty or clayey fine sands, or clayey silts with slight plasticity SAMPLE TYPE SYMBOLS Disturbed bag or jar sample AStd. Penetration Test (2.0" OD) 1 G Type U Ring Sampler (3.25" OD) California Sampler (3.0" OD) Undisturbed Tube Sample Grab Sample Core Run Non-standard Penetration Test (with split spoon sampler) CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays OL Organic clays and organic silty clays of low plasticity SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limit greater than 50 MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts CONTACT BETWEEN UNITS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts Change in geologic unit Soil type change within geologic unit - — Obscure or gradational change HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT k u u Peat and other highly organic soils DESCRIPTORS FOR SOIL STRATA AND STRUCTURE (ENGLISH/METRIC General Thickness or Spacing Parting: less1than 1/16 in. Seam: 1/16 to 1/2 in. (1/6 to 1 1/4 cm) Layer: 1/2 to 12 in. (1 1/4 to 30 1/2 cm) Stratum: > 12 in. (30 1/2 cm) Scattered: < 1 per ft. (30 1/2 cm) Numerous: > 1 per ft. (30 1/2 cm) Structure Pocket: Erratic, discontinuous deposit of limited extent Lens: Lenticular deposit Varved: Altemating seams of silt and clay Laminated: Alternating seams Interbedded: Alternating layers General Attitude Near horizontal: Oto 10 deg. Low angle: 10 to 45 deg. High angle: 45 to 80 deg. Near Vertical: 8010 90 deg. STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION (cont.) Approx. Undrained Shear Str. (psf) Fractured Breaks easily along definite fractured planes Slickensided Polished, glossy, fractured planes Blocky, Diced Breaks easily into small angular lumps Sheared Disturbed texture, mix of strengths Homogeneous Same color and appearance throughout RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY VS. SPT N -VALUE COARSE GRAINED FINE GRAINED Density N (blows/ft) Approx. Relative Density (%) Consistency N (blows/ft) Approx. Undrained Shear Str. (psf) Very Loose 0 to 4 0 - 15 Very Soft 0 to 2 <250 Loose 4 to 10 15 - 35 Soft 2 to 4 250 - 500 Medium Dense 10 to 30 35 - 65 Medium Stiff 4 to 8 500 - 1000 Dense 30 to 50 65 - 85 Stiff 8 to 15 1000 - 2000 Very Dense Over 50 85 - 100 Very Stiff 15 to 30 2000 - 4000 Hard over 30 >4000 Notes: 1. Sample descriptions in this report are based on visual field and laboratory observations, which include density/consistency, moisture condition, grain size, and plasticity estimates, and should not be construed to imply field or laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual -manual classification methods in accordance with ASTM D 2488 were used as an identification guide. Where laboratory data are available, soil classifications are in general accordance with ASTM D 2487 2. Dual symbols are used to indicate gravel and sand units with 5 to 12 percent fines. 3. WOR = weight of rod. CDM MOISTURE DESCRIPTION Dry - Free of moisture, dusty Moist - Damp but no visible free water Wet - Visible free water, saturated WELL COMPLETIONS Concrete Seal Well Casing Bentonite/Grout Seal Groundwater Level s% Slotted Well Casing Sand Backfill Impermeable Backfill or Bentonite/Grouted PHYSICAL PROPERTY TEST AL - FC - GSD - MC - MD - Comp - CBGR - RM - Perm - TXP - Cons - Chem - Corr - VS - DS - UC - TX - UU - CU - CD - Atterberg Limits Fines Content Grain Size Distribution Moisture Content Moisture Content/Dry Density Compaction Test (Proctor) Specific Gravity California Bearing Ratio Resilient Modulus Permeability Triaxial Permeability Consolidation Analytical Chemical. Analysis Corrosion Vane Shear Direct Shear Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression Unconsolidated, Undrained Consolidated, Undrained Consolidated, Drained King County Carosino Property Tukwila, Washington Project No: 19897.68024 Figure: B1 CO 0 0 0 J J CID 0 0 V 0 m O 0 0 0 zC75 0 0 CC N CO co J x 0 z 0 0 0 0' 0 Other Tests 0 z N 2 c Moisture Content (%) a >, ' y -E- G ° Penetration Resistance (blows / fool) Depth (feet) N a USCS Symbol 0 0 Cn COm C7 0 r— :17/ -D o co z 0 Elev. (feet) 1 1 1 1material _i ----\ SM • • • ri Grass. a Silty SAND (SM), light brown, fine grained, some coarse gravel (10-15%), moist. Sand becomes medium grained, decreasing silt, becomes dark brown. 4" concrete -like material at 3 ft bgs. Increasing gravel (20%), gravel is fine to coarse, subangular. Becomes wet at 5.5 ft bgs. Gravel is absent, no trace. Some wood material at 9 ft bgs, increasing moisture. Sand becomes fine grained. Piece of plastic at 14 ft bgs. Encountered refusal on concrete -like and asphalt debris at 15 ft bgs. 5 — _ 10—L, 15 20- 25— Boring terminated at 15 ft bgs. No groundwater encountered during drilling. Location: Surface Elevation: Logged By: Drill Rig: DPT - Truck Mounted Equipment/Hammer: Core Barrel/NA AW Date Completed: 10-14-08 COM King County Carosino Property Tukwila, Washington Boring Log GP1 Figure: B2 Project No: 19897.68024 1 of 1 Other Tests z m a E co Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) E a 2 Penetration Resistance (blows / foot) Depth (feet) 2 n uSCs l LSymbol Boring Log GP1-B DESCRIPTION L? W - 5- 10- 15— - Boring hydropunched to 34 ft bgs. See logs for GP1 and GP2 for geologic conditions in the area of GP1-B. Becomes saturated at 20.5 ft bgs. - 25 — Boring terminated at 23 ft bgs. Groundwater encountered at 20.5 ft bgs during drilling. Location: Surface Elevation: Logged By: Drill Rig: DPT - Truck Mounted Equipment/Hammer: Core Barrel/NA AW Date Completed: 10-14-08• CDM King County Carosino Property Tukwila, Washington Boring Log GP1-B Figure: B3 Project No: 19897.68024 1 of 1 Iu- o1- z° d a 0 Moisture Content (%) a a .N oo E a o a Penetration Resistance (blows / fool) Depth (feet) m a co USCS Symbol Boring Log GP2 DESCRIPTION Elev. (feet) 1 1 2 2 Grass. SP . \ r SAND (SP), brown, medium to coarse grained, trace silt, moist. SM • • Silty SAND (SM), brown, moist. 5— - ML Sandy SILT (ML), light brown, very fine grained sand, trace clay, moist. ' Silty SAND (SM), light brown, fine grained, moist. • Increasing sand. SM 10 — - - - 15— / SAND (SP), light brown, fine grained, trace silt, moist. : SP SM f .l ��. • Thin beds of silt. SAND (SP), gray, fine to medium grained, moist. • SP SAND (SW), dark gray, wet graded, trace silt, wet. Becomes saturated. 20—-.•' - 25— Boring terminated at 23 ft bgs. Groundwater encountered at 19 ft bgs during drilling. Location: Drill Rig: DPT - Truck Mounted Surface Elevation: Equipment/Hammer: Core Barrel/NA Logged By: AW Date Completed: 10-14-08 COM King County Carosino Property Tukwila, Washington Boring Log GP2 Figure: B4 Project No: 19897.68024 1 of 1 > cc 0 1- J 2 n. U U' 0 0 0 U 0 z 0 0 Q 0 cn cn0 0) J W x U zcn 1 0 o co0 0 0 J Other Tests Sample No. Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (per) E a n. F. Penetration Resistance (blows / foot) Depth (feet) m a USCS Symbol Boring Log GP3 DESCRIPTION w 42 W 4 2 3 2 2 _ 5— SM — SP '. > Grass and gravel. r Silty SAND (SM), dark brown, fine grained, moist. Brick fragment at 1 ft bgs. - Decreasing silt at 3 ft bgs, becomes light gray. J SAND (SP), light gray, trace silt, moist. SM :• •2 Silty SAND (SM), dark brown, moist. Decreasing silt. Increasing silt, sand becomes very fine grained, oxidation staining present. 10— — 15— SP •: SAND (SP), brown, moist, trace silt. Silty SAND (SM), dark brown, moist. Becomes wet at 15 ft bgs, increasing silt. SM SW • • SAND (SW), dark gray, well graded, fine to medium grained, trace silt, wet. Becomes saturated. __ 20 25— Boring terminated at 24 ft bgs. Groundwater encountered at 19 ft bgs during drilling. Location: Drill Rig: DPT - Truck Mounted Surface Elevation: Equipment/Hammer: Core Barrel/NA Logged By: AVV Date Completed: 10-14-08 DDIA King County Carosino Property Tukwila, Washington Boring Log GP3 Figure: B5 Project No: 19897.68024 1 of 1 Other Tests Z d a E �n Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pct) PID (ppm) Penetration Resistance (blows / foot) Depth (feet) Sample USCS Symbol Boring Log GP4 DESCRIPTION 1 Elev. (feet) 3 3 3 1 3 3 GP Gravel. /- SM Silty SAND (SM), brown, fine grained, moist. ML Sandy SILT (ML), brown, moist. 5— SM • .:• Silty SAND (SM), brown, moist, interbedded lenses of clean, with medium grained sand lenses 3-4" thick. 10 15— SW •grained, ,'.. SAND (SW), dark gray, moderately wet graded, fine to medium wet. Becomes well graded, saturated. - 20 - 25 — Boring terminated at 21 ft bgs. Groundwater encountered at 16 ft bgs during drilling. Location: Drill Rig: DPT - Truck Mounted Surface Elevation: Equipment/Hammer: Core Barrel/NA Logged By: AW Date Completed: 10-14-08 COM King County Carosino Property Tukwila, Washington Boring Log GP4 Figure: B6 Project No: 19897.68024 1 of 1 0 1- 0 c� 0 0 U 0 0 cn d U 0 0 z 0 cc U N O O J W x 1- 0 z 0 0 m 0 0 0 Other Tests Z N `ui0 Moisture Content (%) a T 0 d o Penetration Resistance (blows / foot) Depth (feet) Sample USCS Symbol Boring Log GP5 DESCRIPTION Elev. (feet) I 4 3 3 3 3 2 - 5- - 10- - CP `.!` " ‘ Gravel. p SM Silty SAND (SM), dark brown, moist. Sp :. 6" thick tense of clean, medium grained sand at 2.5 ft bgs. Silty SAND (SM), light brown, moist. SM Sandy SILT (ML), brown, moist. ML SM .,. Slightly Silty SAND (SM), gray and light brown, moist. SW • SAND (SW), gray and dark brown, moderately well graded, trace silt, moist, some oxidation staining present. Becomes saturated. 15 - - 20 - 25 — Boring terminated at 22 ft bgs. Groundwater encountered at 16 ft bgs during drilling. Location: Drill Rig: DPT - Truck Mounted Surface Elevation: Equipment/Hammer: Core Barrel/NA Logged By: AW Date Completed: 10-14-08 COM' King County Carosino Property Tukwila, Washington Boring Log GP5 Figure: B7 Project No: 19897.68024 1 of 1 I 0 1-- 0 J [o 0 0 U 0 0 0 -J 0 z 0 CCU 0 0 0) W x U z 0 0 co0 0 0 Other Tests Sample No. Moisture Content (%) T .0 0 a a O 2 Penetration ' Resistance (blows / foot) Depth (feet) I N a U) Cic D O Boring Log GP6 DESCRIPTION [Elev. (feet) 1 3 3 3 2 3 3 -• SM ,. • '. i, \ Grass. r Silty SAND (SM), brown, moist. 5 - Sp •: Interbedded 4-5" thick lens of dean, medium grained sand. . • •Silty SAND (SM), brown, moist. SM sp Interbedded 4-5" thick lens of clean, medium grained sand. :• • Silty SAND (SM), brown, moist. Becomes wet at 11 ft bgs. Wet at 14 ft bgs, very silty. SM 10- - Sw '• • .•.•, • SAND (SW), dark gray, moderately well graded, moist. Becomes wet. Becomes saturated. 15 - 20— - 25 — Boring terminated at 22 ft bgs. Groundwater encountered at 17 ft bgs during drilling. Location: Drill Rig: DPT - Truck Mounted Surface Elevation: Equipment/Hammer: Core Barrel/NA Logged By: AW Date Completed: 10-14-08 CDM King County Carosino Property Tukwila, Washington Boring Log GP6 Figure: B8 Project No: 19897.68024 1 of 1 Other Tests Z ). rt co Moisture I Content (%) T oo PID (ppm) Penetration Resistance (blows / foot) Depth (feet) Sample USCS Symbol Boring Log GP7 DESCRIPTION IElev. (feet) I 5 4 4 GP '. -\ Gravel. P SM Silty SAND (SM), light brown, moist. Poor recovery; advance boring to 24 ft bgs without sampling. 5- 10- 15— _ 20— See log for GP8 for geologic conditions in the area of GP7. Becomes saturated. - 25 — Boring terminated at 22 ft bgs. Groundwater encountered at 17 ft bgs during drilling. Location: Drill Rig: DPT - Truck Mounted Surface Elevation: Equipment/Hammer: Core Barrel/NA Logged By: AW Date Completed: 10-14-08 CM King County Carosino Property Tukwila, Washington Boring Log GP7 Figure: B9 Project No: 19897.68024 1 of 1 Other Tests Sample No. Moisture Content (%) (pd) ,(tlsuap tiQ (wdd) Old Penetration Resistance (blows / foot) Depth (feet) a co USCS Symbol Boring Log GP8 DESCRIPTION Elev. (feet) I 3 3 3 3 3 - Grass/gravel. SM c . • Silty SAND (SM), light brown, moist, some asphalt -like debris at 1 ft bgs. Decreasing silt. • 5 _ 10 — - - Sp •: . Interbedded 4-6" thick lens of fine grained sand. ;. SM Sp :.`':.l Interbedded 4-6" thick lens of fine grained sand. Increasing silt. Becomes wet. :' Becomes moist. Decreasing silt. Becomes saturated. SM 15 - _ SW SAND (SW), dark gray, fine to coarse grained, moderately well graded, wet. 20 - 25 — Boring terminated at 22 ft bgs. Groundwater encountered at 17 ft bgs during drilling. Location: Drill Rig: DPT - Truck Mounted Surface Elevation: Equipment/Hammer: Core Barrel/NA Logged By: AW Date Completed: 10-14-08 COM King County Carosino Property Tukwila, Washington Boring Log GP8 Figure: B10 Project No: 19897.68024 1 of 1 Appendix C Analytical Laboratory Reports 0:111000-19999\19897-Kng County\68024-Carosino Phase II\Draft Carosino Phase 11 ESA .docx OnSite Environmental Inc 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 • (425) 883-3881 November 5, 2008 Lance Peterson CDM P.O. Box 3885 Bellevue, WA 98009 Re: Analytical Data for Project Carosino Property Laboratory Reference No. 0810-130 Dear Lance: Enclosed are the analytical results and associated quality control data for samples submitted on October 15, 2008. The standard policy of OnSite Environmental Inc. is to store your samples for 30 days from the date of receipt. If you require longer storage, please contact the laboratory. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions concerning the data, or need additional information, please feel free to call me. David Baumeister Project Manager Enclosures OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`" Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 2 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Case Narrative Samples were collected on October 14, 2008 and received by the laboratory on October 15, 2008. They were maintained at the laboratory at a temperature of 2°C to 6°C. General QA/QC issues associated with the analytical data enclosed in this laboratory report will be indicated with a reference to a comment or explanation on the Data Qualifier page. More complex and involved QA/QC issues will be discussed in detail below. NWTPH Gx/BTEX and Volatiles EPA 8260B Analysis Per EPA Method 5035A, samples were received by the laboratory in pre -weighed 40 mL VOA vials within 48 hours of sample collection. They were stored in a freezer at between -7°C and -20°C until extraction or analysis. Any other QA/QC issues associated with this extraction and analysis will be indicated with a footnote reference and discussed in detail on the Data Qualifier page. OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property NWTPH-Gx/BTEX Date Extracted: 10-20-08 Date Analyzed: 10-20-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Client ID: GP3-3 GP5-3 Lab ID: 10-130-05 10-130-10 Result Flags PQL Result Flags PQL Benzene ND 0.020 Toluene ND 0.048 Ethyl Benzene ND 0.048 m,p-Xylene ND 0.048 o -Xylene ND 0.048 TPH-Gas ND 4.8 ND 6.0 Surrogate Recovery: Fluorobenzene 94% 92% OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 4 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property NWTPH-Gx Date Extracted: 10-20-08 Date Analyzed: 10-20-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Client ID: GP6-5 GP7-2 Lab ID: 10-130-12 10-130-14 Result Flags PQL Result Flags PQL TPH-Gas ND 5.7 ND 6.3 Surrogate Recovery: Fluorobenzene 84% 89% OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) NWTPH-Gx/BTEX METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL 10-20-08 10-20-08 Lab ID: MB1020S2 Result Flags PQL Benzene ND 0.020 Toluene ND 0.050 Ethyl Benzene ND 0.050 m,p-Xylene ND 0.050 o -Xylene ND 0.050 TPH-Gas ND 5.0 Surrogate Recovery: Fluorobenzene 96% 5 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 6 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: NWTPH-Gx/BTEX DUPLICATE QUALITY CONTROL 10-20-08 10-20-08 10-130-05 10-130-05 Original Duplicate RPD Flags Benzene ND ND NA Toluene ND ND NA Ethyl Benzene ND ND NA m,p-Xylene ND ND NA o -Xylene ND ND NA TPH-Gas ND ND NA Surrogate Recovery: Fluorobenzene 94% 91% OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property NWTPH-Gx/BTEX MS/MSD QUALITY CONTROL Date Extracted: 10-20-08 Date Analyzed: 10-20-08 7 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Spike Level (ppm): 3.09 Lab ID: 10-135-02 Percent 10-135-02 Percent MS Recovery MSD Recovery RPD Flags Benzene 3.32 107 3.22 104 3 Toluene 3.31 107 3.22 104 3 Ethyl Benzene 3.31 107 3.22 104 3 m,p-Xylene 3.27 106 3.19 103 3 o -Xylene 3.28 106 3.20 103 3 Surrogate Recovery: Fluorobenzene 85% 86% OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 8 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property NWTPH-Gx1BTEX Date Extracted: 10-16-08 Date Analyzed: 10-16-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Client ID: GP3-W GP5-W Lab ID: 10-130-19 10-130-21 Result Flags PQL Result Flags PQL Benzene ND 1.0 Toluene ND 1.0 Ethyl Benzene ND 1.0 m,p-Xylene ND 1.0 o -Xylene ND 1.0 TPH-Gas ND 100 ND 100 Surrogate Recovery: Fluorobenzene 105% 103% OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Client ID: Lab ID: TPH-Gas NWTPH-Gx 10-16-08 10-16-08 GP6-W GP7-W 10-130-22 10-130-23 Result Flags PQL Result Flags PQL ND 100 ND 100 Surrogate Recovery: Fluorobenzene 101% 101% 9 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 10 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: NWTPH-Gx/BTEX METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL 10-16-08 10-16-08 MB1016W3 Result Flags PQL Benzene ND 1.0 Toluene ND 1.0 Ethyl Benzene ND 1.0 m,p-Xylene ND 1.0 o -Xylene ND 1.0 TPH-Gas ND 100 Surrogate Recovery: Fluorobenzene 101% OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property NWTPH-Gx/BTEX DUPLICATE QUALITY CONTROL Date Extracted: 10-16-08 Date Analyzed: 10-16-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: 10-131-01 10-131-01 Original Duplicate RPD Flags Benzene ND ND NA Toluene ND ND NA Ethyl Benzene ND ND NA m,p-Xylene ND ND NA o -Xylene ND ND NA TPH-Gas ND ND NA Surrogate Recovery: Fluorobenzene 102% • 102% OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 11 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property NWTPH-Gx/BTEX MS/MSD QUALITY CONTROL Date Extracted: 10-16-08 Date Analyzed: 10-16-08 12 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Spike Level: 50.0 ppb Lab ID: 10-131-01 Percent 10-131-01 Percent MS Recovery MSD Recovery RPD Flags Benzene 51.4 103 49.8 100 3 Toluene 51.6 103 50.0 100 3 Ethyl Benzene 51.4 103 50.0 100 3 m,p-Xylene 51.5 103 49.6 99 4 o -Xylene 51.5 103 50.1 100 3 Surrogate Recovery: Fluorobenzene 105% 104% OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 13 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: 10-20-08 Date Analyzed: 10-20-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Client ID: Lab ID: Diesel Range: PQL: Identification: Lube Oil Range: PQL: Identification: Surrogate Recovery o-Terphenyl: GP1-15 10-130-02 ND 29 ND 59 87% NWTPH-Dx GP2-19 10-130-03 GP4-14 10-130-09 ND ND 28 27 ND ND 56 53 96% 86% Flags: Y Y Y OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: 10-20-08 Date Analyzed: 10-20-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Client ID: Lab ID: GP5-3 10-130-10 NWTPH-Dx GP6-5 10-130-12 GP7-2 10-130-14 Diesel Range: ND ND ND PQL: 29 29 29 Identification: Lube Oil Range: ND ND 62 PQL: 58 57 58 Identification: Lube Oil Surrogate Recovery o-Terphenyl: 96% 88% 88% Flags: Y Y Y OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 14 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: 10-20-08 Date Analyzed: 10-20-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Client ID: Lab ID: Diesel Range: PQL: Identification: Lube Oil Range: PQL: Identification: Surrogate Recovery o-Terphenyl: Flags: NWTPH-Dx GP8-1.5 10-130-15 ND 28 ND 56 92% Y OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 15 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property NWTPH-Dx METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL Date Extracted: 10-20-08 Date Analyzed: 10-20-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: MB1020S1 Diesel Range: PQL: Identification: Lube Oil Range: PQL: Identification: Surrogate Recovery o-Terphenyl: Flags: ND 25 ND 50 97% Y 16 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: 10-20-08 10-20-08 NWTPH-Dx DUPLICATE QUALITY CONTROL Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: 10-130-10 10-130-10 DUP Diesel Range: ND PQL: 25 RPD: N/A ND 25 Surrogate Recovery o-Terphenyl: 96% 89% Flags: Y Y 17 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: NWTPH-Dx 10-20-08 10-20-08 Matrix: Water Units: mg/L (ppm) Client ID: Lab ID: Diesel Range: PQL: Identification: Lube Oil Range:. PQL: Identification: Surrogate Recovery o-Terphenyl: Flags: GP1B-W 10-130-17 GP2-W 10-130-18 GP4-W 10-130-20 ND ND ND 0.28 0.25 0.25 ND ND ND 0.44 0.41 0.41 74% Y 77% 61% Y Y 18 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: NWTPH-Dx 10-20-08 10-20-08 Matrix: Water Units: mg/L (ppm) Client ID: Lab ID: Diesel Range: PQL: Identification: Lube Oil Range: PQL: Identification: Surrogate Recovery o-Terphenyl: GP5-W 10-130-21 GP6-W 10-130-22 GP7-W 10-130-23 ND ND ND 0.25 0.26 0.25 ND ND ND 0.41 0.41 0.40 70% 88% 83% Flags: Y Y Y OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company 10 whom it is addressed. 19 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property NWTPH-Dx Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: 10-20-08 10-20-08 Matrix: Water Units: mg/L (ppm) Client ID: Lab ID: Diesel Range: PQL: Identification: Lube Oil Range: PQL: Identification: Surrogate Recovery o-Terphenyl: GP8-W 10-130-24 ND 0.26 ND 0.42 88% Flags: Y 20 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 9511' Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: NWTPH-Dx METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL 10-20-08 10-20-08 Matrix: Water Units: mg/L (ppm) Lab ID: MB1020W1 Diesel Range: PQL: Identification: Lube Oil Range: PQL: Identification: Surrogate Recovery o-Terphenyl: ND 0.25 ND 0.40 59% Flags: Y 21 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is Intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 22 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: 10-20-08 10-20-08 NWTPH-Dx DUPLICATE QUALITY CONTROL Matrix: Water Units: mg/L (ppm) Lab ID: 10-145-03 10-145-03 DUP Diesel Range: ND PQL: 0.25 RPD: N/A ND 0.25 Surrogate Recovery o-Terphenyl: 77% 75% Flags: Y Y OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. TO ELLIOTT BAY, SEATTLE Scale: N.T.S. PROJECT BOUNDARY Duwamish Gardens Habitat Project List of Sheets: 1 Vicinity Map 2 Existing Conditions 3 Demolition, Clearing and Grubbing Plan 4 Site Plan 5 Grading and Drainage Plan 6 Erosion and Water Control Plan 7 Erosion and Water Control Details 8 Planting Plan 9 Plant List 10 Cross Sections 11 Detail: Root Wad and Woody Debris 12 Detail: Tidal Stream and Snag 13 Detail: Cobble River Access Trail 14 Detail: Emergent Planting with Goose Excluder 15 Detail: Tree Planting 16 Detail: Shrub Planting PURPOSE: TO CREATE APPROX. 1 ACRE OF INTERTIDAL HABITAT, AND -2 ACRES OF NATIVE UPLAND AND PASSIVE PARK FEATURES. DATUM: NAVD 88 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: AMALFI INVESTMENTS (LEASED BY UPS FREIGHT), CITY OF TUKWILA (R.O.W.), STATE OF WASHINGTON (WATERS) -LATITUDE: 47° 30' 04.65" N 122°17'19.69"W CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ADDRESS: 11269 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SHEET 1 OF 16: COVER SHEET PROPOSED: DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT IN: TUKWILA, WA AT: DUWAMISH GARDENS COUNTY OF: KING STATE: WA APPL. BY: CITY OF TUKWILA DATE: JUNE 10, 2013 REVISED: PREPARED BY: J.A. BRENNAN ASSOCIATES, PLLC a_ 1- ce0 § (g }Ca §n z 0 E z 0 0 z \ wcoop 0 \ 0 \ 0 0 § > z 0 d ri \ zra 9' SHEET 2 OF U co co z DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE# $ 2 . 2 C-13 0 0 0 k 0 0 E 0 2 0 § 0 § 0 v DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT co >J(p 0 0 a c a 2 <- w W rP � Y C0 w 0 0 REFERENCE #: 0 J J W 1- 0 O U) N mQ Z °W C am w4 w a _I i J_ CO 0 CO CO Y W Z Y w 12a wI_Q �Z Ho� ?a w}Z O 0Z ?00 wa J 1 -z 2 ¢j Qw< X F LL 0 0 cc z w d W . au_ z O r z O = o� a ›-H—co w W Omu)tOrn Qro (J Icew§bol` 0NCa > dWO'N w< O J ce r N Onix z Ix ..............0- a w uQ ia Z w' w 0 aY <I= I=— ( IX KmX I- , FC. a t a < 0 Q / 0 w w 0 00 Cr) (D LU �St MPpGINPL WPY 5. BRIDGE Ica 0) z 0 (n z 0 U O 0) W H J H U J CO D CI_ W J 1-- Q W 0 O > w 0 O m d N N m + 4 z w 0 a 1J w z 0 Y N 9 CD z 0 E Ow Na w> W w- 0w aN ao 0a O O az '- 0 0 oo z w W 0 O N 0 Fw w J a } W d Z a 0 W 0 O < Z z x X DUWAMISH RIVER o_ 11n 0I() 0 W O 0- CL • 5 2 W Q CO CO • WY R N H j mz0N uJ=j< }.UW O D F m? W Q OZ..J U) 0H 7ar> 0 J -J a ai 1- 0 O u) m¢ ❑ Z W Z W tx 0 u_ 0 DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT 3 J (gyp Z 6 < 2J w (D Y 7 co co W 0 0 REFERENCE #: SHEET 5 OF 16: GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN W J (/I ❑ ( H Y W i7 Cea WHa HZ 111 c) 0)LI- 0" Z Q w>_Z LL 0 z z U O IX a J H Z Q > a W to 0 Z ce W W 0 d W Z d H Z a0 Q= wc° W 0mco cs?m H ix `Q0 co W §Lu CO on UNfn > • a Ill N O❑ 7 LU Z d� V H z � 0 - CC ui (/)H W W p7 acoi 7 0 HO I— CC a o axa ❑ < j0 EROSION AND WATER CONTROL PLAN SHEET 6 OF E ,_ / 0. 0 0 o 0 _ > 0 0 0 (� k E 8 0 DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: z \ k jZ }Z §k W �lJl CJ Z a / a0 Z O U wZOF- / ¢ a F 0 OW F Y Z w LL -, �zuo 0 w o J a 0 W Z 1--w a 0 Z < X LU 0 W O w a2 Eo 2 0 w o w _IT: o= og� LL a) N <a o o 0 2 i m o J a LI W J 0 WO Q In a (n op 0 _ o Z w O w o Q �gQ<g¢- Wa 1- z a LL w O. O Z o 0 JJJJ JJJ JJJ.'JlJ :J:J„IJ-JJJ'JJ JJJJJJJJ JJJJJJJJJ JJJJJJJJ .JJJJJJJJ F yJJJJJJJJ ' JJJ,L JJJ -JJJJJJJJ JJJJJJJJJ JJJJJJJJ JJJJ) JJJJ •.,,� .�� �'�`�. JJJJJJJJ - JJJJJJJJJJCL'r J JJJJJJJ J JJJJJJ J:J:iJJJJ JJJJJJJ JJJJJJ- s J▪ JJJJJJ "L - JJ.JJJJJ JJJJJJJ JJJJJJJJJ JJ,JJJJJ JJJ JJJJJJJ JJi1JJJJ JJJJJJ JJJ J : JJJJ JJJJ x JJJJ '-W.-1`4 •x��--:-->s"'- -- JJJ Mi V3 SEEDING/PLANTING AREA BENEATH GUIDEWAY STREETSCAPE PLANTING- TREES AND LOW -GROWING PLANTS RAIN GARDEN- MOSTLY LOW -GROWING PLANTS M 1 UPLAND RIPARIAN PLANTING (EL. 13+) MOIST RIPARIAN PLANTING (EL. 10-13) HIGH MARSH PLANTING (EL. 7.5-10) LOW MARSH PLANTING (EL. 5-7.5) RIPARIAN AND UPLAND RESTORATION OF RIVER BANK C0 co DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: 0 J J a H 0 O N 0) m Q o Z WZ w d m w • -j LL, � J 0 � CF2 W fr 0- W W WO 2Ha Z Q H LL OZ LL O > 0 0 z Z 0 o 0a Jaz a j Q W 0 < ai ixLL 0 m w LL LL Z a 1- Z CO a0 Oa= o� ww 0mv~ifOo�i w0 ccoo F-pl.• o 0 Q 0 w CO b 0 I W > aLO( N W Z O,7 d N OZ0 Z "v H Z iii H a W V)1 -W Z • W� LL w 0H aMY M 0 LC_' M m < H - H L_ a=a o 0 • a` cn § q j co cc ET 888888888 ;!'!§!;!!!;! xxxx !)}))j)))})) COMMON NAME HACIFIC SILVERWEED >4 200 SLOUGH SEDGE 1 TUFTED HAIRGRASS d §\\\\S8888 2 / ARGENTINA EGEDII AGROSTIS EXERATA AGROSTIS STOLINIFERA 0. 000 JUNCOS ARTICULATUS SCIRPUS MICROCARPUS ( !\77§§))§) 7i 888§\\ COMMON NAME VINE MAPLE BIG LEAF MAPLE OREGON ASH SITKA SPRUCE J ) DOUGLAS FIR PACIFIC WILLOW WESTERN RED CEDAR WESTERN HEMLOCK LT 8 0 ! § SCIENTIFIC NAME ARIES GRANDIS ACER CIRCINATUM ACER MACROPHYLLUM FRAXINUS LATIFOLIA LIRIODENDRON TULIPEFERA FASTIGIATN PICEA SITCHENSIS POPULUS BALSAMIFERA PSEUDOTSUGA MENZESII \ THUJA PLICATA TSUGA HETEROPHYLLA /f,2222 \( § SCIENTIFIC NAME AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLLA CORNUS STOLONIFERA GAULTHERIA SHALLON HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR LONICERA INVOLUCRATA e. PHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUS RIBES SANGUINEUM cc GROUNDCOVERS § \ 65 § m KINNICKINNICK ARCTOSTAPHYLOS ULVA-URSI \ » EMERGENT MIX A ET 888888888 xxxx COMMON NAME HACIFIC SILVERWEED >4 200 SLOUGH SEDGE 1 TUFTED HAIRGRASS d 000000 2 / ARGENTINA EGEDII AGROSTIS EXERATA AGROSTIS STOLINIFERA 0. 000 JUNCOS ARTICULATUS SCIRPUS MICROCARPUS 8§88§§681 7!(488(4■■ 7i 888§\\ B§2§§§§§§§§§§§ COMMON NAME !: | OCEANSPRAY rTALL OREGON -GRAPE PACIFIC NINEBARK RED FLOWERING CURRANT ) )t §§ § SCOULER'S WILLOW SITKA WILLOW \( § SCIENTIFIC NAME AMELANCHIER ALNIFOLLA CORNUS STOLONIFERA GAULTHERIA SHALLON HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR LONICERA INVOLUCRATA MAHONIAAOUIFOLIUM PHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUS RIBES SANGUINEUM \ ROSARUGOSA 'SNOW PAVEMENT SALIX SCOULERIANA SALIX SITCHENSIS SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS § ,,:l22=:; , _ ! GROUNDCOVERS § \ 65 § m KINNICKINNICK ARCTOSTAPHYLOS ULVA-URSI \ » EMERGENT MIX A CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: ET 888888888 N§§§(|§§§ COMMON NAME HACIFIC SILVERWEED SPIKE BENTGRASS CREEPING BUNTGRASS SLOUGH SEDGE 1 TUFTED HAIRGRASS JOINTED RUSH lSMALL FRUITED BULLRUSH 2 / ARGENTINA EGEDII AGROSTIS EXERATA AGROSTIS STOLINIFERA CAREXOBNUPTA DESCHAMPSIA CAESITOSA JUNCOS ARTICULATUS SCIRPUS MICROCARPUS SCIRPUS VALIDUS 1 7!(488(4■■ CITY OF TUKWILA DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: 0 ix J 1- u_ 0 0 DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: V DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: DETAIL: ROOT WAD cii LL 0 H w w 2 N UJ ¢ J_ ¢ W 00 co F -j a' LL j cea wr=-a H z u) `w0Z a }} L.L.0 >i_1- 0 3 5 a CC Li a > Q W a U - 0z waw a LL Z F Z_ o wO��; Hw co H0o w ¢ 0 w ; U N W ¢ O J a' r N 00W Z IX,�--vr ~zD a Lu iii z di 0 I- 0 u) r- LIJ 0 1-0 aHY D ¢ HC7 R CO H H Z 0 w wWw w00z - LL y ZO¢� WnZ W00 0 0- Z FINISH GRADE COMPACTED SOIL 310N 33S S3I VA JVNS 30 H1ON3l £/l'NUN -11 C Q Q 0 0 o CO N N 000 0 0 0 www 111 0 0 C7 N Ln Z Z z CO N N W 0 0 0 0 1- 1- 1- 5 LL LL LL 0 O O O K M M M J_ 1- 0 0 U DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: U J -J 0. W H U 0 h Q m¢ Z W Z M am w• a-, La a J c 0 co 1- Y W F- WH¢ 00 Hod Z a w O 0z Z5/9 cca LT aj awl tr ccZ 000 a w Z a F z a0 ��a= im 0 ▪ NU) > ▪ a W • Oo (sl 1 w a O J wr- N 00ft Z it""v.- 1- z O a w Lii a< Z O v)F-L W p� dHY 7 < F=-(1--7 Ce a 0 1-z d I a 0 a Q SECTION VIEW PLAN VIEW U DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: PLACE TOPSOIL TOP VIEW (DIAGRAM, NOT TO SCALE) w 0 J U X w w 0 0 1- Z_ 1— Z - J 0 H Z w w w NOT TO SCALE ISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT 0 J Q -J a (di toFg w W F y Q Y < Q N 1-,_ w `t(-9zo N Q x Y Y o cn r m Q 6 JIi UW Z W— Q O Z 0 N Y m w 2, W K Q tt ui _ • o� ❑ 0a<W > w K -Oa<w as a.?aOacK a-) DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: w J i a a( ure rea W1_a IL F. LL U0 >Lo 0Z Z00 coa JFz aW 2�a `.> awl 0 FE LL 0 a ix cc Z W a OW d u_ Z F Z_ W W 0 m v) fO O• UNVJ i▪ Q W Oo N • w a • O J a' r- N ~ Z m o • W OQw g 0 • ❑j1 a. • Q H C7 KaoK H aia o ❑Q • <0 \\ D } e LL 0 m §1(73 » /_, -DWW0 � , (5 /�) EwD0o }o o> 07 w° e�<ze @ 0 0 e§} 27777 (% [[ §`re K§Qf\, 0 D 4 11. wo )m 0 I--2 <0. §L com3�0` F k1- (/§ F- 2 YOOzw n !o wco o� - o x w w a_z0 C0 9-- ;z1” ,-._�_CC U_ « w E § \D D -) 37m U) Do, ,\p ;moo rewz 1' U &L O 2 X BALL DIA. z OR ] i / CC1 1- > CC 00 a 2 111 2 b \� u} CL \ n k�� - a� <_W (§ 0, # `zG WD 0/ (� w< 0wZ :02 E»a Io 03 W / Kms) ` §�B 0 }/ p` �@(�®�� Q)\ F77 m 2 fo §0 -K9 < _ Ill CC t \j)§)/wk -�. # � ��E o%g[ $ 2 >§ E<w /�2 f\/) _ 0o woo ,. . . i0 co 27 ) 3 wm coa DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: a. § 0 § (< BK 2• ƒ� ay FINISH GRADE FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE \\ E • §[ §fid §R) §-- o§E}( Z E;2 )§) §§§ 0 03 0-k< k CZ 0 < ){§ w ce ;Am mm# ZO DUWAMISH GARDENS HABITAT PROJECT REFERENCE #: Attachment E - DNR Aquatic Use Authorization Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: HALOGENATED VOLATILES by EPA 8260B page 1 of 2 10-17-08 10-17-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: 10-130-02 Client ID: GP1-15 Compound Results Flags P©L Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 0.00098 Chloromethane ND 0.0049 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.00098 Bromomethane ND 0.00098 Chloroethane ND 0.0049 Trichlorofluoromethane ND 0.00098 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.00098 lodomethane ND 0.0049 Methylene Chloride ND 0.0049 (trans) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.00098 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 0.00098 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.00098 (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.00098 Bromochloromethane ND 0.00098 Chloroform ND 0.00098 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane ND 0.00098 Carbon Tetrachloride ND 0.00098 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 0.00098 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 0.00098 Trichloroethene ND 0.00098 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.00098 Dibromomethane ND 0.00098 Brom odichloromethane ND 0.00098 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether ND 0.0049 (cis) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.00098 (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.00098 23 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 24 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property HALOGENATED VOLATILES by EPA 8260B page 2 of 2 Lab ID: 10-130-02 Client ID: GP1-15 Compound Results Flags POL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.00098 Tetrachloroethene ND 0.00098 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.00098 Dibromochloromethane ND 0.00098 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.00098 Chlorobenzene ND 0.00098 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.00098 Bromoform ND 0.00098 Bromobenzene ND 0.00098 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.00098 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.00098 2-Chlorotoluene ND 0.00098 4-Chlorotoluene ND 0.00098 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.00098 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.00098 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.00098 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 0.0049 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.00098 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 0.0049 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.00098 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofiuoromethane 93 70-118 Toluene -d8 97 70-121 4-Bromofluorobenzene 99 70-130 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: HALOGENATED VOLATILES by EPA 8260B page 1 of 2 10-17-08 10-17-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: Client ID: 10-130-03 GP2-19 Compound Results Flags PQL Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 0.0012 Chloromethane ND 0.0059 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.0012 Bromomethane ND 0.0012 Chloroethane ND 0.0059 Trichlorofluoromethane ND 0.0012 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.0012 lodomethane ND 0.0059 Methylene Chloride ND 0.0059 (trans) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.0012 1 ,1 -Dichloroethane ND 0.0012 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.0012 (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.0012 Bromochloromethane ND 0.0012 Chloroform ND 0.0012 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane ND 0.0012 Carbon Tetrachloride ND 0.0012 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 0.0012 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 0.0012 Trichloroethene ND 0.0012 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.0012 Dibromomethane ND 0.0012 Bromodichloromethane ND 0.0012 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether ND 0.0059 (cis) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.0012 (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.0012 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 25 26 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property HALOGENATED VOLATILES by EPA 8260B page 2 of 2 Lab ID: 10-130-03 Client ID: GP2-19 Compound Results Flags POL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.0012 Tetrachloroethene ND 0.0012 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.0012 Dibromochloromethane ND 0.0012 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.0012 Chlorobenzene ND 0.0012 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.0012 Bromoform ND 0.0012 Bromobenzene ND 0.0012 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.0012 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.0012 2-Chlorotoluene ND 0.0012 4-Chlorotoluene ND 0.0012 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0012 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0012 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0012 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 0.0059 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.0012 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 0.0059 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.0012 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofluoromethane 100 70-118 Toluene -d8 107 70-121 4-Bromofluorobenzene 105 70-130 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: Matrix: Units: Lab ID: Client ID: VOLATILES by EPA 8260B Page 1 of 2 10-17-08 10-17-08 Soil mg/kg (ppm) Compound Dichlorodifluoromethane Chloromethane Vinyl Chloride Bromomethane Chloroethane Trichlorofluoromethane 1,1-Dichloroethene Acetone lodomethane Carbon Disulfide Methylene Chloride (trans) 1,2-Dichloroethene Methyl t -Butyl Ether 1,1-Dichloroethane Vinyl Acetate 2,2-Dichloropropane (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene 2-Butanone Bromochloromethane Chloroform 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride 1,1-Dichloropropene Benzene 1,2-Dichloroethane Trichloroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane Dibromomethane Bromodichloromethane 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether (cis) 1,3-Dichloropropene Methyl Isobutyl Ketone Toluene (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene 10-130-10 GP5-3 Results ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Flags PQL 0.0014 0.0068 0.0014 0.0014 0.0068 0.0014 0.0014 0.0068 0.0068 0.0014 0.0068 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0068 0.0014 0.0014 0.0068 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0068 0.0014 0.0068 0.0068 0.0014 27 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 28 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B Page 2 of 2 Lab ID: 10-130-10 Client ID: GP5-3 Compound Results Flags PQL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.0014 Tetrachloroethene ND 0.0014 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.0014 2-Hexanone ND 0.0068 Dibromochloromethane ND 0.0014 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.0014 Chlorobenzene ND 0.0014 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.0014 Ethylbenzene ND 0.0014 m,p-Xylene ND 0.0027 o -Xylene ND 0.0014 Styrene ND 0.0014 Bromoform ND 0.0014 Isopropylbenzene ND 0.0014 Bromobenzene ND 0.0014 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.0014 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.0014 n-Propylbenzene ND 0.0014 2-Chiorotoluene ND 0.0014 4-Chlorotoluene ND 0.0014 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.0014 tert-Butylbenzene ND 0.0014 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.0014 sec-Butylbenzene ND 0.0014 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0014 p-Isopropyltoluene ND 0.0014 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0014 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0014 n-Butylbenzene ND 0.0014 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 0.0068 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.0014 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 0.0068 Naphthalene ND 0.0014 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.0014 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofluorom ethane 101 70-118 Toluene -d8 106 70-121 4-Bromofluorobenzene 112 70-130 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 951h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: Matrix: Units: Lab ID: Client ID: VOLATILES by EPA 8260B Page 1 of 2 10-17-08 10-17-08 Soil mg/kg (ppm) Compound Dichlorodifluoromethane Chloromethane Vinyl Chloride Bromomethane Chloroethane Trichlorofluoromethane 1,1-Dichloroethene Acetone lodomethane Carbon Disulfide Methylene Chloride (trans) 1,2-Dichloroethene Methyl t -Butyl Ether 1,1-Dichloroethane Vinyl Acetate 2,2-Dichloropropane (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene 2-Butanone Bromochloromethane Chloroform 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride 1,1-Dichloropropene Benzene 1,2-Dichloroethane Trichloroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane Dibromomethane Bromodichlorom ethane 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether (cis).1,3-Dichloropropene Methyl Isobutyl Ketone Toluene (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene 10-130-12 GP6-5 Results ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Flags POL 0.0013 0.0063 0.0013 0.0013 0.0063 0.0013 0.0013 0.0063 0.0063 0.0013 0.0063 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0063 0.0013 0.0013 0.0063 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0063 0.0013 0.0063 0.0063 0.0013 29 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-388 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 30 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 82608 Page 2 of 2 Lab ID: 10-130-12 Client ID: GP6-5 Compound Results Flags POL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.0013 Tetrachloroethene ND 0.0013 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.0013 2-Hexanone ND 0.0063 Dibromochloromethane ND 0.0013 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.0013 Chlorobenzene ND 0.0013 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.0013 Ethylbenzene ND 0.0013 m,p-Xylene ND 0.0025 o -Xylene ND 0.0013 Styrene ND 0.0013 Bromoform ND 0.0013 Isopropylbenzene ND 0.0013 Bromobenzene ND 0.0013 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.0013 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.0013 n-Propylbenzene ND 0.0013 2-Chlorotoluene ND 0.0013 4-Chlorotoluene ND 0.0013 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.0013 tert-Butylbenzene ND 0.0013 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.0013 sec-Butylbenzene ND 0.0013 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0013 p-Isopropyltoluene . ND 0.0013 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0013 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0013 n-Butylbenzene ND 0.0013 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 0.0063 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.0013 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 0.0063. Naphthalene ND 0.0013 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.0013 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofluoromethane 96 70-118 Toluene -d8 99 70-121 4-Bromofluorobenzene 106 70-130 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 31 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B Page 1 of 2 Date Extracted: 10-17-08 Date Analyzed: 10-17-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: 10-130-14 Client ID: GP7-2 Compound Results Flags PQL Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 0.0010 Chloromethane ND 0.0050 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.0010 Bromomethane ND 0.0010 Chloroethane ND 0.0050 Trichlorofluoromethane ND 0.0010 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.0010 Acetone ND 0.0050 lodomethane ND 0.0050 Carbon Disulfide ND 0.0010 Methylene Chloride ND 0.0050 (trans) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.0010 Methyl t -Butyl Ether ND 0.0010 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 0.0010 Vinyl Acetate ND 0.0050 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.0010 (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.0010 2-Butanone ND 0.0050 Bromochloromethane ND 0.0010 Chloroform ND 0.0010 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane ND 0.0010 Carbon Tetrachloride ND 0.0010 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 0.0010 Benzene ND 0.0010 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 0.0010 Trichloroethene ND 0.0010 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.0010 Dibromomethane ND 0.0010 Bromodichloromethane ND 0.0010 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether ND 0.0050 (cis) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.0010 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone ND 0.0050 Toluene ND 0.0050 (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.0010 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 32 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B Page 2 of 2 Lab ID: . 10-130-14 Client ID: GP7-2 Compound Results Flags PQL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.0010 Tetrachloroethene ND 0.0010 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.0010 2-Hexanone ND 0.0050 Dibromochloromethane ND 0.0010 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.0010 Chlorobenzene ND 0.0010 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.0010 Ethylbenzene ND 0.0010 m,p-Xylene ND 0.0020 o -Xylene ND 0.0010 Styrene ND 0.0010 Bromoform ND 0.0010 Isopropylbenzene ND 0.0010 Bromobenzene ND 0.0010 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.0010 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.0010 n-Propylbenzene ND 0.0010 2-Chlorotoluene ND 0.0010 4-Chlorotoluene ND 0.0010 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.0010 tert-Butylbenzene ND 0.0010 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.0010 sec-Butylbenzene ND 0.0010 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0010 p-Isopropyltoluene ND 0.0010 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0010 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0010 n-Butylbenzene ND 0.0010 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 0.0050 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.0010 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 0.0050 Naphthalene ND 0.0010 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.0010 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofluoromethane 100 70-118 Toluene -d8 102 70-121 4-Bromofluorobenzene 104 70-130 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 33 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL Page 1 of 2 Date Extracted: 10-17-08 Date Analyzed: 10-17-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: MB1017S1 Compound Results Flags PQL Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 0.0010 Chloromethane ND 0.0050 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.0010 Bromomethane ND 0.0010 Chloroethane ND 0.0050 Trichlorofluoromethane ND 0.0010 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.0010 Acetone ND 0.0050 lodomethane ND 0.0050 Carbon Disulfide ND 0.0010 Methylene Chloride ND 0.0050 (trans) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.0010 Methyl t -Butyl Ether ND 0.0010 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 0.0010 Vinyl Acetate ND 0.0050 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.0010 (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.0010 2-Butanone ND 0.0050 Bromochloromethane ND 0.0010 Chloroform ND 0.0010 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane ND 0.0010 Carbon Tetrachloride ND 0.0010 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 0.0010 Benzene ND 0.0010 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 0.0010 Trichloroethene ND 0.0010 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.0010 Dibromomethane ND 0.0010 Bromodichloromethane ND 0.0010 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether ND 0.0050 (cis) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.0010 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone ND 0.0050 Toluene ND 0.0050 (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.0010 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 34 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL Page 2 of 2 Lab ID: MB1017S1 Compound Results Flags PQL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.0010 Tetrachloroethene ND 0.0010 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.0010 2-Hexanone ND 0.0050 Dibromochloromethane ND 0.0010 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.0010 Chlorobenzene ND 0.0010 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.0010 Ethylbenzene ND 0.0010 m,p-Xylene ND 0.0020 o -Xylene ND 0.0010 Styrene ND 0.0010 Bromoform ND 0.0010 Isopropylbenzene ND 0.0010 Bromobenzene ND 0.0010 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.0010 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.0010 n-Propylbenzene ND 0.0010 2-Chlorotoluene ND 0.0010 4-Chlorotoluene ND 0.0010 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.0010 tert-Butylbenzene ND 0.0010 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.0010 sec-Butylbenzene ND 0.0010 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0010 p-Isopropyltoluene ND 0.0010 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0010 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.0010 n-Butylbenzene ND 0.0010 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 0.0050 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.0010 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 0.0050 Naphthalene ND 0.0010 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.0010 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofluoromethane 98 70-118 Toluene -d8 99 70-121 4-Bromofluorobenzene 106 70-130 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881. This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 35 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 82606 MS/MSD QUALITY CONTROL Date Extracted: 10-17-08 Date Analyzed: 10-17-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: 10-030-01 Sample Spike Percent Percent Recovery Compound Amount Amount MS Recovery MSD Recovery Limits Flags 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.0500 0.0532 106 0.0555 111 70-130 Benzene ND 0.0500 0.0481 96 0.0518 104 70-130 Trichloroethene ND 0.0500 0.0490 98 0.0494 99 70-124 Toluene ND 0.0500 0.0511 102 0.0498 100 70-130 Chlorobenzene ND 0.0500 0.0515 103 0.0519 104 72-127 RPD RPD Limit Flags 1,1-Dichloroethene 4 14 Benzene 7 17 Trichloroethene 1 11 Toluene 3 16 Chlorobenzene 1 15 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: HALOGENATED VOLATILES by EPA 8260B page 1 of 2 10-17-08 10-17-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: Client ID: 10-130-17 GP1 B -W Compound Results Flags PQL Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 0.20 Chloromethane ND 1.0 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.20 Bromomethane ND 0.20 Chloroethane ND 1.0 Trichlorofluoromethane ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 lodomethane ND 1.0 Methylene Chloride ND 1.0 (trans) 1,2-dichloroethene ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 Bromochloromethane ND 0.20 Chloroform ND 0.20 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane ND 0.20 Carbon Tetrachloride ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 1 ,2-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 Trichloroethene ND 0.20 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 Dibromomethane ND 0.20 Bromodichloromethane ND 0.20 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether ND 1.0 (cis) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 36 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property HALOGENATED VOLATILES by EPA 8260B page 2 of 2 Lab ID: 10-130-17 Client ID: GP1B-W Compound Results Flags POL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.20 Tetrachloroethene ND 0.20 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 Dibromochloromethane ND 0.20 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.20 Chlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 Bromoform ND 1.0 Bromobenzene ND 0.20 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.20 2-Chlorotoluene ND 0.20 4-Chlorotoluene ND 0.20 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND . 0.20 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 1.0 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.20 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 0.20 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.20 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofluoromethane 92 71-126 Toluene -d8 93 76-116 4-Bromofluorobenzene 91 70-123 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 37 38 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: HALOGENATED VOLATILES by EPA 8260B page 1 of 2 10-17-08 10-17-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: Client ID: 10-130-18 GP2-W Compound Results Flags PQL Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 0.20 Chloromethane ND 1.0 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.20 Bromomethane ND 0.20 Chloroethane ND 1.0 Trichlorofluoromethane ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 lodomethane ND 1.0 Methylene Chloride ND 1.0 (trans) 1,2-dichloroethene ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 Bromochloromethane ND 0.20 Chloroform ND 0.20 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane ND 0.20 Carbon Tetrachloride ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 Trichloroethene ND 0.20 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 Dibromomethane ND 0.20 Bromodichloromethane ND 0.20 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether ND 1.0 (cis) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20. OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property HALOGENATED VOLATILES by EPA 8260B page 2 of 2 Lab ID: 10-130-18 Client ID: GP2-W Compound Results Flags PDL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.20 Tetrachloroethene ND 0.20 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 Dibromochloromethane ND 0.20 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.20 Chlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 Bromoform ND 1.0 Bromobenzene ND 0.20 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.20 2-Chlorotoluene ND 0.20 4-Chlorotoluene ND 0.20 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 1.0 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.20 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 0.20 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.20 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofluoromethane 89 71-126 Toluene -d8 92 76-116 4-Bromofluorobenzene 91 70-123 39 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 40 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B Page 1 of 2 Date Extracted: 10-17-08 Date Analyzed: 10-17-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: 10-130-21 Client ID: GP5-W Compound Results Flags PQL Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 0.20 Chloromethane ND 1.0 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.20 Bromomethane ND 0.20 Chloroethane ND 1.0 Trichlorofluoromethane ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 Acetone ND 5.0 lodomethane ND 1.0 Carbon Disulfide ND 0.20 Methylene Chloride ND 1.0 (trans) 1,2-dichloroethene ND 0.20 Methyl t -Butyl Ether ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 Vinyl Acetate ND 2.0 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 2-Butanone ND 5.0 Bromochloromethane ND 0.20 Chloroform ND 0.20 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane ND 0.20 Carbon Tetrachloride ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 Benzene ND 0.20 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 Trichloroethene ND 0.20 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 Dibromomethane ND 0.20 Bromodichloromethane ND 0.20 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether ND 1.0 (cis) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone ND 2.0 Toluene ND 1.0 (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B Page 2 of 2 Lab ID: 10-130-21 Client ID: GP5-W Compound Results Flags POL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.20 Tetrachloroethene ND 0.20 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 2-Hexanone ND 2.0 Dibromochloromethane ND 0.20 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.20 Chlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 Ethylbenzene ND 0.20 m,p-Xylene ND 0.40 o -Xylene ND 0.20 Styrene ND 0.20 Bromoform ND 1.0 Isopropylbenzene ND 0.20 Bromobenzene ND 0.20 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.20 n-Propylbenzene ND 0.20 2-Chlorotoluene ND 0.20 4-Chlorotoluene ND 0.20 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.20 tert-Butylbenzene ND 0.20 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.20 sec-Butylbenzene ND 0.20 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 p-Isopropyltoluene ND 0.20 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 n-Butylbenzene ND 0.20 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 1.0 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.20 Hexachiorobutadiene ND 0.20 Naphthalene ND 1.0 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.20 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofluoromethane 91 71-126 Toluene -d8 93 76-116 4-Bromofluorobenzene 91 70-123 41 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 42 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B Page 1 of 2 Date Extracted: 10-17-08 Date Analyzed: 10-17-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: 10-130-22 Client ID: GP6-W Compound Results Flags PQL Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 0.20 Chloromethane ND 1.0 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.20 Bromomethane ND 0.20 Chloroethane ND 1.0 Trichlorofluoromethane ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 Acetone ND 5.0 lodomethane ND 1.0 Carbon Disulfide ND 0.20 Methylene Chloride ND 1.0 (trans) 1,2-dichloroethene ND 0.20 Methyl t -Butyl Ether ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 Vinyl Acetate ND 2.0 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 2-Butanone ND 5.0 Bromochloromethane ND 0.20 Chloroform ND 0.20 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane ND 0.20 Carbon Tetrachloride ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 Benzene ND 0.20 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 Trichloroethene ND 0.20 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 Dibromomethane ND 0.20 Bromodichloromethane ND 0.20 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether ND 1.0 (cis) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone ND 2.0 Toluene ND 1.0 (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B Page 2 of 2 Lab ID: 10-130-22 Client ID: GP6-W Compound Results Flags PQL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.20 Tetrachloroethene ND 0.20 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 2-Hexanone ND 2.0 Dibromochloromethane ND 0.20 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.20 Chlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 Ethylbenzene ND 0.20 m,p-Xylene ND 0.40. o -Xylene ND 0.20 Styrene ND 0.20 Bromoform ND 1.0 Isopropylbenzene ND 0.20 Bromobenzene ND 0.20 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.20 n-Propylbenzene ND 0.20 2-Chlorotoluene ND 0.20 4-Chlorotoluene ND 0.20 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.20 tert-Butylbenzene ND 0.20 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.20 sec-Butylbenzene ND 0.20 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 p-Isopropyltoluene ND 0.20 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 n-Butylbenzene ND 0.20 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 1.0 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.20 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 0.20 Naphthalene ND 1.0 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.20 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofluoromethane 91 71-126 Toluene -d8 93 76-116 4-Bromofluorobenzene 90 70-123 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 43 44 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B Page 1 of 2 Date Extracted: 10-17-08 Date Analyzed: 10-17-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: 10-130-23 Client ID: GP7-W Compound Results Flags POL Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 0.20 Chloromethane ND 1.0 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.20 Bromomethane ND 0.20 Chloroethane ND 1.0 Trichlorofluoromethane ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 Acetone ND 5.0 lodomethane ND 1.0 Carbon Disulfide ND 0.20 Methylene Chloride ND 1.0 (trans) 1,2-dichloroethene ND 0.20 Methyl t -Butyl Ether ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 Vinyl Acetate ND 2.0 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 2-Butanone ND 5.0 Bromochloromethane ND 0.20 Chloroform ND 0.20 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane ND 0.20 Carbon Tetrachloride ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 Benzene ND 0.20 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 Trichloroethene 0.86 0.20 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 Dibromomethane ND 0.20 Bromodichloromethane ND 0.20 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether ND 1.0 (cis) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone ND 2.0 Toluene ND 1.0 (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 82608 Page 2 of 2 Lab ID: 10-130-23 Client ID: GP7-W Compound Results Flags PQL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.20 Tetrachloroethene 0.64 0.20 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 2-Hexanone ND 2.0 Dibromochloromethane ND 0.20 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.20 Chlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 Ethylbenzene ND 0.20 m,p-Xylene ND 0.40 o -Xylene ND 0.20 Styrene ND 0.20 Bromoform ND 1.0 Isopropylbenzene ND 0.20 Bromobenzene ND 0.20 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.20 n-Propylbenzene ND 0.20 2-Chlorotoluene ND 0.20 4-Chlorotoluene ND 0.20 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.20 tert-Butylbenzene ND 0.20 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.20 sec-Butylbenzene ND 0.20 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 p-Isopropyltoluene ND 0.20 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 n-Butylbenzene ND 0.20 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND 1.0 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.20 Hexachlorobutadiene ND 0.20 Naphthalene ND 1.0 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.20 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofluoromethane 94 71-126 Toluene -d8 93 76-116 4-Bromofluorobenzene 92 70-123 45 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 951h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 46 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL Pagel oft Date Extracted: 10-17-08 Date Analyzed: 10-17-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: MB1017W1 Compound Results Flags PQL Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 0.20 Chloromethane ND 1.0 Vinyl Chloride ND 0.20 Bromomethane ND 0.20 Chloroethane ND 1.0 Trichlorofluoromethane ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 Acetone ND 5.0 lodomethane ND 1.0 Carbon Disulfide ND 0.20 Methylene Chloride ND 1.0 (trans) 1,2-dichloroethene ND 0.20 Methyl t -Butyl Ether ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 Vinyl Acetate ND 2.0 2,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 (cis) 1,2-Dichloroethene ND 0.20 2-Butanone ND 5.0 Bromochloromethane ND 0.20 Chloroform ND 0.20 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane ND 0.20 Carbon Tetrachloride ND 0.20 1,1-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 Benzene ND 0.20 1,2-Dichloroethane ND 0.20 Trichloroethene ND 0.20 1,2-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 Dibromomethane ND 0.20 Bromodichloromethane ND 0.20 2-Chioroethyl Vinyl Ether ND 1.0 (cis) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone ND 2.0 Toluene ND 1.0 (trans) 1,3-Dichloropropene ND 0.20 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL Page 2of2 Lab ID: MB1017W1 Compound Results Flags PQL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane ND 0.200.20 Tetrachloroethene ND 1,3-Dichloropropane ND 0.20 2-Hexanone ND 2.00.20 Dibromochloromethane ND 1,2-Dibromoethane ND 0.200.20 Chlorobenzene ND 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 Ethylbenzene ND 0.20 m,p-Xylene ND 0.40 o -Xylene ND 0.20ND 0.20 Styrene ND 1.0 Bromoform 0.20 Isopropylbenzene ND Bromobenzene ND 0.20 1;1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane ND 0.20 1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 0.20 n-Propylbenzene ND 0.20ND 0.20 2-Chiorotoluene ND 0.20 4-Chlorotoluene 0.20 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND tert-Butylbenzene ND 0.20ND 0.20 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 0.20 sec-Butylbenzene ND 0.20 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 p-Isopropyltoluene ND 0.20 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene ND 0.20 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene 0.20 n-Butylbenzene ND 1.0 1.2 Dibromo 3-chloropropane ND 0.20 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND Hexachlorobutadiene ND 0.20 Naphthalene ND 1.0 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 0.20 Percent Control Surrogate Recovery Limits Dibromofluoromethane 91 71-12694 76-116 Toluene -d8 70-123 4-Bromofluorobenzene 91 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 47 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property VOLATILES by EPA 8260B MS/MSD QUALITY CONTROL Date Extracted: 10-17-08 Date Analyzed: 10-17-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: 10-130-21 48 Sample Spike Percent Percent Recovery Compound Amount Amount MS Recovery MSD Recovery Limits Flags 1,1-Dichloroethene ND 10.0 10.9 109 11.1 111 70-130 Benzene ND 10.0 10.0 100 10.4 104 70-130 Trichloroethene ND 10.0 9.77 98. 9.86 99 77-114 Toluene ND 10.0 10.2 102 10.2 102 79-121 Chlorobenzene ND 10.0 9.96 100 10.3 103 77-108 RPD RPD Limit Flags 1,1-Dichloroethene 2 11 Benzene 3 11 Trichloroethene 1 10 Toluene 1 11 Chlorobenzene 4 10 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property PCBs by EPA 8082 49 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/Kg (ppm) Date Date Analyte Result PQL Method Prepared Analyzed Flags Client ID: GP3-23 Laboratory ID: 10-130-07 Aroclor 1016 ND 0.063 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1221 ND 0.063 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1232 ND 0.063 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1242 ND 0.063 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1248 ND 0.063 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1254 ND 0.063 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1260 ND 0.063 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1262 ND 0.063 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1268 ND 0.063 EPA 8082 10-23-08 . 10-23-08 Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits DCB 80 35-127 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property PCBs by EPA 8082 QUALITY CONTROL Matrix: Soil Units: mg/Kg (ppm) Date Date Analyte Result PQL Method Prepared Analyzed Flags METHOD BLANK Laboratory ID: MB1023S1 Aroclor 1016 ND 0.050 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1221 ND 0.050 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1232 ND 0.050 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1242 ND 0.050 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1248 ND 0.050 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1254 ND 0.050 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1260 ND 0.050 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1262 ND 0.050 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 Aroclor 1268 ND 0.050 EPA 8082 10-23-08 10-23-08 50 Surrogate: Percent Recovery Control Limits DCB 98 35-127 Source Percent Recovery RPD Analyte Result Spike Level Result Recovery Limits RPD Limit Flags MATRIX SPIKES Laboratory ID: 10-130-07 MS MSD MS MSD MS MSD Aroclor 1260 0.384 0.422 0.500 0.500 ND 77 84 24-128 9 14 Surrogate: DCB 86 96 35-127 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: 10-22-08 Date Analyzed: 10-22-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: Client ID: 10-130-10 GP5-3 TOTAL METALS EPA 6010B/7471 A 51 Analyte Method Result PQL Arsenic 6010B ND 12 Barium 6010B 33 2.9 Cadmium 6010B ND 0.58 Chromium 6010B 9.7 0.58 Lead 6010B ND 5.8 Mercury 7471A ND 0.29 Selenium 6010B ND 12 Silver 6010B ND 0.58 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 52 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property TOTAL METALS EPA 6010B/7471 A Date Extracted: 10-22-08 Date Analyzed: 10-22-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: 10-130-12 Client ID: GP6-5 Analyte Method Result POL Arsenic 6010B ND 11 Barium 6010B 42 2.9 Cadmium 6010B ND 0.57 Chromium 6010B 11 0.57 Lead 6010B ND 5.7 Mercury 7471A ND 0.29 Selenium 6010B ND 11 Silver 6010B ND 0.57 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property TOTAL METALS EPA 6010B/7471 A Date Extracted: 10-22-08 . Date Analyzed: 10-22-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: 10-130-14 Client ID: GP7-2 53 Analyte Method Result PQL Arsenic 6010B ND 12 Barium 6010B 69 2.9 Cadmium 6010B ND 0.58 Chromium 6010B 12 0.58 Lead 6010B 24 5.8 Mercury 7471A ND 0.29 Selenium 6010B ND 12 Silver 6010B ND 0.58 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 54 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: TOTAL METALS EPA 6010B/7471 A METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL 10-22-08 10-22-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: MB1022S1&MB1022S2 Analyte Method Result PQL Arsenic 6010B ND 10 Barium 6010B ND 2.5 Cadmium 6010B ND 0.50 Chromium 6010B ND 0.50 Lead 6010B ND 5.0 Mercury 7471A ND 0.25 Selenium 6010B ND 10. Silver 6010B ND 0.50 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property TOTAL METALS EPA 6010B/7471A DUPLICATE QUALITY CONTROL Date Extracted: 10-22-08 Date Analyzed: 10-22-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: 10-171-01 Sample Duplicate Analyte Result Result RPD PQL Flags Arsenic ND ND NA 10 Barium 23.3 23.7 2 2.5 Cadmium ND ND NA 0.50 Chromium 17.2 16.8 2 0.50 Lead ND ND NA 5.0 Mercury ND ND NA 0.25 Selenium ND ND NA 10 Silver ND ND NA 0.50 55 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 56 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property TOTAL METALS EPA 6010B/7471A MS/MSD QUALITY CONTROL Date Extracted: 10-22-08 Date Analyzed: 10-22-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: 10-171-01 Spike Percent Percent Analyte Level MS Recovery MSD Recovery RPD Flags Arsenic 100 94.5 95 98.2 98 4 Barium 100 116 93 118 95 2 Cadmium 50 48.6 97 49.2 98 1 Chromium 100 108 90 110 93 2 Lead 250 234 93 238 95 2 Mercury 0.50 0.503 101 0.504 101 0 Selenium 100 97.7 98 97.9 98 0 Silver 25 22.5 90 22.8 91 1 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425).883-3881. This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property TOTAL LEAD EPA 200.8 Date Extracted: 10-22&23-08 Date Analyzed: 10-22&23-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: 10-130-19 Client ID: GP3-W Analyte Method Result PQL 32 1.1 Lead 200.8 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 57 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: Matrix: Units: Lab ID: Client ID: Analyte Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium Lead Mercury Selenium Silver TOTAL METALS EPA 200.8/7470A 10-22&23-08 10-22&23-08 Water ug/L (ppb) 10-130-21 GP5-W Method 200.8 200.8 200.8 200.8 200.8 7470A 200.8 200.8 Result 14 140 ND 30 8.6 ND ND ND PQL 3.3 28 4.4 11 1.1 0.50 5.6 11 58 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`x' Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: Matrix: Units: Lab ID: Client ID: Analyte Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium Lead Mercury Selenium Silver TOTAL METALS EPA 200.8/7470A 10-22&23-08 10-22&23-08 Water ug/L (ppb) 10-130-22 GP6-W Method 200.8 200.8 200.8 200.8 200.8 7470A 200.8 200.8 Result 13 110 ND 20 6.6 ND ND ND OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 59 PQL 3.3 28 4.4 11 1.1 0.50 5.6 11 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: Matrix: Units: Lab ID: Client ID: Analyte Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium Lead Mercury Selenium Silver 10-22&23-08 10-22&23-08 Water ug/L (ppb) 10-130-23 GP7-W Method 200.8 200.8 200.8 200.8 200.8 7470A 200.8 200.8 TOTAL METALS EPA 200.8/7470A Result 18 210 ND 25 13 ND ND ND PQL 3.3 28 4.4 11 1.1 0.50 5.6 11 60 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 61 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: TOTAL METALS EPA 200.8/7470A METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL 10-22&23-08 10-22&23-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: MB1022W1&MB1023W3 Analyte Method Result PQL Arsenic 200.8 ND 3.3 Barium 200.8 ND 28 Cadmium 200.8 ND 4.4 Chromium 200.8 ND 11 Lead 200.8 ND 1.1 Mercury 7470A ND 0.50 Selenium 200.8 ND 5.6 Silver 200.8 ND 11 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 62 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property TOTAL METALS EPA 200.8/7470A DUPLICATE QUALITY CONTROL Date Extracted: 10-22&23-08 Date Analyzed: 10-22&23-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: 10-161-01 Sample Duplicate Analyte Result Result RPD PQL Flags Arsenic ND ND NA 3.3 Barium 138 136 1 28 Cadmium ND ND NA 4.4 Chromium ND ND NA 11 Lead 3.13 3.04 3 1.1 Mercury ND ND NA 0.50 Selenium ND ND NA 5.6 Silver ND ND NA 11 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 ' This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property TOTAL METALS EPA 200.8/7470A MS/MSD QUALITY CONTROL Date Extracted: 10-22&23-08 Date Analyzed: 10-22&23-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: 10-161-01 63 Spike Percent Percent Analyte Level MS Recovery MSD Recovery RPD Flags Arsenic 110 113 103 114 104 1 Barium 110 244 96 238 91 2 Cadmium 110 107 98 110 100 3 Chromium 110 107 97 106 96 1 Lead 110 109 96 109 96 0 Mercury 12.5 12.3' 99 12.3 98 0 Selenium 110 117 106 117 106 0 Silver 110 104 95 110 100 5 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property TOTAL LEAD EPA 6010B Date Extracted: 10-30-08 Date Analyzed: 10-30-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Client ID GP3-3 Lab ID 10-130-05 64 Result PQL ND 5.3 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 65 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: Date Analyzed: TOTAL LEAD EPA 6010B METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL 10-30-08 10-30-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: MB1030S1 Analyte Method Result PQL Lead 6010B ND 5.0 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property. TOTAL LEAD EPA 6010B DUPLICATE QUALITY CONTROL Date Extracted: 10-30-08 Date Analyzed: 10-30-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: 10-201-01 Sample Duplicate Analyte Result Result RPD Flags PQL Lead 114 112 2 5.0 66 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 67 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Extracted: 10-30-08 Date Analyzed: 10-30-08 Matrix: Soil Units: mg/kg (ppm) Lab ID: 10-201-01 Analyte Lead TOTAL LEAD EPA 6010B MS/MSD QUALITY CONTROL Spike Percent Percent Level MS Recovery MSD Recovery RPD Flags 250 321 83 363 100 12 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95 Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 68 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property DISSOLVED LEAD EPA 200.8 Date Filtered: 10-15-08 Date Analyzed: 10-31-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: 10-130-19 Client ID: GP3-W Analyte Method Result PQL Lead 200.8 2.0 1.0 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 69 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Filtered: Date Analyzed: DISSOLVED LEAD EPA 200.8 METHOD BLANK QUALITY CONTROL 10-15-08 10-30-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: MB1015D1 Analyte Method Result PQL Lead 200.8 ND 1.0 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`x' Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Filtered: 10-23-08 Date Analyzed: 10-30-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: 10-186-01 Analyte Lead DISSOLVED LEAD EPA 200.8 DUPLICATE QUALITY CONTROL Sample Duplicate Result Result RPD PQL Flags ND ND NA 1.0 70 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 71 Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Filtered: 10-23-08 Date Analyzed: 10-30-08 Matrix: Water Units: ug/L (ppb) Lab ID: 10-186-01 Analyte Lead DISSOLVED LEAD EPA 200.8 MS/MSD QUALITY CONTROL Spike Percent Percent Level MS Recovery MSD Recovery RPD Flags 200 202 101 202 101 0 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95` Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. Date of Report: November 5, 2008 Samples Submitted: October 15, 2008 Laboratory Reference: 0810-130 Project: Carosino Property Date Analyzed: 10-16,20&21-08 Client ID GP1-15 GP2-19 GP3-3 GP3-23 GP4-14 GP5-3 GP6-5 GP7-2 GP8-1.5 % MOISTURE Lab ID % Moisture 10-130-02 15 10-130-03 10 10-130-05 5 10-130-07 20 10-130-09 6 10-130-10 14 10-130-12 13 10-130-14 14 10-130-15 10 72 OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95`h Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. OnSite Environmental Inc. Data Qualifiers and Abbreviations A - Due to a high sample concentration, the amount spiked is insufficient for meaningful MS/MSD recovery data. B - The analyte indicated was also found in the blank sample. C - The duplicate RPD is outside control limits due to high result variability when analyte concentrations are within five times the quantitation limit. E - The value reported exceeds the quantitation range and is an estimate. F - Surrogate recovery data is not available due to the high concentration of coeluting target compounds. H - The analyte indicated is a common laboratory solvent and may have been introduced during sample preparation, and be impacting the sample result. I - Compound recovery is outside of the control limits. J - The value reported was below the practical quantitation limit. The value is an estimate. K - Sample duplicate RPD is outside control limits due to sample inhomogeneity. The sample was re -extracted and re -analyzed with similar results. L - The RPD is outside of the control limits. M - Hydrocarbons in the gasoline range are impacting the diesel range result. M1 - Hydrocarbons in the gasoline range (toluene-napthalene) are present in the sample. N - Hydrocarbons in the lube oil range are impacting the diesel range result. O - Hydrocarbons indicative of heavier fuels are present in the sample and are impacting the gasoline result. P - The RPD of the detected concentrations between the two columns is greater than 40. Q - Surrogate recovery is outside of the control limits. S - Surrogate recovery data is not available due to the necessary dilution of the sample. T - The sample chromatogram is not similar to a typical U - The analyte was analyzed for, but was not detected above the reported sample quantitation limit. U1 - The practical quantitation limit is elevated due to interferences present in the sample. V - Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate recoveries are outside control limits due to matrix effects. W - Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate RPD are outside control limits due to matrix effects. X - Sample extract treated with a mercury cleanup procedure. Y - Sample extract treated with an acid/silica gel cleanup procedure. Z - ND - Not Detected at PQL PQL - Practical Quantitation Limit RPD - Relative Percent Difference OnSite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052 (425) 883-3881 This report pertains to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody, and is intended only for the use of the individual or company to whom it is addressed. 73 "J 0 0) 0 aJnysloW % S 17991. /q IN3H X� > sleleW dial (2) slelelAl VbJO1:1 IElol V1.91-8 iq seploniaH VI.808 r(q sapp ed 2808 Aq s9Od WIS / QOLZB !q SHdd Gun !q sell4ElonlwaS 90928 Aq sei!leloA pe ue6oleH ❑ 0 r f) ❑ ❑ 90929 iq SallpioA XC-Hd1MN X919n-HdiMN GIOH-Hd1MN 0 0 x • 1.0 Phone: (425) 883-3881 • Fax: (425) 885-4603 ❑ ❑ Project Number: fiti t"1 a FE 9.4 raW Oki Relinquished by 0 U CC Relinquished by Relinquished by Chromatograms with final report ❑ Reviewed by/Date Reviewed by/Date 0 U U s a 0 U 0 0 0 0 O m (A O m 0 z w W z O m co 0 OnSite Chain of Custody Page 2-- of 3 Environmental `-° _ ,` , f y,Jfa Turnaround RegitesY' * e (� 3 Laboratory Number: 0 • • ; ? � �.'(It1•Vo`rking�� ys� =- • � - Phone: (425) 863-3881 • Fax (425) 885-4603 ,Mk, -3t• ,.. = e'.`_p,. L�.,l... v e� jY ' coq ,� 5)'< +.,;; rf ' % - s 4,1�" .�ar i .g., 1, •�v; equeeted A stsv. , -"'"' • • x . '1411 � %" Company: �� (Check One) ❑ Same Day ❑ 1 Day y Pii-'� �r ,1 + A a`4ti?3;F 6 u� ,..11414-;e:y rNWTPH-HCID NWTPH-Gx/BTEX x O CL z m m T - N .� O > Halogenated Volatiles by 8260B rSemivolatiles by 82700 PAHs by 8270D / SIM PCBs by 8082 Pesticides by 8081 A Herbicides by 8151A Total RCRA Metals (8) TCLP Metals ,- �' W z , /1 cS � O I un Q , -'�� S ,r. ll V V \--r L ti _ X, JO Q nn J �} (J --yy- -L % Moisture Project Number:,,✓\ ■2Day ❑3Day 'Project Name:Na e,csii5 a �ro Pte-• C'�% Standard (7 working days) Project Manager: / cg ?e* SOt~� (TPH analysis 5 working days) Sampled . a pled / / )� (other) „5N-- w V ,, J -„.„.„,„. LabAll''' ,,, } •�r} y - ,, +1N f,t- .11,Z.31 Yd 'S ft [ 5�] c.< ^,_.,' x ���>1 s'. Sam, les deri icatton �� �;x}5 :fr u0ate 4 to 4, '..:si 3a if 1-W � ee a 7.C'*i a-�--rh.r;.�r , Sa i le'di ,.�." ��3 ',;v zr Ii.1 Mattiko res v # af? �u ;•;r _ -tint 1 1 P S--1 6-' to/i0 12-3 5 s b X 1 (9-, GP (9- .5-'\ 433o S t XXX X 15 6.10 b-15 • ratio S x LII* GP 8 - . 5--. 11-6--0 5 1 . tG G Pg - 1 Li 1Lrss— 5 �, - >C . X a 6p113 - (--,) iii /5-5-- (,.) t9Gp3-� �, (05-0 i„..) Inni� X G pH- - tc(iyl t {-ts X' -r �i. :� �.::f� q..?' ,--, -is r• 1� rJ� '� - - � �_ .�. .-�' K:i4t� o.GJ11. fcJs !tj i '}l`�! It �.L�:,I� �: ��:�s '�. � _-,.,18e4:4-4-.4" `S19Ra re:.;,m ... a•< .�.�"sµ� ]w i” t � 4a _ Gi:� Co • anY; ��:� l: r••� uyk . - 3 . oaii <'v i r' " ik= �h._ .-�: •' �, y- _ _ �� ' r { '_'Y �ate,�, ''Lk'.� G �- �Noon -�'l:?.Jl:'<L.�.. Lo :�,e .., nts CJ'.' A3Y� 5 eC ` alA1J � - sf -. �4i>' �• :tat._`k^: �r' V�LRi Si. f ay'tJ �, ., Relinquished by 10(f 579 I p ' C�6 S J ��' i%✓ `�` Received b y i 4 6 101152"1 I/4' r .\-5 Pcbt Relinquished by . Received by e �t� f(g Relinquished by ,j (k Received by Reviewed by/Date • Reviewed by/Date Chromatograms with final report 0 DISTRIBUTION LEGEND: White - OnSite Copy Yellow - Report Copy Pink - Client Copy • Onsite Chain of Custody___ Page -3• •of `� _ ". Environmental Inc. ,Y. _ �.s, .-mb mf -r:. ' ?� 'fur.`rtacountf=Fte�estsi%'s'� /� 10 ' 1 3 Pett alikj �y o:ays 47' Laboratory Number: 0 Phone: (425) 883-3881 . Fax: (425) 885-4603 One) ' �,, ? eRequfesfe '— n^ -s' �S!S Company: (Check _:ry o.la ,rirtx '• .a ... C;7' • Same Day ❑ 1 Day 1NWTPH-HCID NWTPH-Gx/BTEX x NWTPH-Dx 1Volatiles by 8260B Halogenated Volatiles by 8260B Semivolatiles by 8270D PAHs by 8270D / SIM 32 / 8081A y 8151 A Metals (8) 4 I% Moisture Project Number: ■2Day . ❑3Day—ia �,) ice• Project Name: eaft),S Pro tandard (7 working days) Project Manager: e_ Pei-ej s r-, (TPH analysis 5 working days) Sampled by -2ST- We)Ci'--------. (other) X :. Lrab IDa Y i n1-ir i?, '�f :` ' . u'thet 1e41ii- ntifii at A , 1 -- ,,,,,,,g,*-- ,,,,, —a led - Sa � ' ffl\ at K4 *{i1y tr x ,ta ,,j oonti is 0 P s r t,.) toil /2:2,0 G` ., g , G P —G3 (olrioe. 13a0 L5 Xx i, —3'I P q -- co jviic /910 c.—) 8 Xx - GP & — W - '`'l!y k)b c`ff6-- t,t) 2— G97, G97— ILo s ;:;�-ate:: _ss'•'_ ••� y z� -�, -�>.c.�`, u x r- , . _ � -111 R ..:`Y /- -:;rr+ _r:�?n,.r-:�a �5� -- Sina!".e y v 5 < y,' � �' '.� 'A �- r - .z � "; r :I .:{,tiT '1. "'.V:i..v5..tf.,4,- : -,'-� kt- �' tGotn an"^ +4�r�.,.+: i5 ��t_-`=- .. 1. x;' -..,,. h _.I. S'Ci Date '4+%'. '+ ,,--J parr %IT _ ±�� -til "•�: ."�."}e---i`»a3 ., Time--- _±L, �fi. SH �.,.. Co ni:i1�:. ments/5ec -.fT• -VaP-a ifs 1�' ,v`�� �`stru atYlnstructio�s F'n-. :7.1%17.7,77.!-,'-�.P ,�. �u' ' �i� =' p M1 r[.��... : cl .;-r- •.,ti�'. -; ' �r,,y z . ti Relinquished by ice' v ,, G hV---4 ig fis %r2 (0-(0 Received by l Vf is( ; ' 1 ) L Relinquished by . Received by Relinquished by Received by Reviewed by/Date Reviewed by/Date Chromatograms with final report ❑ DISTRIBUTION LEGEND: White - OnSite Copy Yellow - Report Copy Pink - Client Copy 1 2221 Ross Way • Tacoma, WA 98421 • (253) 272-4850 • Fax (253) 572-9838 • SPECTRA Laboratories 10/28/2008 OnSite Environmental Inc 14648 NE 95th Street Redmond, WA 98052 Attn: David Baumeister Client ID GP5-3 GP6-5 GP7-2 Spectra # 1 2 3 SPECTRA LABORATORIES Steve Hibbs, Laboratory Manager a7/scj Analyte Total Cyanide Total Cyanide Total Cyanide Project: Sample Matrix: Date Sampled: Date Received: Spectra Project: Result <0.1 • <0.1 < 0.1 www.spectra-lab.com 10-130/Carosino Property Soil 10/14/2008 10/16/2008 2008100330 Units mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg Page 1 of 1 Method SM4500CN-E SM4500CN-E SM4500CN-E �% CO• c U C w O R a J �1�11 E O ya O W Project Manager: . David Baumeister M °' N N W 4 O N Om o .0 w Q) J 3 U d 0. c N o. E E, E 0 E. N J 05 U 0 y W•C Z O • .o a• cn Att Project Nam .0 0 N ca 3 A 1 coN N N m .0 E z a E 0 a.' ci 1 • sly V • aceAnalytical'm www.pacelabs.com Report Prepared for: David Baumeister Onsite Environmental, Inc. 14648 NE 95th Street Redmond WA 98052 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS FOR PCDD/PCDF Report Prepared Date: November 3, 2008 Report No 1082677_8290 Pace Analytical Services, Inc. 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 Phone: 612.607.1700 Fax: 612.607.6444 Report Information: Pace Project #: 1082677 Sample Receipt Date: 10/16/2008 Client Project #: 10-130 Client Sub PO #: N/A State Cert #: C218 Invoicing & Reporting Options: The report provided has been invoiced as a Level 2 PCDD/PCDF Report, If an upgrade of this report package is requested, an additional charge maybe applied. Please review the attached invoice for accuracy and forward any questions to Scott Unze, your Pace Project Manager. This report has been reviewed and prepared by: Scott Unze, Project Manager (612) 607-6383 (612) 607-6444 (fax) scottarn7e@pacelabs.com Report of Laboratory Analysis This report should not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc. The results relate only to the samples included in this report. Page 1 of 13 1H aceAnalyticar Pace Analytical Services, inc. 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 Phone: 612.607.1700 Fax: 612.607.6444 DISCUSSION This report presents the results from the analyses performed on two samples submitted by a representative of OnSite Environmental, Inc. The samples were analyzed for the presence or absence of polychlorodibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorodibenzofurans (PCDFs) using a modified version of USEPA Method 8290. Reporting limits were set to correspond to one-fifth of the lowest calibration points. The recoveries of the isotopically -labeled PCDD/PCDF internal standards in the sample extracts ranged from 39-63%. With the exception of one low value, which was flagged "P" on the results table, the labeled standard recoveries obtained for this project were within the 40-135% target range specified in Method 8290. Also, since the quantification of the native 2,3,7,8 -substituted congeners • was based on isotope • dilution, the data were automatically corrected for variation in recovery and accurate values were obtained. A laboratory method blank was prepared and analyzed with the sample batch as part of our routine quality control procedures. The results show the blank to be free of PCDDs and PCDFs at the reporting limits, with the exception of a trace level of Total TCDD. This was below the calibration range of the method. The Total TCDD level reported for sample GP3-23 was similar to the corresponding blank level and was flagged "B" on the results table; this may be, at least partially, attributed to the background. It should be noted that levels less than ten times the background are not generally considered to be statistically different from the background. Laboratory and matrix spike samples were also prepared with the sample batch using clean sand or sample matrix that had been fortified with native standards. The results show that the spiked native compounds were recovered at 89-115%, with relative percent differences of 0.2-7.0%. These results indicate high degrees of accuracy and precision for these determinations. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in fill, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc. Report No 1082677_8290 Page 2 of 13 Appendix A Sample Management Report No ..... 1082677_8290 Page 3 of 13 OnSite "CI Environmental Inc. 0 14348 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 905Z- (425) 883-3881 • Subcontract Laboratory: Pace Analytical Service, Inc. Co I•0 Contact Person: Scott Unze / Dioxin Manger Address: 1700 Elm St. Ste. 200 Minneapolis, MN 55414 co Phone Number: ( 612 ) 607-6383 CO Date/Time: Turnaround Request 1 Day 2 Day Other: 3 -Day Laboratory Reference #: Page t 141 f2',( 11 / I 30 Project Manager: David Baumeister .email: dbaumeistereonsite-env.com • Project Number: •••tU1catflPi;•ii: . : i:'.i .4;;'• ii: ; ' ' • ;10, "%5 — , , ,. is . 1011 IMO 5 I Pk) 44 in ' PO ran ..L. . . . • . . _ iiiiiiiiiii .iir-ilinliuiliimi„:mtililiiilii .i..-olit iiiimmiamim i r:;:;Iiiiiniiiimir,iy,ou,i Relinquished by: •.... ! 110”— . e9g6 icasla rc3t) • . Ts 3 q.L . . #.: Received by: Ali 41/ fcut.e cofico. 0;,,E8 Or i Relinquished by: Received by: ... . Relinquished by: ' Received by: P` �y,.P caAn Iytical tit- dit on 2ptio�n�,ryIoZ L Client Name: bLl "I i '!z ��,,7,/4411 r' !Project Courier: Fed Ex D UPS 0 USPS 0 Client ❑Commercial ❑ Pace Other Tracking #•( [67)S—OICO• Custody Seat on Cooler/Bolt Present: ❑ yes no Seals intact: 0 yes IC7-ho - No, Packing Material: 0 Bubble Wrap ubble Bags 0 None 0 Other Temp Blank; Yes 7herrrroineter Used an/een.4 79 Tyi5e of Ice: Wet Tile None 0 Samples on Ice, cooling process has begun • • z r t c.c Cooler TemperatureContents: Biological Tissue Is Frozen: Yes No Comments: 1, 2. Date and i or xamining Temp should be above freezing to 6°C Z�G b° P • Chain of Custody Present: Wes ONo ON/A )as ONo DNIA _ Chain of Custody Filled Out: Chain of Custody RoilnquIshed: 11.laTinfo DNIA 3. Sampler Name & Signature on COC: DYes Io ONIA 4, . Samples Arrived within Hold Time: Vas ONo ON/A 5, Short Hold Time Analysis (<72hr): DYes 'Efaio ON/A 6, • Flush Turn Around Time Requested: DYes C t�o ON/A 7, Sufficient Volume: *as ONo ON/A 8. Correct Containers Used: -Pace Containers Used: ' es DNo ON/A DYes la. ❑NIA 9. __„sr _ - - Containers Intact: I es ONo ON/A 10. Filtered volume received for Dissolved tests DYes ONo /A 11. Sample Labels match COC: -Includes date/time/ID/Analysis Matrix: Is ONo ON/A , L 12. 13. • All containers needing add/base preservation have been checked. Noncompliance are noted In 13. At containers needing preservation are found to be in compliance with EPA recommendation, Exceptions: VOA,Coliform, TOC, Oil and Grease, WORO (water) [lyes ONo 911A DYes DNo!/A DYes % No initial when completed Lot # of added preservative . Samples checked for dechlorination: DYes DNo C IA 14. Headspace in VOA Vials ( >6mm):_ DYes DNo I i/A 15. — - Trip Blank Present: Trip Blank Custody Seals Present Pace Trio Blank Lot # (if purchased):_ DYes ONo ItaIA DYes DNc PA 16. Client Notification/ Resolution: Person Contacted: Comments/ Resolution: • Datefrime: Field Data Required? Y / N Project Manager Review: Date: (Q (I, k (oQ Note: Whenever there is a discrepancy affecting North Carolina compliance samples, a copy of this form will be sent to the North Carolina DEHNR Certification Office (I.e out of hold, Incorrect preservative, out of temp, Incorrect containers) Report No 1082677_8290 • F-ALLcoda'r?55,0633 Appendix B Sample Analysis Summary Report No 1082677_8290 Page 6 of 13 TM ace Analytical! Method 8290 Sample Analysis Results Client - Onsite Environmental, Inc. Client's Sample ID Lab Sample ID. Filename Injected By Total Amount Extracted Moisture Dry Weight Extracted ICAL ID CCaI Filename(s) Method Blank ID Native isomers 2,3,7,8-TCDF Total TCDF 2,3,7,8-TCDD Total TCDD 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF Total PeCDF 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD Total PeCDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF Total HxCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD Total HxCDD 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 1,2,3,4,7, 8,9-HpCDF Total HpCDF 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD Total HpCDD OCDF OCDD GP3-23 1082677001 U81031A 11 BAL 13.2 g 20.7 10.4g U81002 U81031A_03 & U81031A 16 BLANK -18000 Conc ng/Kg ND ND ND 0.38 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 5.40 EMPC RL ng/Kg ng/Kg Matrix Dilution Collected Received Extracted Analyzed Internal Standards Pace Analytical Services, Inc. 1700 Elm Street - Suite 200 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel: 612-607-1700 Fax. 612- 607-6444 Solid NA 10/14/2008 10/16/2008 10/23/2008 10/31/2008 19:52 0.19 2,3,7,8-TCDF-13C 0.19 2,3,7,8 -TCDD -130 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF-13C 0.19 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF-13C 0.19 BJ 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD-13C 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF-13C 0.96 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF-13C 0.96 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF-13C 0.96 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF-13C 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD-13C 0.96 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD-13C 0.96 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF-13C 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF-13C 0.96 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD-13C 0.96 OCDD-13C 0.96 0.96 0.96 1,2,3,4 -TCDD -13C 1,2,3,7,8,9-H xCDD-13C 0.96 2,3,7,8 -TCDD -37C14 -- 0.96 0.96 -- 0.96 -- 0.96 Total 2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.96 Equivalence: 0.0054 ng/Kg 0.96 (Using ITE Factors) 0.96 0.96 1.90 1.90 J ng's Percent Added Recovery 2.00 62 2.00 56 2.00 57 2.00 57 2.00 58 2.00 55 2.00 63 2.00 58 2.00 59 2.00 50 2.00 61 2.00 51 2.00 44 2.00 55 4.00 47 2.00 NA 2.00 NA 0.20 57 Conc = Concentration (Totals include 2,3,7,8 -substituted isomers). EMPC = Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration RL = Reporting Limit. Results reported on a dry weight basis and are valid to no more than 2 significant figures. J = Value below calibration range B = Less than 10x higher than method blank level ND = Not Detected NA = Not Applicable NC = Not Calculated REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc. Report No 1082677_8290 Page 7of13 TM aceAnalyt cal Method 8290 Sample Analysis Results Client- Onsite Environmental, Inc. Client's Sample ID Lab Sample ID Filename Injected By Total Amount Extracted % Moisture Dry Weight Extracted ICAL ID CCal Filename(s) Method Blank ID Native Isomers 2,3,7,8-TCDF Total TCDF 2,3,7,8-TCDD Total TCDD 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF Total PeCDF 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD Total PeCDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF Total HxCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD Total HxCDD 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF Total HpCDF 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD Total HpCDD GP8-14 1082677002 U81031A_12 BAL 13.1 g 21.3 10.3 g U81002 U81031A 03 & U81031A_16 BLANK -18000 Conc EMPC RL ng/Kg ng/Kg ng/Kg ND ND ND ND ND - ND - ND - ND ND ND - ND - ND - ND ND ND ND ND ND ND - ND - ND - ND ND Matrix Dilution Collected Received Extracted Analyzed Internal Standards Pace Analytical Services, Inc. 1700 Elm Street - Suite 200 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel: 612-607-1700 Fax: 612- 607-6444 Solid NA 10/14/2008 10/16/2008 10/23/2008 10/31/2008 20:40 0.19 2,3,7,8-TCDF-13C 0.19 2,3,7,8 -TCDD -13C 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF-13C 0.19 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF-13C 0.19 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD-13C 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF-13C 0.97 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF-13C 0.97 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF-13C 0.97 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF-13C 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD-130 0.97 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD-13C 0.97 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF-13C 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF-13C 0.97 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD-13C 0.97 OCDD-13C 0.97 0.97 0.97 1,2,3,4 -TCDD -13C 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD-13C 0.97 2,3,7,8-TCDD-37CI4 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Total 2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.97 Equivalence: 0.0070 ng/Kg 0.97 (Using ITE Factors) 0.97 0.97 OCDF ND 1.90 OCDD 7.0 1.90 J Conc = Concentration (Totals include 2,3,7,8 -substituted isomers). EMPC = Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration RL = Reporting Limit. Results reported on a dry weight basis and are valid to no more than 2 significant figures. J = Value below calibration range P = Recovery outside target range ng's Percent Added Recovery 2.00 55 2.00 45 2.00 45 2.00 46 2.00 50 2.00 52 2.00 58 2.00 54 2.00 53 2.00 47 2.00 56 2.00 44 2.00 39 P 2.00 48 4.00 40 2.00 NA 2.00 NA 0.20 49 ND = Not Detected NA = Not Applicable NC = Not Calculated REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc. Report No 1082677_8290 Page 8 of 13. TM aceAnalytical Method 8290 Blank Analysis Results Lab Sample ID Filename Total Amount Extracted ICAL ID CCaI Filename(s) Pace Analytical Services, Inc. 1700 Elm Street - Suite 200 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel: 612-607-1700 Fax: 612- 607-6444 BLANK -18000 Matrix Solid U81028A_13 Dilution NA 10.6 g Extracted 10/23/2008 U81002 Analyzed 10/28/2008 20:52 U81028A 06 & U81028A 24 Injected By SMT Native Conc EMPC RL Internal ng's Percent Standards Added Recovery Isomers ng/Kg ng/Kg ng/Kg ND 0.19 2,3,7,8-TCDF-13C 2.00 80 Total TCDF 0.19 2,3,7,8 -TCDD -13C 2.00 79 otaIDF ND - 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF-13C 2.00 72 2,3,7,8-TCDD ND - 0.190 A 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF-13C 2.00 76 Total TCDD 0.71 --- . 0.19 J 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD-13C . • - . • 2.00.. 82 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF-13C 2.00 73 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF NDD - 0.94 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF-13C 2.00 71 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.94 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF-13C 2.00 69 Total PeCDF ND - 0.94 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF-13C 2.00 71 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD-13C 2.00 76 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD ND 0.94 1,2,3,6,7,8-HXCDD-13C 2.00 77 Total PeCDD 0.94 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-NpCDF-13C 2.00 68 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF-13C 2.00 61 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF ND - 0.94 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCDD-13C 2.00 72 0.94 OCDD-13C 4.00 60 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF ND - 0.94 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF ND -- 0 94 1,2,3,4 -TCDD -130 2.00 NA Total HxCDF HxCDF ND - 0.94 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD-13C 2.00 NA Total HxC-' 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD ND - 0.94 2,3,7,8-TCDD-37CI4 0.20 81 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD ND - 0.94 0.94 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ND 0.- 94 Total HxCDD 0.94 Total 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1,2,31,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF ND 0.94 Equivalence: 0.00 ng/Kg Tootaltal HpCDF - ,8,9-HPCDF 0.94 (Using NDE Factors) 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD ND - 0.94 Total HpCDD ND - 0.94 OCDF ND OCDD ND - 1.90 Conc = Concentration (Totals include 2,3,7,8 -substituted isomers). EMPC = Estimated Maximum Possible Concentration RL = Reporting Limit Results reported on a total weight basis and are valid to no more than 2 significant figures. J = Value below calibration range A = Reporting Limit based on signal to noise 1.90 REPORT OF.LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc. Report No 1082677_8290 Page 9 of 13 Lab Sample ID Filename Total Amount Extracted ICALID CCai Filename(s) Method Blank ID Native Isomers 2,3,7,8-TCDF Total TCDF 2,3,7,8-TCDD Total TCDD 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF Total PeCDF 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD Total PeCDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF Total HxCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD Total HxCDD 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF Total HpCDF 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD Total HpCDD Method 8290 Laboratory Control Spike Results LCS-18001 U81028A 07 10.2 g U81002 U81028A 06 & U81028A 24 BLANK -18000 Matrix Dilution Extracted Analyzed Injected By Pace Analytical Services, Inc. 1700 Elm Street - Suite 200 • Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel: 612-607-1700 Fax: 612- 607-6444 Solid NA 10/23/2008 10/28/2008 16:07 SMT Qs Qm % Internal (ng) (ng) Rec. Standards 020 0.18 92 2,3,7,8-TCDF-13C 2,3,7,8 -TCDD -13C 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF-130 0.20 0.19 95 213,4,7,8-PeCDF-13C 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD-13C 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF-13C 1.00 0.95 95 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF-13C 1.00 0.93 93 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF-130 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF-13C 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD-130 1.00 0.89 89 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD-13C 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF-13C 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF-13C 1.00 0.92 92 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD-13C 1.00 0.95 95 OCDD-13C 1.00 0.92 92 1.00 0.91 91 1,2,3,4 -TCDD -13C 2.00 NA 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD-13C 2.00 NA 1.00 0.95 95 2,317,8 -TCDD -37C14 0.20 80 ng's Percent Added Recovery 2.00 82 2.00 80 2.00 71 2.00 73 2.00. 80 2.00 73 2.00 74 2.00 71 2.00 73 2.00 77 2.00 77 2.00 70 2.00 58 2.00 70 4.00 58 1.00 0.96 96 1.00 0.98 98 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 1.11 111 1.00 0.94 94 OCDF 2.00 2.05 OCDD 2.00 2.09 103 105 Qs = Quantity Spiked Qm = Quantity Measured Rec. = Recovery (Expressed as Percent) P = Recovery outside of target range X = Background subtracted value Nn = Value obtained from additional analysis NA = Not Applicable . = See Discussion REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc. Report No 1082677_8290 Page 10of13 aceAnalytica!*M Client's Sample ID Lab Sample ID Filename Total Amount Extracted ICAL ID CCaI Filename(s) Method Blank ID Native Isomers 2,3,7,8-TCDF 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD OCDF OCDD Method 8290 Spiked Sample Report Client - Onsite Environmental, Inc. GP3-23-MS 1082677001 -MS U81031A_13 13.0 g U81002 U81031A_03 & U81031A_16 BLANK -18000 Qs Qm % (ng) (ng) Rec. 0.20 0.19 96 0.20 0.20 101 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 0.99 99 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 0.96 96 1.00 0.94 94 1.00 0.95 95 1.00 0.95 95 1.00 1.03 103 1.00 1.07 107 1.00 1.06 106 1.00 1.01 101 1.00 1.11 111 1.00 0.95 95 2.00 2.16 108 2.00 2.16 108 Qs = Quantity Spiked Results reported on a dry weight basis and are valid to no more than 2 significant figures. Matrix Dilution Extracted Analyzed Injected By Pace Analytical Services, Inc. 1700 Elm Street - Suite 200 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel: 612-607-1700 Fax: 612- 607-6444 Solid NA 10/23/2008 10/31/2008 21:27 BAL Internal Standards 2,3,7,8-TCDF-13C 2,3,7,8 -TCDD -13C 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF-130 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF-130 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD-130 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF-13C 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF-13C 2, 3,4,6,7, 8-HxCDF-13C 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF-130 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD-13C 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD-130 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCD F-130 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF-13C 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD-13C OCDD-130 1,2,3,4 -TCDD -130 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD-130 2,3,7,8 -TCDD -37014 ng's Percent Added Recovery 2.00 78 2.00 69 • 2.00 • 70 2.00 69 2.00 69 2.00 68 2.00 77 2.00 70 2.00 67 2.00 61 2.00 72 2.00 60 2.00 51 2.00 60 4.00 49 2.00 NA 2.00 NA 0.20 72 Qm = Quantity Measured Rec. = Recovery (Expressed as Percent) REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc. Report No 1082677_8290 Page 11 of 13 aceAnalytical'TM Clients Sample ID Lab Sample ID Filename Total Amount Extracted ICAL ID CCaI Filename(s) Method Blank ID Native Isomers 2,3,7,8-TCDF 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,7,8, 9-HxCDD 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD OCDF OCDD Method 8290 Spiked Sample Report Client - Onsite Environmental, Inc. GP3-23-MSD 1082677001 -MSD U81031A 14 13.0 g U81002 U81031A_03 & U81031A_16 BLANK -18000 Qs Qm (ng) (ng) Rec. 0.20 0.20 98 0.20 0.21 104 1.00 1.01 101 1.00 0.95 95 1.00 0.99 99 1.00 0.91 91 1.00 0.96 96 1.00 0.91 91 1.00 0.90 90 1.00 1.02 102 1.00 1.07 107 1.00 1.07 107 1.00 1.02 102 1.00 1.14 114 1.00 0.98 98 2.00 2.31 116 2.00 2.26 113 Matrix Dilution ' Extracted Analyzed Injected By Internal Standards Pace Analytical Services, Inc. 1700 Elm Street - Suite 200 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel: 612-607-1700 Fax: 612- 607-6444 Solid NA 10/23/2008 10/31/2008 22:15 BAL ng's Added 2,3,7,8-TCDF-13C 2.00 2,3,7,8 -TCDD -13C 2.00 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF-13C - - - 2.00 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF-13C 2.00 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD-13C 2.00 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF-13C 2.00 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF-13C 2.00 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF-13C 2.00 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF-13C 2.00 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD-13C 2.00 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD-13C 2.00 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF-13C 2.00 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF-13C 2.00 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD-13C 2.00 OCDD-13C 4.00 1,2,3,4 -TCDD -13C 2.00 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD-13C 2.00 2,3,7,8-TCDD-37CI4 0.20 Percent Recovery 82 73 73 74 71 76 81 76 74 67 77 64 53 62 51 NA NA 75 Qs = Quantity Spiked Qm = Quantity Measured Rec. = Recovery (Expressed as Percent) Results reported on a dry weight basis and are valid to no more than 2 significant figures. REPORT OF. LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc. Report No 1082677_8290 Page 12 of 13 7M ace Analytical Method 8290 Spike Sample Results Client- Onsite Environmental, Inc. Pace Analytical Services, Inc. 1700 Elm Street - Suite 200 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel: 612-607-1700 Fax: 612- 607-6444 Client Sample ID GP3-23 Dry Weights Lab Sample ID 1082677001 Sample Filename U81031A 11 Sample Amount 10.4 g MS ID 1082677001 -MS MS Filename U81031A_13 MS Amount 10.3 g MSD ID 1082677001 -MSD MSD Filename U81031A 14 MSD Amount 10.3 g Analyte Sample Conc. MS/MSD Qs MS Qm MSD Qm Background Subtracted ng/Kg (ng) (ng) (ng). RPD MS % Rec. MSD % Rec. RPD 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.000 0.20 0.19 0.20 2.6 96 98 2.6 2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.000 0.20 0.20 0.21 2.8 101 104 2.8 1,2,3,7,8-PeC1JF 0.000 1.00 1.00 1.01 0.8 100 101 0.8 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.000 1.00 0.99 0.95 3.8 98 95 3.8 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.000 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.2 100 99 0.2 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.000 1.00 0.96 0.91 4.7 96 91 4.7 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.000 1.00 0.94 0.96 1.9 94 96 1.9 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.000 1.00 0.95 0.91 4.5 95 91 4.5 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.000 1.00 0.95 0.90 5.4 95 90 5.4 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.000 1.00 1.03 1.02 0.5 103 102 0.5 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.000 1.00 1.07 1.07 0.3 107 107 0.3 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.000 1:00 1.06 1.07 0.9 106 107 0.9 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.000 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.2 101 102 1.2 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.000 1.00 1.11 1.14 3.3 111 114 3.3 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.000 1.00 0.95 0.98 3.1 95 98 3.1 OCDF 0.000 2.00 2.16 2.31 7.0 107 115 7.0 OCDD 5.387 2.00 2.16 2.26 4.5 105 110 4.6 Definitions MS = Matrix Spike MSD = Matrix Spike Duplicate Qm = Quantity Measured Qs = Quantity Spiked % Rec. = Percent Recovery RPD = Relative Percent Difference NA = Not Applicable NC = Not Calculated CDD = Chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin CDF = Chlorinated dibenzo-p-furan T = Tetra Pe = Penta Hx = Hexa Hp = Hepta 0=Orta Report No 1082677_8290 Page 13 of 13 SPECTRA Laboratories 2221 Ross Way o Tacoma, WA 98421 ° (253) 272-4850 10/28/2008 OnSite Environmental Inc 14648 NE 95th Street Redmond, WA 98052 Attn: David Baumeister Client ID GP5-3 GP6-5 GP7-2 Spectra # Analyte SPECTRA LABORATORIES 1 2 3 Steve Hibbs, Laboratory Manager a7/scj Total Cyanide Total Cyanide Total Cyanide Fax (253) 572-9838 ° www.spectra-lab.com Proj ect: Sample Matrix: Date Sampled: Date Received: Spectra Project: Result < 0.1 < 0.1 <0.1 10-130/Carosino Property Soil 10/14/2008 10/16/2008 2008100330 Units mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg Page 1 of 1 Method SM4500CN-E SM4500CN-E SM4500CN-E :Aq :lip A 3 N a • r•• X W a • O 3 A Phone Number: (253) 272-4850 0 7' N nD. > c aAr O A B A n 0 N e3�+ O Z N q m w e N 'co S .r.: a y Z N 71 aN= , • 10 N • ;S1 0 IN 3 `4 y 0 •07 O O. a n m m a co O N N O N 0 Of N Co Co L., :awery )oaro.ed IZb86 VM 'ewonel :Jegwnry laarwd email: dbaumeister@onsite-env.com 4senba i punoreuinl W :u e311a1a¢aa R.+o1e1o14ei rim do- is 747 co wt. �� .52 CD V J • 0 V C \ TY VAD: 0 0RTH'INDS WEIR TORATION SITE 0 Z3 ,a i //BEEN RIVER ;Am V DUWAMISH RIVER •Q . ,i a t1 Project Site Address: 11269 East Marginal Way South Tukwila, WA 98168 PROJECT BOUNDARY I:jii.41z : W -WKS. E, r ,. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- Contract Documents for the Purchase of: Bid No. xx—xx 000 d MP DS 0 Poi .f( Poi .r .3 " W A V SH GA3E\S OCTOBER 2, 2013 DRAWING INDEX SHEET SHEET TITLE GENERAL 1 COVER SHEET 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN TESC EC1 EROSION AND WATER CONTROL PLAN EC2 EROSION AND WATER CONTROL DETAILS LANDSCAPE 4 DEMOLITION, CLEARING AND GRUBBING PLAN 5 SITE LAYOUT PLAN 6 MATERIALS PLAN 7 DETAIL AREA PLAN 8 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN 9 IRRIGATION ZONE PLAN 10 PLANTING PLAN 11 PLANT LIST 12 SITE SECTIONS 13 DETAILS: PLANTING 14 DETAILS: HABITAT FEATURES 15 DETAILS: MISC. 16 DETAILS: SITE AMENITIES 17 DETAILS: MISC. 18 DETAILS: MISC. 19 DETAILS: MISC. • 20 DETAILS: MISC. 21 DETAILS: CIVIL 22 DETAILS: CIVIL 23 DETAILS: CIVIL j. a. brennan' In ossociotion with: Moul Foster Alongi, Inc. Shonnon & Wilson, Inc. Lin & Associates, Inc. Taylor Aquatic Science & Policy Consultant Design Team: Landscape Architect: • J. a. brennan associates PLLC Landscapc Archin ,, & Planners 100 S. King Street Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98104 206.583.0620 In Association with: Civil Engineer: Maul Foster Alongi, Inc. 911 Western Avenue, Suite 575 Seattle, WA 98104 L Hydrologic, Environmental, rT (Sc Geotechnical Engineer: Shannon & Wilson, Inc. 400 N 34th Street _ Seattle,' WA 98103 Surveyor & Structural Engineer: Lin & Associates, Inc. 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1610 Seattle, WA 98164 Aquatic Sciences: Taylor Aquatic Science & 60% DESIGN CALL 2 DAYS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BE OR Y5OUDIG 155 (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATONS ARE APPROX ) DUWAMISH GARDENS COVER SHEET - ave revi9000 Gleno em e L ' 1 20 date SURVEY NOTES HORIZONTAL DATUM: WASHINGTON COORDINATE SYSTEM, NAD83/91, NORTH ZONE BASIS OF BEARINGS AND COORDINATES: DERIVED BETWEEN LIN (, ASSOCIATES CONTROL POINTS 10001 AND 10002 N12'16'16"W 343.51' (MEASURED) CONTROL POINT 10000 FOUND 2" BRASS DISK W/PUNCH MARK, IN CASE, DOWN 0.50' N 186186.11 E 1280780.72 ELEV. 27.26 CONTROL POINT 10001 FOUND 2" BRASS DISK W/PUNCH MARK, IN CASE, DOWN 0.45' N 186521.77 E 1280707.72 ELEV. 20.75 VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 BENCHMARK: SOUND TRANSIT (ST) H/V CONTROL POINT 2" DIA. ALUMINIUM DISK STAMPED "SOUND ELEV=19.77 FEET HV-21RS, TRANSIT LIGHT RAIL H9-2185", VERTICAL DATUM CONVERSIONS (PER CITY OF SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES) DATUM ELEVATION NAVD88 0.00 MEAN LOW WATER +0.49 MEAN LOWER LOW WATER (83-01 EPOCH) —2.35 NGVD 29, KING COUNTY, METRO +3.58 NOTE: FROM A DATUM TO NAVD 88 ADD THE VALUE SHOWN FROM NAVD88 TO A DATUM SUBTRACT THE VALUE SHOWN EXAMPLE: NAVD88 ELEV. 20.00 = (20.00 —(-2.35)) = MLLW ELEV. 22.35 NGVD29 ELEV. 10.00 = (10.00 + 3.58) = NAVD88 ELEV. 13.58 CONTAMINATED SOIL AREA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE 45—KI-703 / _ -------- / 1 1 \ \ ` ,/ ' / \ I i UNITS: U.S. SURVEY FOOT. MULTIPLY BY 12/39.37 TO GET METERS. \ \ ' Li \ \ PROPERTY BOUNDARY \ CONTOUR INTERVAL SHOWN: 2' - SCALE: 1" = 20' 0' 20' 40' \ POTENTIAL PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT \\— CONTAMINATED SOIL, TYP. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE 45 -KI -703 11 \ 1 \ 1\ 1.- SOUND TRANSIT GUIDEWAY ABOVE 1 `\ GROUND \ 1, I / 1 I - -- 1 1 —\- 1 C \ \ } d 1 i \ I \ \----- l....... I '' 1 1 . \ 1 ; j\\ \ 1\ i 1 11 ?1 1 \ 1 °II \ \\ \\ 11 p11 r „ _ T \\ ,,-\'' —' I \ 1 4`f ) 1 d. 1 I _ I� t 1 d I I 11 / i d N1 1 \ ) / \ 1 z P 1 1 1 11 —\ \ // 1 1 ,I \ C \' \ / i jl \ 11 d i' 1 1 II ;1 _-- iI I 1 11 11 1. 1 I 0 1 A, Id I 1 Pl \ 1\ d 11 -T_- ___-1 11 III �= a __ _ �_ .a I 1 E L_--J- ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE (10.1) (PROPERTY LINE) orowniliamb NivkoOr. 61'0 B IGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ST EASEMENT ST GUIDEWAY 1908 I JB SIC WIRKS I EI T. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- dewed cheded ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by dale a. brennan •"• assoctacesrux DUWAMISH GARDENS EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN 4 CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND Li -rimy LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) 2 ! - 17 file no -. scale 1"=20' revisions date L ' rT 0 co1 PROPOSED PATH APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SILT FENCE 4/ (SEE NOTE 1) / rss•a; + �C00TR0 }+aw- ia000 FGOoD T IiIoAs -500 wJ00oc, NARK, tebteCASE.e.l7 0.50' N 00 E7.26 120p700.72 ', Y:C' eF WC 74 Ft* 2 APPROXIMATE PROP. LINE ORDINARY HIGH EN,U vI'ffi' WATER AND L NE OF VEGETATION, ELEV. &5' HAVD88 re, PER ALTA SD VEY APRIL 2003. NOTES: 1. INSTALL SILT FENCE AT ELEVATION 11' PRIOR TO EARTHWORK ALONG RIVER BANK GRADING AREAS. 2. REMOVE CONTAMINATED TOPSOIL PER SPECIFICATIONS. 3. REMOVE UPPER SOIL LAYER (VI) TO ELEVATION 12'. UPPER LAYER REMOVAL ALLOWED PRIOR TO IN -WATER WORK WINDOW. 4. TEMPORARY BERM (V3) TO REMAIN IN PLACE AND PROTECT INTERIOR AREAS UNTIL INTERIOR GRADING OF LOWER LAYER (V2) COMPLETE. TEMPORARY BERM SIDE SLOPES TO BE CONFIRMED. 5. EXCAVATE AND DEWATER INTERIOR GRADING OF LOWER LAYER (V2). LOWER LAYER REMOVAL ALLOWED PRIOR TO IN -WATER WORK WINDOW BUT MUST BE CONDUCTED OUTSIDE OF THE WET SEASON. 6. TEMPORARY SLOPE ON LANDWARD SIDE OF V3 MUST BE PROTECTED WITH PLASTIC SHEETING DURING ANY TIME THAT IT IS NOT BEING ACTIVELY WORKED FOR MORE THAN 1 WEEK. 7. INSTALL SILT CURTAIN DURING IN—WATER WORK WINDOW AND PRIOR TO REMOVING TEMPORARY BERM. 8. REMOVE TEMPORARY BERM (V3) FROM LANDWARD SIDE. BREACHING ALLOWED ONLY DURING IN—WATER WORK WINDOW AND DURING LOW TIDE. PROPOSED SILT CURTAIN (MOVEMENT DUE TO REVERSING CURRENT) SILT CURTAIN ANCHOR AND BUOY (TYP) 100' (TYP.) A PLAN SCALE: r=30' 1 30' 60' 30 SILT FENCE [EXIST00GGROUNOSURFACE EXISTING GROUND SURFACE EXTRAPOLATED—v. 10 EXTREME HIGH TIDE EL. 10.28' ORDINARY HIGH TIDE EL. 10.1' UPPER LAYER (VT) TEMPORARY BERM (V3) 10 SILT CURTAIN FINISHED GRADE 0 -10 EXISTING GROUND SURFACE EXTRAPOLATED ANCHOR SECTION A .J . ). J. .0 • • � RKS. . •J -ENGINEERING -STREETS -WATER -SEWER -PARKS -BUILDING - SCALE: 1°=10' 1- 1 I I 1 0' 10' 20' dm demand maws dada mime IBM I1111111111111111111, SHANNON &WILSON, INC. Geoteehnlul and Environmental Consultants • 400 North 34th Street, Suite 100 P.O. Box 300303 Seattle, Washington 98103 (206) 632-8020 FAX: (206) 633-6777 DUWAMISH GARDENS EROSION AND WATER CONTROL PLAN -10 file no scale L L revision A -- EXTRA FLOTATION TO COMPENSATE FOR WEIGHT OF END CONNECTOR TENSION CABLE FLOTATION SEGMENT At WATERLINE —\_. A -al— END CONNECTOR SKIRT BALLAST CHAIN SILT CURTAIN DETAIL GROMMET NTS • BUOYANCY FLOAT TENSION CABLE • O WATERLINE SKIRT BALLAST CHAIN MUDUNE NEW A—A NOTE: ANCHOR CHAIN EVERY 100 FEET. ALLOW APPROX. 1 FOOT CLEARANCE BETWEEN LOWER EDGE OF SKIRT AND MUD LAYER. JOINTS IN FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE SPLICED AT POSTS. USE STAPLES, WIRE RINGS, OR EQUIVALENT TO ATTACH FABRIC TO POSTS. POST SPACING MAY BE INCREASED7 TO 8' 0 WIRE BACKING IS USED NOTE: FILTER FABRIC FENCES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG CONTOUR WHENEVER POSSIBLE 2'x2' BY 14 GA. VARE OR EQUIVALENT, 0 STANDARD STRENGTH FABRIC USED FILTER FABRIC MINIMUM 4'x4' TRENCH BACKFILL TRENCH WITH NATIVE SOL OR 3/4'-1.5'WASHED GRAVEL 2'x4' WOOD POSTS, STEEL FENCE POSTS, REBAR, OR EQUIVALENT SILT FENCE DETAIL NTS 'JB:C w:m.s -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- date designed fetid bkro SHANNON &WILSON, INC. Geoteehnleal and Environmental Consuhanta 400 North 34th Street, Suite 100 P.O. Box 300303 Seattle, Washington 98103 (206) 632-8020 FAX: (206) 633-6777 DUWAMISH GARDENS EROSION AND WATER CONTROL DETAILS file no EC2 INTNI W 1 scale date revisions date VERTICAL DATUM CONVERSIONS (PER CITY OF SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES) DATUM ELEVATION NAVD88 0.00 MEAN LOW WATER +0.49 MEAN LOWER LOW WATER (83-01 EPOCH) —2.35 NOVO 29 KING COUNTY METRO +3.58 NOTE: FROM A DATUM TO NAVD 88 ADD THE VALUE SHOWN FROM NAVD88 TO A DATUM SUBTRACT THE VALUE SHOWN EXAMPLE NAVD88 ELEV. 20.00 = (20.00 —(-2.35)) = MLLW ELEV. 22.35 NGVD29 ELEV. 10.00 = (10.00 + 3.58) = NAVD88 ELEV. 13.58 CONTAMINATED SOIL AREA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE 45—KI-703 SAVE AND PROTECT -DEMOLISH-STAIRS, COORDINATE WITH OWNER DMOLISH BUILDING FOUNDATIONS AND SLABS, TYP. (BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED BY OWNER) — REMOVE 30" HICKORY • i SAVE AND PROTECT ROW OF JUNIPERS SAVE AND PROTECT TREE PROTECTION FENCING DEMOLISH BUILDING FOUND IONS AND SLABS, TYP, (BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISH D BY OWNER) DEMO ISH ASPHA T' DRIVE MAINTAIN CITY -OWNED FENCING THROUGH DURATION OF CONTRACT \ \ —1 \ \ 1 t1 \ DEMOLISH CONCRETE / PATIO\\\ \.. DEM ' LISH CON ETE WAL Y SAVE AND PROTECT ALL UTI TY VAULTS REMOVE 14" CEDRUS DEODORA , DEMUSHASPHALT /.... \ DRIV= AY' DEMOLISH STAIRS, COORDINATE WITH OWNER CLEAR AND GRUB FIELD GRASS AND OTHER VEGETATION/ REMOVE 15° MULTI -STEMMED HICKORY DEMOLISH BUILDING FOUNDATIONS AND SLABS, TYP. (BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED BY OWNER) 0 REMOVE 4' MULTI - STEMMED BLACK LOCUST A SCALE: -1" = 20' 1 0' 20' 40' JIILIC W - RKS : EPT. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- ey CLEAR ALL BLACKBERRIES, LEAVE ROOTS FOR EROSION CONTROL WHERE NO GRADING WORK WILL OCCUR dale designed drawn checked pro) erg WO; a, e�bkne • j. a. brennanass oiauv.Lc 161*If I :oar A444' REMOVE 5 BLACK LOCUST TREES: 18-20' MULTISTEMMED, 30", 6 1 0 D IG N 24', 16', 18° MULTISTEMMED; CUT TO GROUND LEVEL, SAVE ROOT SYSTEM NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DUWAMISH GARDENS DEMOLITION, CLEARING AND GRUBBING PLAN CALL DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 .(UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) file no 17 no dale revisions scale 1"=20'-0" date NOTE: SEE GRADING SHEET FOR LOCATIONS OF CONTAMINATED SOIL AREA AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE CRUSHED ROCK PEDESTRIAN TRAIL TOP OF BANK 22' 20 4w 18 TRUCK DRIVEWAY SIZE AND CONFIGURATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE. IN NEGOTIATION WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER POTENTIAL PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT 21 22 / � 1 ' I UGPOWER- Ir SOUND 1 TRANSIT 1 ACCESS 1\1 1 1 SCLEASEMENT 1 ._ 2 EW STORMWATER OUTFALL FROM BIORETENTION CELL IL 1, . BIORETENTION CELL EA PLAN: SEE SHEET 7 \. R 26 HW 10.1 VIEWPOINT 24 22 24 25 PARK SPACE 26 100 SF SWALE ,1 GARDEN `PA) POTENTIAL ART ELEMENT VIEWPOINT POTENTIAL FUTURE EXTENSI� VIEWPOINT `sm m ,sm •'PO m PARK SIGN•sQR- 170 SF SWALE GARDEN EXISTING CONCRETE COLUMNS ST EASEMENT ST GUIDEWAY 0 SCALE: -1" = 20' 0' 20' 40' 1-- • - • • I JB . C WIRKS I DUWAMISH RIVER \1908 -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- M dee dewed MP DS decked P01.2 Ride reel* re j.a. brennan " ' 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DUWAMISH GARDENS LAYOUT PLAN CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND URUrY LOCATONS ARE APPROIL) dee revisions L rT L fibro scab 1"=20' dole NOTE: SEE GRADING SHEET FOR CONTAMINATED SOIL AREA AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE CRUSHED ROCK PEDESTRIAN TRAIL, TYP. SPLIT RAIL FENCE INTERPRETIVE SIGN SEATING BOULDER Li CRUSHED ROCK PAVING SEEDED CONCRETE PAVING CONCRETE PAVING CONCRETE SIDEWALK ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVING IA SNAGS: 5 V, UPRIGHT ROOT WADS: 5 HABITAT LOGS WITH ROOT WAD: HABITAT LOGS: 35 II I 11 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 / \ I II I 1.•I POTENTIAL PROPERTY LINE — / / I BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT I UG POWER 1.--1 / SCLEASEMENT I ROCK -LINED SPILLWAY 'RB -BREAK BARRIER CURB, TYP. ASPHALT PAVEMENT 20-: 18.. 22 21 �� SIDEWALK ,0 1N COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY m HABITAT LOG, TYP. ROOT WAD, TYP BOULDER 1= o .�.,... VIEWPOINT •SA sm 11m s0 N ‘sa�, +— ST EASEMENT ST GUIDEWAY p m 0 COBBLE SPIT-- - -------- WAVE DEFLECTOR ----- SCALE: --1''= 20' 20' 40' 'UB :IC W : RKS IETT DUWAMISH RIVER -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- Ey date designed drawn MP DS checked Wel eoe nerd Irk no j. a. brennan ' ' assocwa�e , 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRU 1 TION DUWAMISH GARDENS MATERIALS PLAN CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND URUTY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) doe revisions 6 17 Ole no anile 1"=20' date SCALE: 1" = 8' 0' 8' 16' /RETAINING WALL- SEEDED CONCRETE PAVEIENT 21 1N. 25.06 BII RACK< j '26 27 5'X5' GRID CRUSHED ROCK CALL 2 DA BEFORE YOU 1-800-424-5' (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCA11O DIG 55 ARE APPROX.) I JBLIC WIRKS I EPT. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by tlAe designed checked Pmle,9 Prol dr field bk no j. a. brennan " ' associates sq.l.c DUWAMISH GARDENS DETAIL AREA PLAN file no 7 17 r no date revisions scale 1"=8'-0" date VERTICAL DATUM CONVERSIONS (PER CITY OF SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES) DATUM ELEVATION NAVD88 0.00 MEAN LOW WATER +0.49 MEAN LOWER LOW WATER (83-01 EPOCH) —2.35 NGVD 29, KING COUNTY, METRO +3.58 NOTE: FROM A DATUM TO NAVD 88 ADD THE VALUE SHOWN FROM NAVD88 TO A DATUM SUBTRACT THE VALUE SHOWN EXAMPLE: NAVD88 ELEV. 20.00 = (20.00 —(-2.35)) = MLLW ELEV. 22.35 NGV029 ELEV. 10.00 = (10.00 + 3.58) — NAVD88 ELEV. 13.58 CONTAMINATED SOIL AREA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE 45—KI-703 EXCAVATED MATERIAL WITHIN CONTAMINATED SOIL HATCHED AREAS SHALL BE HANDLED AND DISPOSED OF PER APPLICABLE LAWS, SEE SPEC. ECOLOGICAL ZONE ELEVATION MAX. SLOPE UPLAND RIPARIAN 13+ 3:1 MOIST RIPARIAN 10-13 3:1 HIGH AND LOW MARSH 5-10 5:1 MUD FLAT 0-5 10:1 CONTAMINATED SOIL AREA, TYP. TYPE 1 CB W/ BEEHIVE GRATE RIM = 22.50 8" CPEP IN = 20.50 (S) 6" PVC IN = 20.00 (UNDERDRAIN N) 12° CPEP OUT =19.90 (W) POTENTIAL PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT UG POWER SCL\EASEMENT BIORETENTION UNDERDRAIN CLEANOUT FINISH GRADE OF BIORETENTION = 22.0 °0 IE OUT =22.5 EA PLAN: SEE SHEET 7 — 25.4 25.3 C0MNECT NEW 8" 0 TO EXISTING CB '01EOUT =23.5 5 810 IE OUT = 23.5 CUL — L RESO RCE BOU 'ARY 0 IE OUT = 3.5 0 IE OUT = 23.6 24.0 CONNECT EXISTING GUIDEWAY DOWN SPOUT W/ NEW 8" 0 EXIS INGTr1POF BANK ST EASEMENT 01 ST GUIDEWAY p m SCALE: 1" = 20'.. _ . .. 0' 20' 400 UIIiIIC WIRKS -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUI LDING- DUWAMISH RIVER dle dr,igned dawn MP DS checked j. a. brennan '. 60% DESIGN CALL2 DAYS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555_ -(IfNDERGROUND UTILI1XLOCATTONS ARE APPROX.) DUWAMISH GARDENS GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN 17, file no re L rT . 0 L ' dale revisions 51519 1"=20'-0" dale IRRIGATION SPRAY HEADS CHART: RAINBIRD 1800 SERIES PRS POP UP HEAD NOZZLE: MP ROTATOR (MP 1000) NOZZLES VARY, SEE BELOW RIGHT STRIP SIDE STRIP 5'X15' 5'X30' .22 .44 &� MP 1000, 10' RADIUS 1$O' GPM: / .27 "\ I n 1 MP 1000, 12' RADIUS /360 T8 "C0 GP�1: .64 LL .32 \ .16 MP 1000. 14' RADIUS / 180' GPM: .37 L RAINBIRD 1800 SERIES PRS NOZZLE: MP ROTATOR (MP 2000) NOZZLES VARY, SEE BELOW / M,B 2609. Ij 16' .ADtt 1S\ GPM: 324 /7 .62 \ �MP 2000 19� RADIUS GPM 74� / \ 90 7 L -1L -J -J HUNTER ROTOR HEADS --HUNTER —� <20-06I—SS, NOZZL�7.5 OPE�ATINC PSI: 45\ RADIUS: 31' OPERATING PSI: \45 RADIUS\ 40' L NOfZLE:4.0 ...Tea�Lay kt GPM: 1.5 GPM: 3.0 RAINBIRD 1800 SERIES PRS NOZZ)E:--- MP ROTkTOR7VP' 30,00) N9.ZZLES VARY, SEE BLOW /VP 3000, 30' RADIUS 18GPM: 802 . 6 \ \ MIMI OP ROTATOR MOM II IICRATIN MN Mp' 3000, 22' RADIUS / 180' GPM: 1.34 TEMPORARY IRRIGATION RESTORATION ZONE POTENTIAL PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT 1 11 1 I 1 1 I UG POWER SCLEASEMENT 1 1 11 1 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 LONG-TERM IRRIGATION EXISTING WATER LINE / 241 / 22 1 \ SCALE:20' 1 1 1 0' 20' 40' k / �I • +014W 10.1 • • ...•...._._. DUWAMISH RIVER LAWN ZONE POP-UP RISERS, HEAVY-DUTY_... COMPONENTS FOR LONG-TERM USE ST EASEMENT ST GUIDEWAY CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 [UNDERGROUND UTILRY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) P JBLIC W : RKS D :P". -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by date desiaeed dawn checked Mlen9 n,oi a' led bk ro MP DS j.a. brennan ' ' associates sL‘c DUWAMISH GARDENS IRRIGATION PLAN no dale revisions scale 1"=2O'-0" date VERTICAL DATUM CONVERSIONS (PER CITY OF SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES) DATUM NAVD88 MEAN LOW WATER MEAN LOWER LOW WATER (83-01 EPOCH) NGVD 29, KING COUNTY, METRO ELEVATION 0.00 +0.49 —2.35 +3.58 NOTE: FROM A DATUM TO NAVD 88 ADD THE VALUE SHOWN FROM NAVD88 TO A DATUM SUBTRACT THE VALUE SHOWN EXAMPLE: NAVD88 ELEV. 20.00 = (20.00 —(-2.35)) = MLLW ELEV. 22.35 NGVD29 ELEV. 10.00 = (10.00 + 3.58) = NAVD88 ELEV. 13.58 NOTES: 1. SEE GRADING SHEET FOR LOCATIONS OF CONTAMINATED SOIL AREA AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE 2. NO TREE PLANTING WITHIN 5' OF UTILITY LINES NAVD 88 RN ECOLOGICAL ZONE UPLAND RIPARIAN MOIST RIPARIAN HIGH AND LOW MARSH MUD FLAT ELEVATION 13+ 10-13 5-10 0-5 MAX. SLOPE 3:1 3:1 5:1 10:1 POTENTIAL PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT 1 11 1 1 1\ II 11 II UG POWER SCLEASEMENT N GARDEN AF PO RG CO AF PT SA PO GRASS PO PO RAIN GARDEN CO RG GRASS SA PT PO SA RAIN GARDEN CO RG GRASS PO PT PO SF RN ST EASEMENT ST GUIDEWAY SCALE: 1" =-20' 0' 20' 40' IJILIIC W RKS i IHTT. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- designed ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- designed darn cir fieldlicro by MP DS date j.a. brennanan .' reAc LIVE STAKE MIX #2 ..................... LIVE STAKE MIX #1 60% DESIGN-::` CALL 2 DAYS. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION !, . _BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 -`��IUt•I�ERGROUND UTJULY-LOCA110NS ARE APPROX.) ! 1 O DUWAMISH GARDENS PLANTING PLAN dale revisions 10 17 file no scale 1'=20'-0" date T✓Y t.1 IJ (i Donn LI _ U O PLANT LIST TREES PLANTING ZONE KEY SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING UR MR HM LM RG PARK/SS AC ACER CIRCINATUM VINE MAPLE 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X X X N/A N/A AG AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA 'AUTUMN BRILLIANCE' AUTUMN BRILLIANCE SERVICEBERRY 1_1/2• CAL B & B AS SHOWN X X X X X AM ACER MACROPHYLLUM BIG LEAF MAPLE 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X X X AR ALNUS RUBRA RED ALDER 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X X FL FRAXINUS LATIFOLIA OREGON ASH 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X PS PICEA SITCHENSIS SITKA SPRUCE 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X PB POPULUS BALSAMIFERA BLACK COTTONWOOD 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X X PT POPULUS TREMULOIDES QUAKING ASPEN 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X PM PSEUDOTSUGA MENZESII DOUGLAS FIR 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X Pm PSEUDOTSUGA MENZESII DOUGLAS FIR - 1 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X SL SALIX LUCIDA PACIFIC WILLOW 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X TP THUJA PLICATA WESTERN RED CEDAR 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X X TC TSUGA CANADENSIS 'GENEVA' DWARF CANADIAN HEMLOCK 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X TH TSUGA HETEROPHYLLA WESTERN HEMLOCK 5 GAL CONTAINER AS SHOWN X SHRUBS SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING UR MR HM LM RG PARK/SS AA AMELANCHIERALNIFOLIA SERVICEBERRY 1GAL CONTAINER 6'O.C. X X X X N/A N/A CS CORNUS STOLONIFERA REDOSIER DOGWOOD 1 GAL CONTAINER 6' O.C. X X X X HD HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR OCEANSPRAY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6' O.C. X X X X PC PHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUS PACIFIC NINEBARK 1 GAL CONTAINER 6' O.C. X X X PL PHILADELPHUS LEWISII LEWIS' MOCK -ORANGE 1 GAL CONTAINER 6' O.C. X X RS RIBES SANGUINEUM RED FLOWERING CURRANT 1 GAL CONTAINER 6' O.C. X X SS SALIX SCOULERIANA SCOULER'S WILLOW Y2" - 1-1/2" LIVESTAKE 8' O.C. X X X SSi SALIX SITCHENSIS SITKA WILLOW Y2" - 1.12" LIVESTAKE 8' O.C. X X VO VACCINIUM OVATUM EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 5' O.C. SMALL SHRUBS/ FERNS SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING UR MR HM LM RG PARK/SS AD ARUNCUS DIOICUS GOATS BEARD 1 GAL CONTAINER 2' O.C. 5-7.5 5:1 X X N/A N/A AF ATHYRIUM FILIX-FEMINA LADY FERN 1 GAL CONTAINER 2' O.C. X X GS GAULTHERIASHALLON SALAL 1 GAL CONTAINER 2'O.C. X X X X LI LONICERA INVOLUCRATA TWINBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 6' O.C. X X X MA MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM TALL OREGON -GRAPE 1 GAL CONTAINER 4' O.C. X X PO POLYSTICHUM MINUTUM SWORD FERN 1 GAL CONTAINER 3' O.C. X RG ROSA RUGOSA 'SNOW PAVEMENT SNOW PAVEMENT ROSE 1 GAL CONTAINER 3' O.C. X RN ROSA NUTKANA NOOTKA ROSE 18" BARE ROOT 2' O.C. X X RP RUBUS PARVIFLORUS THIMBLEBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 4' O.C. RU RUBUSSPECTABILIS SALMONBERRY 1 GAL CONTAINER 4'O.C. X SD SPIREA DOUGLAS!! DOUGLAS' SPIREA 1 GAL CONTAINER 4' O.C. SA SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNOWBERRY 12" - 18" BARE ROOT 3' O.C. X 'J3.0 W:RKS IEIT. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- dale designed MP drawn DS n�q ere oam. field Lk m GROUNDCOVERS SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING UR MR HM LM RG PARK/SS AF ARCTOSTAPHYLOS ULVA-URSI KINNICKINNICK 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. 5-7.5 5:1 X X N/A N/A FC FRAGARIA CHILOENSIS COASTAL STRAWBERRY 4" POT CONTAINER 18" O.C. X X PT PACHYSANDRA TERMINALIS JAPANESE SPURGE 4" POT CONTAINER 18" O.C. X X SH SA CA HOOKERIANA 'HUMILISMILLS'' SWEETBOX 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X X HM HAKONECHLOA MACRA 'AUREOLA' GOLDEN JAPANESE FOREST GRASS 4" POT CONTAINER 18" O.C. X EMERGENT MIX SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING UR MR HM LM RG PARK/SS CL CAREX LYNGBYEI LYNGBYE'S SEDGE 1 GAL CONTAINER 24'0.C. 5-7.5 5:1 X X N/A N/A CO CAREX OBNUPTA SLOUGH SEDGE 1 GAL CONTAINER 24'0.C. X X SM SCIRPUS MICROCARPUS SMALL FRUITED BULLRUSH 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X X SV SCIRPUS VALIDUS SOFTSTEM BULLRUSH 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X X EMERGENT MIX SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING UR MR HM LM RG PARK/SS AR ARGENTINA EGEDII PACIFIC SILVERWEED 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. 5-7.5 5:1 X RG N/A N/A AE AGROSTIS EXARATA SPIKE BENTGRASS 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X AS AGROSTIS STOLONIFERA CREEPING BUNTGRASS 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" 0.C. X CL CAREX LYNGBYEI LYNGBYE'S SEDGE 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X X DC DESCHAMPSIA CAESITOSA TUFTED HAIRGRASS 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" 0.C. X JA JUNCUS ARTICULATUS JOINTED RUSH 1 GAL CONTAINER 24" O.C. X LIVE STAKE MIX #1 PERCENTAGE SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 10% POPULUS BALSAMIFERA BLACK COTTONWOOD 10% CORNUS SERICEA RED TWIG DOGWOOD 40% SALIX SCOULERIANA _ SCOULER'S WILLOW 40% SALIXSITCHENSIS SITKA WILLOW LIVE STAKE MIX #2 PERCENTAGE SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 10% SAMBUCUS CERULEA ELDERBERRY 10% CORNUS SERICEA RED TWIG DOGWOOD 80% SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNOWBERRY j. a. brennan ' ' associates ru.c PLANTING ZONE KEY PLANTING ZONE ABBREVIATION ELEVATION MAX. SLOPE UPLAND RIPARIAN UR 13+ 3:1 MOIST RIPARIAN MR 10-13 3:1 HIGH MARSH HM 7.5-10 5:1 LOW MARSH LM 5-7.5 5:1 RAIN GARDEN RG N/A N/A PARK STREETSCAPE D PARK/SS N/A N/A 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DUWAMISH GARDENS PLANT SCHEDULE CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) 11 file no 17, w L 110 dale revisions scale date Path .241.-",,,k;;;* of max r•.i.i�i7tn 5:lsjo Ex. structures, to be demolished fir= : Upland Riparian (el. 13+) Moist Riparian (el. 10-13 A. SECTION A Duwamish River High,and low marsh (e). 5-10) Mud fiat SCALE: 1" = 20' I I I I 0' 20' 40' Existing grade v V OHW—e1.10 Mud flat Mud flat .. . High and low marsh Path/water access J hand -carry boatlaunch Upland Riparian Park space Sound transit . . elevated guideway A' r L 1-- Ex. structures, to be demolished t?i • m High and low marsh (el. 5-10) Moist riparian (el. 10-13) Upland riparian (el. 13+) Path Buffer Adjacent property (freight) L SECTION B I SIALE:I1'-1I' 0' 10' 20' 60% DESIGN . NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND UIIUIY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) . • 1908 •`'Jy -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- JBLIC W(RK.S IEITT. 6Y 41e MP DS checked woad P46v j. a. brennan ' ' DUWAMISH GARDENS SITE SECTIONS ne 440 revisions fib ro scale r date 1 NOTES: • STAKE TREES OVER 5' HEIGHT • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH THE FINISHED GRADE • SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING • FLAG GUYING WIRES WITH SURVEYOR TAPE 2 STRAND TWISTED 12 GAUGE GAL. WIRE ENCASED IN 1" DIAMETER RUBBER HOSE 8'-0" BVC TM' TREATED PINE STAKES DRIVEN TO REFUSAL INTO UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL MIN. 24" DEPTH. FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE 3" MULCH, KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK FORM SAUCER WITH 3" HIGH CONTINUOUS RIM REMOVE ALL WRAPPINGS FROM TOP Y3 OF ROOTBALL SPECIFIED PLANTING MIX, WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE AIR POCKETS A \ CONIFER TREE PLANTING SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" NOTE: • MULCH COMPLETELY BETWEEN ALL PLANTS EXCEPT IN SEEDED AND MARSH AREAS. • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH THE FINISHED GRADE. 3" MULCH. KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK. FORM SAUCER WITH 3" CONTINUOUS RIM FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE 11 V IIaglina _ .4..r..A PLANTING SOIL. WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE ALL AIR POCKETS. SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING. C5) SHRUB PLANTING SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" 2 X DIA. OF ROOTBALL NOTES: • STAKE TREES OVER 5' HEIGHT • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH THE FINISHED GRADE • SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING • FLAG GUYING WIRES WITH °r SURVEYOR TAPE Q, 2 STRAND TWISTED 12 GAUGE GAL. WIRE ENCASED IN 1" DIAMETER RUBBER HOSE 8'-0" BVC TM' TREATED PINE STAKES DRIVEN TO REFUSAL INTO UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL MIN. 24" DEPTH. STAKE ABOVE FIRST BRANCHES ORAS NECESSARY FOR FIRM SUPPORT FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE 3° MULCH, KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK FORM SAUCER WITH 3" HIGH CONTINUOUS RIM REMOVE ALL WRAPPINGS FROM TOP Y3 OF ROOTBALL SPECIFIED PLANTING MIX, WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE AIR POCKETS DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" 15' MAX. SPACING BETWEEN POSTS ✓ 1 HOG WIRE, ATTACHED TO POSTS T 5' MAX. – H SPACING BETWEEN POSTS ROW OF BVC POSTS ALONG 5 CONTOUR LOW MARSH PLANTINGS RIPARIAN „40(7— PLANTINGS HIGH MARSH PLANTINGS MUDFLAT MARSH -____Irl ROW OF BVC POSTS ALONG 10.1 CONTOUR ORDINARY HIGH WATER (10.1 CONTOUR) MARSH I RIPARIAN PLAN VIEW (DIAGRAM, NOT TO SCALE) GOOSE EXCLUDER SCALE: N.T.S. I JBLIC W : RKS IEITT. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- dale designed MP drawn DS checked v of anal pro) do field ex no j. a. brennan0 NOTES: • STAKE TREES AS SHOWN IN TREE PLANTING DETAILS AS APPLICABLE • PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS EVEN WITH THE FINISHED GRADE • SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO BACKFILLING PLANTING HOLE TO BE 2 X DIA. OF ROOTBALL SHRUB ON SLOPE PLANTING SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" ROW OF BVC POSTS ALONG 5 CONTOUR HOG WIRE, ATTACHED TO POSTS OHW A. . n - n n n n n n n n n n n A n nn FORM SAUCER WITH 3” HIGH CONTINUOUS RIM, DOWNHILL SIDE ONLY 3" MULCH, KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM TRUNK FINISH GRADE EXISTING SUBGRADE REMOVE ALL WRAPPINGS FROM TOP Y3 OF ROOTBALL AFTER PARTIAL BACKFILL SPECIFIED PLANTING MIX, WATER AND TAMP TO REMOVE AIR POCKETS MOIST RIPARIAN PLANTING BARK MULCH JUTE NETTING TWINE TWINE 2" TUBERS CORMS, AND/OR ROOTS PLANTED & WEIGHTED WITH CORN STAKE EMERGENT PLUG PLANAR') DESIGN ROW OF BVC POSTS ALONG 10.1 CONTOUR JUTE NETTING PLACE TOPSOIL SCALE: 1" =1'-0" NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DUWAMISH GARDENS DETAILS: PLANTING CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) no Cale revisions 13 17 file no scale 4! w date VARIES, SEE NOTE ,,e-2'-0" MAX. A HABITAT SNAG ANGLE CUT 15 BRANCHES MIN. 1"-3" DIA. MIN. CUT 6 CAVITIES (PROJECT TOTAL) AS DIRECTED BY OWNER. BRANCHES SHALL BE VARIABLE IN LENGTH BETWEEN 6" AND 3' LONG NEW SNAG TREE CEDAR, SPRUCE, DOUGLAS FIR OR PONDEROSA PINE FINISH GRADE COMPACTED SOIL PROVIDE: 1/3 OF TOTAL SNAGS @ 30' HEIGHT, 24" DIA. 1/3 OF TOTAL SNAGS @ 20' HEIGHT, 20" DIA. 1/3 OF TOTAL SNAGS @ 15' HEIGHT, 18" DIA. HEIGHT INCLUDES BURIED PORTION OF SNAG SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" C LARGE WOODY DEBRIS SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" LOG NOTCHED 4" WIDE BY 3" DEEP (TOP OF LOG ONLY) TO SEAT CABLE WRAPS LOG ANCHORED IN TIGHT CONTACT WITH SOIL 1/4" 7X9 GALVANIZED STEEL CABLE W. CABLE CLAMPS CABLE EYELET THREADED THROUGH ANCHOR OHW DRIVEABLE ANCHOR SYSTEM FOR LOAFING LOG TIDAL STREAM SCALE: N.T.S. APPROX. 1/3 LOG LENGTH OG LENGTH VARIES PRUNE LIMBS FLUSH WITH COLLAR, WP. PROVIDE 18"-24" CEDAR, DOUGLAS FIR, OR SPRUCE LOGS OHW APPROXI 1/3 LOG LENGTH SUBGRADE NOTE: SLOPE VARIES; SEE PLANS 1=Tr TI T T TTI —TTI -7 III 11111 IIS 1 II I I I I I IIIII 1 II I III 1 111-111 1 1 III FL 'T rl- - T rl- -T FI -- r - I II �n�-1111 I III�IIIIJI _SII -1 J 3 ,IC W : RKS )EPT. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- dale ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- dale designed dram decked Rtq er wqd, field uno MP DS 11111 1111 111 11111=111111111 1 HI -1-11-111-1F111-1-frirl-TIMM —IIIA II � WWWW II 1111111;l111I1 IIIllll j. a. brennan " ' 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DUWAMISH GARDENS DETAILS: HABITAT FEATURES CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) no date revisions 14 17 file no scale data 1.1 USE ONLY SOUND MATERIAL MANTA RAY DRIVABLE ANCHOR OR APPROVED EQUAL EXISTING SUBGRADE 25%OF LENGM 30 LENGTH — LOG NOTCHED 4" WIDE BY 3" DEEP (TOP OF LOG ONLY) TO SEAT CABLE WRAPS. LOG WITH ROOT WAD I I -1I , III I 1-11=I I 1=1 _1 1 LOG WITH ROOT WAD • SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" VIEWPOINT PINE RAIL FENCE CRUSHED ROCK STEPS v 7X9 GALV. STEEL CABLE W. CABLE CLAMPS AireAnW I-111 1 li-Ill-'1117(i1-111-1Itr.._. BOULDER =1 I —I IE 11--__11171_71 11= [I=1 1=1 11=1 I I-II I—I I 1-=111=1I IE T F=1 I I -- _ LOGS -1 I � I I 11-1 11-1 I I I I 111 11—I I I� I I-1 11=1 I I-1 '— — — — 11 1111E1- I 11 1 11 I 1 3:1 SLOPE i I—I 11=111=111—I 1= ROCKS T.ll1 111111-11 _111411T74411.. - -11 I111=T11T1=1 11- 11R I 11 1=1 1=1 III-111—III—III— 69=11-,114 -II—I I1=111=11I- 11I—I 1=1 1=1 -1 1=111= I 111_111_111_I m: aro y+:!t rs : ,_:, -1 1 111-1I==711—l—.=fiT=1 I111 -1 1-11=T1= --117i1_I11m= 1 11 SCRAMBLING PATH PATH SCALE: 1/4" =1'-0" EDGE OF ADJACENT PLANTING, 24" GROUNDCOVER SPACING, 18" OR 24" TYP., AS PER PLANTING SCHEDULE GROUNDCOVER AT TIME OF PLANTING GROUNDCOVER SPACING SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" 1=1 RIPARIAN PLANTINGS, SEE PLANS 1° DIAM. DRILLED HOLE 7X9 GALV. STEEL CABLE W. CABLE CLAMPS ROOT WAD, SEE SPECIFICATIONS CABLE EYELET THREADED THROUGH ANCHOR O.H.W. MANTA RAY ANCHOR OR APPROVED EQUAL COBBLES, PER PLAN II—iii—iii —iii—I 1i-111711.1 05) ROOT WAD 1 111—iii=iii—iii—iiI--Ii SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" 28" 52" 36 1/2" SIGN/ ATTACHED HERE CROWN FOOTING TO FINISH GRADE FINISH GRADE -24—III III= -111E111= III II-III7111 111=11 I I—II III—I1I— iJ 1 111 1--1 Ell 4 ,2L 1— 1 111=1 1 -Ilii,. �,..: II III ii SIGN 111=11=1 _ 11 ill 111 Hi 11 SCALE: 1" =1'-0" 4" ,- 1-1 I 1-1 II ,CONCRETE FOOTING 1" HOLE WITH REBAR I 1719 AGGREGATE BASE 1111111111 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND UTILnY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) r L rT. ?14. L Co) JB . C W : RKS IEP". -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- dale designed MP dawn aged P eleng DS Pro, di, fieida, no i.a. brennan 0 associates essC DUWAMISH GARDENS DETAILS: MISC. 15 file no 17, r no dale revisions scale date ALL OUT TO OUT DIMENSIONS 2" LESS THAN LISTED SIZE. EXAMPLE - 6' BENCH WILL BE 5' 10" I= 11_ I_ LI! -111_lF111 6" *-12" LESS THAN OUT TO OUT DIM. I-- 1==J- Ell -._L= =Ill I II= II= 1.11=--1 1=-111- 11-_�-- -11-:=111=111=i;111-E111 1 F-11 L 111== 111===� 1- n WOOD SHINGLES OVER 30# ROOFING FELT ON Y2" PLYWOOD 2-16d NAILS 2"x6" ROOF RAFTERS AT 22" O.C. CHAMFERED EDGES (ALL EDGE). 4"X8" BEAMS 4"X6" BRACES AT 45° 10"X10" P.T. POST 1/2" THICK BY 8" WIDE STEEL PLATE. DRILL TO ACCEPT (2) 3/8" DIA. MACHINE BOLTS. FIT SNUG INTO WOOD POST COUNTERSINK & PLUG. SITE BACKFILL CONCRETE FOOTING FOUR (4) #4 BARS EACH WAY CRUSHED ROCK C-6) KIOSK SCALE: 1/4" =1'-0" t. UTILITY SERIES, MODEL UT -2 BENCH TWO (2) 3/4" DIA. CARR BOLTS ck"--SIGN BOARD 4'-0" CONTINUOUS ROOF CAP STEEL HORSE SHOE EACH SIDE BIRDS MOUTH NOTCH CUT RAFTER 1"x6" CEDAR FASCIA OVER 2"X8" FASCIA 1"X6" AND -1 2"X8" FASCIA 7,_3" sts FINISH GRADE 3'-6" 1 'I 18" • ens •sr 1 CONCRETE PAVERS 4'-0" SECTION A -A' UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE 13' 5" LOOP RACK 5'-4" PLAN VIEW TYP. CONCRETE FOOTINGS 1" CLEARANCE TYP. FINISHED GRADE BIKE RACK CONCRETE FOOTING ELEVATION Jr A_ — SCALE: 3/4" =1'-0" INTERP. SIGN #1 WITH PLYWOOD SIDE. PLYWOOD SIDE TO FACE PARKING LOT, CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE. ARTWORK TO BE PROVIDED BY OWNER. CONTRACTOR TO SUPPLY & INSTALL FINISHED SIGN. CEDAR SLAT BACKSIDE. BOTTOMOF BEAM SIGN BOARD 10"X10" POST FINISH GRADE 7'_3" 111-111—_ I 1-111 111 1 - A' 'J3,IC WIRKS IEITI'. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- dale ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- ELEVATION dale designed MP dawn DS checked wde field 11, no GALV STEEL PLATE WITH BOLTS CONCRETE FOOTING j. a. brennan " ' rux y" MARINE GRADE PLYWOOD 2" x 4" CEDAR FRAME 1/8" x 2" x 6" GUSSETT PLATE W/ 1/4" DIA. LAG SCREWS INTO POST AND FRAME (4 TOTAL) 10" x 10" POST SIGN BOARD ELEVATION 1" x 2" CEDAR BOARDS SOLID-HORIZ. 3/4" MARINE GRADE PLYWOOD, FINISHED SIDE SHOWING OUT 10" x 10" POST 2" x 4" CEDAR FRAME W/ 16d TOENAIL SIGN BOARD PLAN 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DUWAMISH GARDENS DETAILS: SITE AMENITIES CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX ) no dale revisions 16 17 file no scale dale SELECT Y2 MAN TO 3 MAN BOULDERS PER PLAN ADJACENT MARSH OR 1-1/2" DRAIN ROCK MUDFLAT GROUND SURFACE PLAN VIEW APPROX. 10', VARIES, PER PLAN 'OM& Da 4tifirartapr-tall--41;V: ,a5 1/8"-1/4" WIDE TOOLED JOINT, 1" IN 1 DEPTH (OR 1/4 DEPTH OF SLAB) W/ ROUND EDGES, 1/4"-1/2" IN RADIUS CONTROL JOINT CONCRETE PATH, OR CONCRETE SIDEWALK, SEE LAYOUT PLANS 3/4"=1'-0" 1-1/2" DRAIN ROCK 4"-6" ROUNDED COBBLES 3:1 SIDE SLOPES MAX. SELECT Y2 MAN TO 3 MAN BOULDERS PER PLAN ADJACENT MARSH OR MUDFLAT GROUND SURFACE SECTION VIEW CD -)COBBLE SPIT WAVE DEFLECTOR 1/2"=1'-0" IJILIZC W - RKS IEP. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by date designed MP DS checked PSI erg pmi dl, nem u no 4" j. a. brennan ' ' CONCRETE PAVING 3/4"=1'-0" VIEWPOINT 1/4"=I-0" 4" CONCRETE WITH LIGHT SANDBLAST FINISH CRUSHED ROCK SUBGRADE AS REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE GRADE. UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE EDGE:OF CRUSHED ROCK, PATH AND VIEWPOINT, 4 X4 PRESSURE TREATED- HEADER= DRILL TO RECIEV,E 2 DIA :REBAI2 AT 4 O C ,`MIN 2 PER SEGMENT; CRUSHED 1/2" x 18° SMOOTH ROUND DOWEL, W/9' SPEED LOAD SLEEVE, CENTERED (aZ MIN 18" 0.C. %e" SAW CUT ©3/4" DEPTH Yy" POLYPROPYLENE FOAM CONCRETE PATH, OR CONCRETE SIDEWALK, SEE LAYOUT PLANS HIDDEN EXPANSION JOINT 3/4"=1'-0" ROCK //Alk tip 'r SIGN BASE INTERPRETIVE SEATING BQULDER SN/ ® PINE RAIL FENCE 5A 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DUWAMISH GARDENS DETAILS: MISC. CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX) 17 file no scale dale revisions 17 date r L rT . ?•1 L VARIES, SEE PLAN— EXPANSION JOINT 5' 6" PLAZA FINISH GRADE R. MINUS COMPACTED CRUSHED ROCK SUBGRADE REFER TO CIVIL SPEC. i4" DRAINROR CK BACKFILL 1'-6" 1' BACKFILL UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE 4" PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE TOP OF WALL EL. 25.06 1" BEVEL 2 #6 REBAR CONT. #4 REBAR, 12" O.C. #4L REBAR, 9" O.C. 1" PVC WEEPS, 10' O.C. FINISH GRADE 2x4 KEY CONT. (TYP.) 12" III AI III -11111 nm_annl=mnl—iimi_mi 3' 3' 6" A \ CONCRETE RETAINING WALL/ SEAT WALL SCALE: 3/4" = ljf 5/8" -MINUS CRUSHED ROCK WITH FINE CONTENT LESS THAN 5% BY WEIGHT; COMPACTED TO 95% UPSLOPE SHOULDER: 2' BETWEEN PATH EDGE AND BOTTOM OF SLOPE COMPACTED SUBGRADE; COMPACTED TO 95% 2% SLOPE 2% SLOPE BACKFILL #4 @ 9"O.C. 5 #4 REBAR CONT. #4L REBAR, 9" O.C. TOP OF WALL EL. 25.06 FINISHED GRADE BEHIND WALL FINISHED GRADE IN FRONT OF WALL CONCRETE RETAINING WALL/ SEAT WALL ELEVATION SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" FOOTING, SUBSURFACE TOP OF WALL EL. 25.06 FINISHED GRADE BEHIND WALL FINISHED GRADE IN FRONT OF WALL CONCRETE RETAINING WALL/ SEAT WALL ELEVATION SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" DOWNSLOPE SHOULDER: 2'-0" BETWEEN PATH EDGE AND TOP OF SLOPE 2% SLOPE 2% SLOPE 2' 0" CRUSHED ROCK PATH SCALE 1 1/2" =1'-0" 6-0" 2' 0" 73.:C 1%:R1(s ., -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by date designed drum aAd Anti AN "a di fieldekno MP DS 3' 0" j.a. brennan '. FOOTING, SUBSURFACE MAX. 8' 0.C. EVEN POST SPACING 5-1/2" DIA PRESSURE TREATED LODGEPOLE PINE POST, TYP. 3-1/2" DIA. PRESSURE TREATED LODGEPOLE PINE RAIL, TYP. _Ill -III I I CONCRETE FOOTING NOTE: PROVIDE END POSTS AND CORNER POSTS AS SHOWN ON PLANS. DUWAMISH GARDENS DETAILS: MISC. CALL 2 DAYS RFFQRF YOU fIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) 18 17, file no 'YOFYUKWI L• • scale date revisions date 38 (18) x 3h1 PLASTIC (2) Y4' STEEL HOOPS I- 2O 23 RECEPTACLE, "FAIRWEATHER TR -2" GALVANIZED DOME TOP W/ HINGED DOOR SCALE: NOT TO SCALE (36) CARRIAGE BOLTS W/. NUTS AND WASHERS 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND MILAN LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) I JBLIC W : RKS ) 'sI T. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by date designed MP dawn DS chimed prolene pro dir field bit no .a. brennan "' associates DUWAMISH GARDENS DETAILS: MISC. 19 file no 17 no date revisions Scale date IRRIGATION NOTES: 1. THE IRRIGATION DESIGN REPLACES AN EXISTING SYSTEM. OLD ZONES WILL BE REPLACED WITH NEW ZONES PER THE DRAWINGS. 2. LOCATE AND INSTALL CONTROLLER AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. 3. OLD VALVES, VALVE BOXES, QUICK COUPLERS AND IRRIGATION HEADS SHALL BE SAVED AND RETURNED TO THE DISTRICT. 4. THE IRRIGATION DESIGN IS DIAGRAMMATIC. EQUIPMENT SHOWN IN PAVED AREAS IS FOR DESIGN CLARIFICATION ONLY AND IS TO BE INSTALLED WITHIN PLANTED AREAS WHENEVER FEASIBLE. ALL VALVES AND VALVE BOXES TO BE INSTALLED IN PLANTED AREAS. 5. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM CONNECTS TO AN IRRIGATION SUPPLY LINE DRAWING WATER FROM LAKE ENTIAT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO COORDINATE WITH THE DISTRICT. REFER TO CIVIL FOR LOCATION, SIZE, AND TYPE. 6. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM DRAWS WATER FROM LAKE ENTIAT WITH A PUMP SYSTEM. P51 AT PUMP BEFORE PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE (PRV) IS ASSUMED TO BE 160 PSI. IRRIGATION DESIGN ASSUMES A DESIGN PRESSURE OF 120 PSI AFTER THE PRV. VERIFY STATIC WATER PRESSURE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM AND REPORT ANY DIFFERENCES IN PRESSURE TO THE DISTRICT. 7. VERIFY CONDITIONS IN THE FIELD BEFORE BEGINNING WORK. BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ENGINEER ANY ADVERSE CONDITIONS THAT WILL AFFECT THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM. . 8. ALL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE INSTALLED PER STATE AND LOCAL CODES. INSTALLER TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL PERMITS. 9. LOCATE ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES 48hrs PRIOR TO ANY SITE EXCAVATION. CALL (800) 424-5555 10. INSTALL ALL PIPING UNDER PAVED AREAS PRIOR TO PAVING. PROVIDE SLEEVES UNDER ALL PAVING FOR VEHICULAR ROUTES FOR MAIN LINES, LATERAL LINES AND CONTROL WIRES. 10. INSTALL ALL PIPING UNDER PAVED AREAS PRIOR TO PAVING. PROVIDE SLEEVES UNDER ALL PAVING FOR VEHICULAR ROUTES FOR MAIN LINES, LATERAL LINES AND CONTROL WIRES. 11. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE STAKE OUT AND VERIFY FINAL LOCATION OF CONTROLLER, VALVES, SLEEVES, Sc HEADS WITH THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 12. ALL LINES SHALL BE THOROUGHLY FLUSHED PRIOR TO PRESSURE TEST AND INSTALLATION OF HEADS OR OTHER EQUIPMENT. CONTRACTOR TO PERFORM PRESSURE TEST PRIOR TO TESTING WITH ENGINEER. 13. ADJUST ALL HEADS, IF APPLICABLE, FOR MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE AND TO PREVENT OVERSPRAY. THROTTLE VALVES SLIGHTLY TO OBTAIN OPTIMUM OPERATING PRESSURE. 14. MAINTAIN ACCURATE INSTALLATION RECORDS WITH ACCURATE DIMENSIONS TO ALL IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT. (INCLUDING DEPTH OF BURIED PIPE AND WIRES), FOR THE FORMATION OF THE EXACT "RECORD DRAWINGS" OF INSTALLED SYSTEM, 15. IRRIGATION WIRING UTILIZES A TWO WIRE SYSTEM WITH DECODER EQUIPMENT REFER TO SPECS. 16. SPLICE CONTROL WIRES WITHIN VALVE BOXES ONLY, USING 3M—DRY SPLICE CONNECTORS. DO NOT SPLICE SIGNAL WIRE BETWEEN CONTROLLER AND VALVES. PROVIDE A 24" EXPANSION LOOP FOR ALL WIRES WITHIN EACH VALVE BOX. 17. INSTALL SECONDARY IRRIGATION: MAINLINE IN TRENCH WITH WATER LINE, WHERE POSSIBLE. ENGINEER TO APPROVE PLACEMENT. 18. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS INDICATING SIZE (DIAMETER) OF ALL IRRIGATION LATERAL PIPING TO ENGINEER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 19. OWNER INTENDS TO OPERATE UP TO 5 ZONES AT THE SAME TIME. P.O.C. POINT OF CONNECTION (NTS) METER BY OWNER GATE VALVE PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE DOUBLE CHECK VALVE. SEE CIVIL GALV.,BRASS, & PVC PER DETAILS BEGIN 100psi-PVC MAINLINE ZO GPM 1-1/2" —VALVE20NE# —GPM —VALVE SIZE IPA 0 0 . IRRIGATION LEGEND EQUIPMENT PRODUCT/ MODEL SYMBOL SPRAY HEAD HUNTER — MP3 ROTATOR NOZZLE: NOZZLES VARY, SEE BELOW 6" POP UP HEAD ON RAINBIRD BODY SEE SPRAY HEAD CHART ROTOR HEADS SEE ROTOR HEAD CHART HUNTER — I-20-06—SS 6 PLASTiC? RISER (17' — 46' Radius) NOZZLE: NOZZLES VARY HUNTER — I-40-06—SS 6" STAINLESS STEEL RISER (45' — 70' Radius) NOZZLE: NOZZLES VARY BUBBLER HUNTER — PCN BUBBLER NOZZLE O .25 GPM PIPE MAINLINE (SECONDARY) SCH. 40 PVC PIPE, SIZE AS SHOWN, SEE PLANS LATERAL SCH. 40 PVC PIPE SLEEVING SCH. 200 PVC PIPE CONTROLLER RAINBIRD FLOW SENSOR FS MASTER VALVE M V SOIL MOISTURE SENSOR SMS AUTOMATIC CONTROL VALVE RAINBIRD PCRPROVIDE CARSON BOX W/LOCKING LID O DRAIN VALVE 2" MUELLER MARK ORISEAL OR APPROVED EQUAL. PROVIDE VALVE BOX. DV QUICK COUPLER HUNTER H0-44—LRC—AW PROVIDE VALVE BOX W/ LOCKING LID SEE SPECS. 41) BALL VALVE BALL VALVE — 2" KBI PVC BALL VALVE OR APPROVED EQUAL SIZE ACCORDINGLY. PROVIDE TWO UNIONS. PROVIDE VALVE BOX W/LOCKING LID SEE SPECS. >< GATE VALVE WILKINS OR APPROVED EQUAL, SIZE ACCORDINGLY. PROVIDE VALVE BOX W/LOCKING LID SEE SPECS. 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) r L rT . L HJIIIC W: RKSILPT. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by date designed MP drawn DS cheded re tea atq e , field x no j. a. brennan'' assocaatcsrux DUWAMISH GARDENS DETAILS: IRRIGATION no date revisions file no scale 20 17, date 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CALL 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 (UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROX.) IJBLIIC W : RKS I 31'. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by amend MP ma DS cher pole Plbr fie .a. brennan ' DUWAMISH GARDENS DETAILS: IRRIGATION 21 17 file no r revisions scale date CATCH BASIN TYPE 1 W/BEEHIVE GRATE.LOCATION, CONFIGURATION AND ELEVATION SHOWN ON SHEET C1.1 MOUND SOIL AROUND CATCH BASIN FOR RAINGARDEN PLANTS, SEE LANDSCAPING PLAN DESIGN GRADE SHALL BE ACHIEVED AT TOP OF MULCH LAYER L6 -FREEBOARD 2:j idla ' wv v� iiv./ SCARIFY TOP OF SUBSOIL TO A DEPTH ,j\\ OF 12" BEFORE PLACING BIORETENTION ��\ SOIL (DO NOT COMPACT THIS \ ' SURFACE) \\\' GRAVEL FILTER rw /i/ it /<v... ,,,v!iw�v//.O/.:/✓�:/z/ice/,: � , , v,!w./.;v y//;. ,,yy./ BIORETENTION INSTALLATION NOTES:.: 1. PROTECT THE BIORETENTION AREA FROM ACCUMULATING FINES DURING CONSTRUCTION. DO NOT ALLOW SILT LADEN STORMWATER TO ENTER THE BIORETENTION AREA. REMOVE ANY SOIL THAT BECAME CONTAMINATED WITH SILT DURING CONSTRUCTION. 2. PROTECT THE BIORETENTION AREA FROM EXCESS COMPACTION DURING CONSTRUCTION. DO:NOT ALLOW HEAVY MACHINERY WITH NARROW TRACKS, NARROW TIRES, OR LARGE LUGGED, OR HIGH PRESSURE TIRES TO OPERATE IN THE BIORETENTION AREA. SOIL COMPACTION. CAN LEAD TO PREMATURE FAILURE. EXCAVATION SHOULD BE PERFORMED BY MACHINERY OPERATING ADJACENT TO THE BIORETENTION AREA. 3. SCARIFY BOTTOM SURFACE OF THE BIORETENTION AREA PRIOR TO PLACEMENT:OF BIORETENTION SOIL TO A LOOSE:UNIFORM STATE. rE 1`1144 14 e!41,11 0r°mr 111!'A!!. m! 01ii " T 1d' t OBIORETENTION CELL SCALE: NTS �%6"STORAGE ��/.�� : MULCH 2" ARBORIST \i\\\ice\\i\\\i\\\i 24" BIORETENTION SOIL MIXTURE CO PVC SLOTTED PIPE, PROVIDE e' SLOTS 1" O/C ACROSS THE TOP 90° OF THE PIPE ONLY 6" (MIN.) FILTER BLANKET COVER OVER UNDERDRAIN PIPE SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADATION 4" THICKNESS OF 2"-5" ROUND RIVER STONE (CLEAN, <5% FINES) 6" THICKNESS OF 2"-4" RIP RAP. • DESIGN GRADE TO BE ACHEIVED AT TOP OF RIP RAP NOTES: 1. SEE DETAIL 4, THIS SHEET FOR CURB CUT TO SWALE DETAIL 03ROCK LINED SWALE SCALE: NTS TERMINATE FABRIC IN A "KEYWAY" 4 oz. NON -WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC JB J. C W : RKS .P''. -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by dote designed drown checked proj eng proj do - field bk no CO PVC CAP (6" ABOVE GRADE) CO PVC SWEEP ELBOW LIMITS OF BIORETENTION CELL UNDERDRAIN 02BIORETENTION UNDERDRAIN CLEANOUT SCALE: NTS A 12" —24" 12" I MODIFIED. BARRIER CURB 72" ELEVATION THICKEN BARRIER CURB AS SHOWN IN THE VICINITY OF THE CURB CUT PROVIDE 6" DROP TO NOMINAL DOWNSTREAM GRADE ROCK LINED SWALE OCURB BREAK AT ROCK LINED SWALE SCALE: NTS j. a. brennak associates I , MAUL FOSTER ALONG! SECTION A -A HAND PLACE ADDITIONAL LARGER ROUND RIVER STONE AT THIS LOCATION DUWAMISH GARDENS FG SURFACE L • rT . 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION STORM DETAILS 1 no dote revisions �..rle0O.O. -lar RASE ,1,71V0En0n0ER. PLAN VIEW . . :0 Q ELEVATION CAST IRON RING AND COVER "f\ c d • Ciiy of Tukwila SANITARY SIDE SEWER CLE/W-OUT SS -03'' 08.03 8.SHELTON OSTORM DRAINAGE CLEANOUT 1 SCALE: NTS RIGID PIPE FLEXIBLE PIPE L EVM EIEVA. PON (DJ., CONC.) (CPEP CMP. PVC) PPE ASSPECI, ON MANOR 0P0C.S. NOTES: IN PAVED AREAS ANO RIGHTS-OF-WAY. BACKFILL WITH %' MINUS CRUSHED ROCK TOP COURSE, COMPACTED P4 MAXIMUM 6" LIFTS, TO 90 % MODIFIED PROCTOR PER ASTM D•1557. 2, IN UNPAVED AREAS BACKFILL. WITH NATIVE MATERIALS OR. GRAVEL AND COMPACT IN. MAXIMUM I2'LIFTS TO 90% PER ASTMD-1557. 3.NATIVE BACKFILL MATERIAL AT UNPAVED AREAS SHALL NOT HAVE PART_ ICLE SIZE GREATER THAN 10 WITHIN G OF THE PIPE EXTERIOR - 4. COMPACT PIPE" CRUSHED ROCK BEDDING TO 9046 MOOIFEO PROCTOR PER ASTM D-1557. /MT io =Ws City of Tukwila TRENCH BEDDING AND BACKFILL SWIM Ds -14A R0wmal o: 08.03 *Amos: 8. SHELTON OPIPE BEDDING AND BACKFILL SCALE: NTS .. 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION " 3" "C W4C RKS " -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- dote designed drown checked proj eng proj dir field bk nc j"a" brennan # MAULassociates PLLC lArdscIpe Art /t Flamm Odp FOSTER ALONGI DUWAMISH GARDENS STORM DETAILS 2 C r L rT. 0 1 ow 2.2 dote revisions SCALE: AS NOTED NOTES: 1. SEAL AND SAND ALL JOINTS WITH HOT ASPHALT (AR -4000W) BETWEEN EXISTING AND NEW AC PAVEMENT IMMEDIATELY AFTER FINISH ROLLING. 2. ALL EXISTING ASPHALT THAT ADJOINS NEW ASPHALT SHALL BE SAWCUT. SAWCUT SHALL BE 12" (MIN.) BACK FROM ANY EXISTING FREE EDGE. 3. HMA PAVING TO BE PER SECTION 5-04 OF THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. 4. CRUSHED SURFACING TO BE PER SECTION 9-03.9(3) OF THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. 1 O ASPHALT PAVING SCALE: NTS 3" COMPACTED DEPTH HMA CLASS "Y2" ASPHALT CONCRETE 2" COMPACTED DEPTH CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE 8" COMPACTED DEPTH CRUSHED SURFACING BASE COURSE EXISTING SOIL SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 95% TO A DEPTH OF 12" (MIN.) PERMANENT BOLLARD REMOVABLE BOLLARD NOTES: 1.AR,CONSTRUCTIONSHALL B PRESSURE TIMBER SHALL B .DOUGLASDENSE CONS UCTIO GRADE AND E E TREATED. 2. STEEL TUBE SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A53 014 ASTM A53 GRADE A. 3. NUTS. BOLTS, & WASHERS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A307. 4. ALL STEEL PARTS SHALL BE GALVANIZED. 5. CONCRETE SHALL BE 3000 psi. 6. REMOVABLE BOLLARDS ARE REQUIRED FOR RESTRICTED ACCESS ROADWAYS SUCH AS MAINTENANCE EASEMENTS. 7. ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATES: WSDOT TYPE 1 (REM) & TYPE 2 (FIXED). STO PLANS weals.® & 14-60.20.00. rRr to SCA1E. City of Tukwila BOLLARD Nam R844 WM=In: 0&03 I LAST RENSRN: 04.08 APPROVAL:, BOB GIBERSON. CITY ENGINEER 4 O BOLLARD SCALE: NTS F 12" BARRIER CURB: 1. DUMMY JOINTS SHALL EXTEND 2" BELOW GUTTER LINE, BE MINIMUM OF 16" THICK AND BE 20' o/c OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. PARTIAL DIVISION PLATES MAY BE USED IN LIEU OF DUMMY JOINTS IF APPROVED THE ENGINEER. 2. 2" WEEP HOLES SHALL BE PROVIDED EVERY 60'. 02 BARRIER CURB SCALE: NTS SECTION A -A NOTES: 1. THIS ALTERNATE SHOULD BE USED ONLY AFTER STUDYING CLOSENESS OF DRIVEWAYS, DRAINAGE TOPOGRAPHY, DRIVEWAY GRADES, RIGHT OF WAY, ETC. 2. DRIVEWAYS WITH HIGH VOLUME (AS NOTED BY CITY ENGINEER) MAY BE APPROVED FOR INTERSECTION TYPE ACCESS. 3. TURNING RESTRICTIONS MAY BE APPLIED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. 4. CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS 4000. 5. INSPECTION REQUIRED BEFORE PLACING CONCRETE. AT LEAST 24 HOUR NOTICE MUST BE GIVEN TO TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR INSPECTION, 6. ALL DRIVEWAY APRONS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 6' THICK. 7. WHERE DRIVEWAY WIDTHS EXCEED 15', A 318' X 5-1/2" EXPANSION JOINT SHALL BE PLACED LONGITUDINALLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE. 8. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH APWA/WSDOT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OR AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY OF TUKWILA. 9, AN ASPHALT APRON MAY BE USED IN AREAS WHERE N0 CURB EXISTS. 10. REMOVAL OF EXISTING CONCRETE CURB. GUTTER OR SIDEWALK SHALT. BE TO THE NEXT EXPANSION JOINT; SCORE JOINTS MUST BE SAW CUT AND REPLACED WITH AN EXPANSION JOINT. NOT TO SCALE City of Tukwila COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAV sheen RS49 EEvtsRNn: 08.03 (uNIREIM8OH. 09.08 APPROVAL. BOB GIBERSON. CITY ENGINEER OCOMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY SCALE: NTS NOTES: ALL MATERIAL AND WORKMANSHIP SHALL CONFORM TO ACI 318. ALL DETAILING, FABRICATION, ACCESSORIES, AND PLACEMENT OF ALL REINFORCING STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO THE ACI MANUAL OF STANDARD PRACTICE FOR. DETAILING REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES AND SHALL MEET THE FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS: 1. MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (28 DAY) SHALL BE 3000 PSI, PLACED WITH LESS THAN 4" SLUMP. 2. ALL CONCRETE EXPOSED TO WEATHER SHALL HAVE AN AIR CONTENT OF 5% ± 1.5%, ADMIXTURE PER ASTM C260. MINOR ARTERIAL' SIDEWALK WIDTHS PRINICIPAL ARTERIAL' 6' TUKWILA URBAN CENTER (SEE. NOTE 11 8' aer sari OCPtti .741.5.1014.2017 -0 CURS a GUTTER ,SiEt MOW NOTES: or SECTION A.A PLAN VIEW ',HOC SCORt daWS . VC kJ SA CONN Ai JOWS ELEVATION 1, SIDEWALKS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET WIDE AT BUS STOPS AND PULLOUTS. OR WHERE THE SPEED LIMIT IS OVER 35 MPH. OR WHERE A TRAIL AND SIDEWALK ARE COMBINED. - - 2. PLACE CEMENT CONCRETE OVER T OF 5!8" MINUS CRUSHED ROCK OR AS SPECIFIED IN THE CURRENT APWAAVSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. 3. REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE CURB. GUTTER OR SIDEWALK TO THE NEAREST JOINT; SCORE JOINTS MUST BE SAW CUT AND REPLACED WITH NEW, 5E£ TMC 9.48.040 HOTTOSCALE City of Tukwila SIDEWALK /MEETr RS -11 REARM to: 08.03 f :usrawlsior 04.08 APPitovu: BOB GIBERSON. CITY ENGINEER CONCRETE SIDEWALK SCALE: NTS ONOT USED 3 SCALE: NTS 60% DESIGN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION '73. W: .Er' -ENGINEERING-STREETS-WATER-SEWER-PARKS-BUILDING- by ENGINEERING -STREETS -WATER -SEWER -PARKS -BUILDING - by dote designed drawn checked proj eng proj dir field bk no j. a. brennan '« MAULassociates vt.bc FOSTER ALONG! DUWAMISH GARDENS SITE DETAILS,1 2.3, no date revisions SCALE: AS NOTED?