Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 90-08-SS - HAWKINS DAVID - LESCHI TRADING COMPANY SHORT PLAT90-08-SS 14264 MACADAM ROAD SOUTH LESCHI TRADING COMPANY To: Joanna Spencer, Public Works Dept. Duane Griffen, Building Div., DCD Mike Alderson, Fire Dept. From: Vernon Umetsu, Planning Div., DCD Date: 5/22/95 RE: Leschi Trading Company Information Request. Time and materials costs for copying will be paid by the applicant. cq K6 it Nrc_ cte' Fc / /-4tf FA - e - epJpp TPP4 KdY fircc..01)c16 r "c T& t) The attorney for Leschi Trading Co. has made a request for public information as shown in the attached letter. The City Attorney has determined that this should be treated as any other information request. She is available to rule on whether specific documents within a file are confidential. Please send copies of the relevant documents to as I'll be coordinating for Jack Pace who was the project planner. I'd also appreciate an estimate of when you will be finished. Planning will probably be sending our files to a copy company. cc:Lancaster /Pace City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director MEMORANDUM To: Linda Cohen, City Attorney From: Vernon Umetsu, Interim Sr. Planner Date: 5/10/95 RE: Leschi Trading Co. I have received the attached information request, but am operating without a context. I plan to brief Steve Lancaster on Monday and Jack on Tuesday, when they respectively return. I anticipate that Jack would handle this matter as both the planner who dealt with this application and the Sr. Planner. This would be a delay of 3 -4 working days. Is there a problem with this strategy? John W. Rants, Mayor 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 LAW OFFICES OF CHERYL A.M. WEIBEL 2907 Hewitt Avenue Everett, Washington 98201 Telephone: (206) 303 - 8104 Telecopier: (206) 258 - 4060 May 8, 1995 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Leschi Trading Co., Inc. SP 90- 8- SS /91 -3 -APRD RECEIVED 10 1995 COMlvlv+vll Y DEVELOPMENT To whom it may concern: I received the enclosed request form from Jack Pace with respect to my request for a copy of the records involving the above referenced development located at 144th & Mac Adams Rd. By this request, I am seeking a copy of each and every document in the public records maintained by community development dealing with this project, including the application, blueprints, wetlands studies, drainage plans, etc. When the . copies are available, please call my office and I will arrange to have everything picked up. Please also advise if there is any charge for the documents that are copied. In the meantime, if you have any questions, please contact me at your earliest convenience. cc: Gene Sanders Very truly yours, �] J e �cc i .0 Cheryl Weibel LESCHI TRADING COMPANY SHORT PLAT CITY OF TUKWILA REQUEST FOR PUBLI4 JitECORDS DATE: Ake...) S, 19 15 RECEIVE') la 10 1995 DEVELOPMENT *' * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * TYPE OF RECORDS YOU ARE REQUESTING. P BUILDING PERMIT 0 MECHANICAL PERMIT 0 UTILITY PERMIT P BUILDING PLANS 0 UTILTY PLANS I LAND USE FILE ® OTHER o-vf P e c4- % 0 - 8 - S S q f - A P SITE ADDRESS: PLEASE DESCRIBE IN AS MUCH DETAIL AS POSSIBLE WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR OR NEED COPIES OF: a . -- w..,cti -e Q + - Le, e4; c o . Pem . 0%n 1-1ZI Can. ' 5 (,.e L.. _ 'P° Q* . s 4-rti ( 2'd REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC RECORDS WILL BE COMPLETED WITHIN FIVE WORKING DAYS. Md'GOG ti1IMmfll WdS0:60 S6, 82 eidH November 30, 1993 Mr. Harold Chesnin Court in the Square 401 Second Avenue South Seattle, WA 98104 Dear Mr. Chesnin: c City of Tukw'la Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director RE: Short Plat 90 -8 -SS / 91 -3 -APRD Since our telephone conversation on September 16, 1993; I have not heard from you as to future action regarding the short plat. In review of the current status, after staff has granted you several extensions to complete the project, your application for Short Plat and Administrative Planned Residential Dev lopment is null and void. Attached to this letter are the applicatio forms for Short Plat and Administrative Planned Residential Development. When we firs met, you were given a copy of the Sensitive Area Ordnance, contained within the ordina ce are provisions for Mitigation on and off -site, Reasonable Use Exception, and Appe s. John W. Rants, Mayor In response to your client's position tha the requirements being placed upon the property and short plat are incorrect. You and y.ur client met with me on December 16, 1992, and agreed to the conditions in the letter dat d May 21, 1992. If you had concerns or issues with the conditions, you should have express :d your concerns before the application became null and void. The June 18, 1993 wetland assessment eport and wetland field delineation was performed by your wetland consultant, Michael P. illiams Consulting, Inc. This study was submitted to the City on July 16, 1993 as part of t e Short Plat/PRD process identified in our May 21, 1992 letter. The City's August 12, 19' 3 letter approved the required wetland study as a project submittal. Your September 9, 1993 letter stat- s that based on the "incorrect designation of wetland "... "the requirements being placed upon the property and short plat are incorrect ". Your consultant determined the designation of wetland and your engineer professionally surveyed the wetland boundary. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 Chesnin 11/30/1993 Page 2 Sincerely yours, ack Pace Senior Planner cc: David Hawkins Gary Schulz As noted in the May 21, 1992 letter, conditions were modified in response to some development occurring without permits. Based upon the land alteration, staff required a wetland study to assess whether the site contained a wetland. If you wish to short plat the property, you need to submit a new application. If you should . have any further questions regard this project, please feel free to call or write. Christopher E. Mathews LaVeeda Garlington- Mathews Harold Chesnin Sharon B. Shaw MATHEWS GARLINGTON - MATHEWS & CHESNIN ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW Mr. Jack Pace City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Short Plat #90 -8 -SS Dear Mr. Pace: September 9, 1993 I am writing this letter to set forth my client's position as applicant with respect to the above short plat and the process followed by the City of Tukwila. After our last meeting, my client sought to configure the use of the property according to the suggestions of the City with respect to what the City would accept in the short plat. However, based upon what my client feels is an incorrect designation of wetland which eliminates a substantial portion of the property, the number of living units cannot be configured either with townhouses or single family residences and townhouses to make the property usable for 4 units of housing and / or to make an economically feasible project. Based upon the above, it is my client's position that the requirements being place upon the property and short plat are incorrect. Further, my client feels that such requirements are contrary to the prior agreements and approvals made with and received and that the short plat needs to be approved as previously submitted and corrected. Please let me know as soon as possible the City's position. Sincerely yours, MATHEWS GARLINGTON - MATHEWS & CHESNIN Harold Chesnin 500 Court in the Square 401 Second Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98104 Telephone (206) 621 -7557 Facsimile (206) 621 -9494 ABA/net: MATHEWS.CE ECEFVE D SEP 15 1993 commIJN3 i Y DEVELOPMENT August 12, 1993 Dear Mr. Chesnin: Wetlands City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director Mr. Harold Chesnin 500 Court in the Square 401 Second Avenue South Seattle, WA 98104 John W. Rants, Mayor This letter is in response to our several meetings and phones calls. Below I have summarized the various items we have discussed. The June 18, 1993 wetland assessment report and wetland field delineation, performed by your consultant, Michael P. Williams Consulting, Inc., has been verified. Several significant features of your site and wetland area were discussed in the report: 1. The on -site wetland was well- forested and remains contiguous with the forested wetland area to the north. Therefore, the wetland rating is a Type 2 because it contains a significant forested class (20 percent or greater). In addition, the overall wetland area is probably greater than 1.0 acre in total size. 2. Because of clearing and grading activities, the wetland boundary on your property was difficult to establish in certain areas. The wetland report includes data which substantiates the surveyed boundary. 3. According to TMC 18.45 (Sensitive Area Ordinance) Type 2 wetlands are generally not developed or relocated for mitigation. A 50 -foot protective buffer area is required around the wetland boundary during and after development as a permanent portion of the wetland tract. 4. The Sensitive Areas Ordinance also requires restoration of unpermitted activities and impacts to wetlands. Some restoration of the forested component of this wetland will be required prior to final permitting of the proposed short plat. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Mr. Harold Chesnin August 12, 1993 Page 2 PRD Permitted Uses Attached to this letter is the section of the PRD which permits attached two -unit dwellings. (See attachment) Time Frame Your revisions need to be submitted to the Planning Division by August 20 to keep your application active. If submitted after the deadline, your application will be null and void and a new application will need to be submitted. As you know, I will be on vacation from August 13 through August 20. If you have questions before I get back, you may contact Gary Schulz. Sincerely, ck Pace Senior Planner cc: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist Phil Fraser, Senior Engineer 'TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE Sections: 18.46.010. 18.46.020 18.46.030 18.46.040 18.46.060 18.46.070 18.46.080 18.46.090 18.46.100 18.46.110 18.46.112 18.46.115 18.46.120 18.46.130 18.46.140 Chapter 18i. PRD — PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Purpose. Permitted districts. Permitted uses. Site acreage minimum. Relationship of this chapter to other sections and other ordinances. Density standards. Open space. Relationship to adjacent areas. Preapplication procedure. Application procedure required for PRD approval. Review criteria. Restrictive covenants subject to approval by City Council and City Attorney. Application procedures for building permit. Minor and major adjustments. Expiration of time limits. 18.46.010 Purpose. It is the purpose of this chapter to encourage imagi- native site and building design and to create open space in residential developments by permitting greater flexibility in zoning requirements than is permitted by other sections of this title. Furthermore, it is the pur- pose of this chapter to: (1) Promote the retention of significant features of the natural environment, including topography, vegetation, waterways, wetlands and views; (2) Encourage a variety or mixture of housing types; (3) Encourage maximum efficiency in the layout of streets, utility networks, and other public improvements; and (4) Create and /or preserve usable open space for the enjoyment of the occupants and the general public. (Ord. 1599 §4(1), 1991; Ord. 1247 §1(part), 1982) 18.46.020 Permitted districts. Planned residential development (PRD) may be permitted in the following districts: (1) R -1, Single - family residential; (2) R -2, Two-family residential when there are sensitive areas on the lot; (3) R -3, Three- and four - family residential when there are sensitive areas on the lot; (4) R -4, Low apartments when there are sensitive areas on the lot; (5) RMH, Multiple- residence high density when there are sensitive areas on the lot. (Ord. 1655 §2, 1993; Ord. 1285 §1, 1983: Ord. 1247 §1(part), 1982) 18.46.030 Permitted uses. The following uses are allowed in plarned resi- dential development: (1) In R -1 districts, dwellings may be permitted which are harmonious with the surrounding residential character and built environment. Single unit detached dwellings will be preferable to attached units; however, attached two -unit dwelling; will be considered if necessa to accommodate interior zero lot lines or pro ects with sensitive areas and /or' s" ns Eve area buffers; (2) In R -2, R-3, R -4, and RMH distr.cts, rest -, dential developments of all types regardless of the type of building in which such residence is located, such as single - family residences, duplexes, triplexes, four - plexes, rowhouses, townhouses or apartments; pro- vided, that all residences are intended for permanent occupancy by their owners or tenants. Hotel , motels, and travel trailers and mobile homes and trakler parks are excluded; (3) Accessory uses specifically des gned to meet the needs of the residents of the PR such as garages and recreation facilities of a nonc mmercial nature; (4) In planned residential developme is of ten acres or more, commercial uses may be ermitted. Commercial uses shall be limited to those w ich are of a neighborhood convenience nature such as eauty or barber shops, drugstores, grocery stores and s 1f-service laundries. (Ord. 1599 §4(2), 1991,- Ord. 128 ' §2, 1983; Ord. 1247 §1(p: rt), 1982) 18.46.040 Site acreage minimum. The minimum site for a planned residen vial devel- opment shall be one acre, except sites contain ng sensi- tive areas and their buffers. (Ord. 1599 §4(3), 1991; Ord. 1247 §1(p rt), 1982) 18.46.050 Location. The site of the planned residential de shall abut, and the main internal street servin shall be connected to, at least one major, sec collector arterial as defined in the Comprehen Use Policy Plan, except in R -1 single- family r districts. (Ord. 1289 §3, 1983: Ord. 1247 §1(s • rt), 1982) 18.46.060 Relationship of this chapter to oth r sections and other ordinances. (a) Lot Size, Building Height and Setback •. (1) Lot Size. The minimum lot size 'rovisions of other sections of this Code are waived ithin the planned residential development. The n mber of lopment the PRD ndary or lye Land sidential Page 18-52 Printed August 12, 1993 MEMORANDUM TO: Jack Pace, Senior Planner, DCD FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist, DCD DATE: August 9, 1993 RE: Leschi Short Plat - Wetland Verification My comments to use in your letter to Mr. David Hawkins are brief as follows. The June 18, 1993 wetland assessment report and wetland field delineation, performed by your consultant, Michael P. Williams Consulting, Inc., has been verified. Several significant features of your site and wetland area were discussed in the report: 1) The on -site wetland was well- forested and remains contiguous with the forested wetland area to the north. Therefore, the wetland rating is a Type 2 because it contains a significant forested class (20 percent or greater). In addition, the overall wetland area is probably greater than 1.0 acre in total size. 2) Because of clearing and grading activities, the wetland boundary on your property was difficult to establish in certain areas. The wetland report includes data which substantiates the surveyed boundary. 3) According to TMC 18.45 (Sensitive Areas Ordinance) Type 2 wetlands are generally not developed or relocated for mitigation. A 50 -foot protective buffer area is required around the wetland boundary during and after development as a permanent portion of the wetland tract. 4) The Sensitive Areas Ordinance also requires restoration of unpermitted activities and impacts to wetlands. Some restoration of the forested component of this wetland will be required prior to final permitting of the proposed short plat. cc: Mick Beeler, Director - DCD Christopher. E. Mathews . LaYeeda Garlington-Mathcws Harold Chesnin Sharon B. Shaw Mr Jack P. Pace Senior Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Mr. Pace: Per your request, enclosed is a copy of the wetlands survey performed by Michael P. Williams. Consulting, Inc. Enclosure MATHEWS GARLINGTON - MATHEWS & CHESNIN ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW Re: Hawkins Wetlands Survey h \w \Hawkins \Pace.ltr July 14, 1993 Very truly yours, MATHEWS GARLINGTON - MATHEWS & CHESNIN 1 9Lt G%LQ/1 Toni T. Anderson Paralegal 500 Court in the Square 401 Second Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98104 Telephone (206) 621 -7557 Facsimile (206) 621 -9494 ABA /net: MATHEWS.CE E i JUL 1 6 1993 cOMiMi UN!TY DEVELOPMENT June 18, 1993 !MICHAEL P. WILLIAMS CONSULTING, , INC. BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL SERVICES P.O. Box 31669 Seattle, Washington 98103 206- 623 -3280 206- 623 -3292 FAX Mr. David Hawkins Leschi Trading Co. P.O. Box 22701 Seattle, WA 98122 Dear Mr. Hawkins: My specific comments and review follows. Methods Subject: Wetlands Survey and Delineation Report, 0.71 acre parcel north of South 144th Street at Macadam Road, Tukwila, Washington. At your request, I have reviewed your property for the occurrence of wetlands and other ecological features pertinent to a Wetland and Watercourse Special Study as required by the City of Tukwila. I have prepared the attached map with the assistance of Eugene Sprout of Sprout Engineers and have flagged the wetland boundaries in the field. The site was difficult to delineate due to past changes in soils, vegetation, and hydrology. There are obvious areas of infiliing and new grades as evidenced by mounding of surface materials and drift fences. This has also been expressed to me in the field by the City Urban Ecologist, Gary Schultz. As such, the results of this delineation are based on disturbed areas methods in the 1989 Federal Manual (3) and my best professional judgement. Overall, the wetland is confined to the central portion of the parcel extending downslope (to the northeast) from the toe of the steep slope towards the drainage along the north boundary of the parcel. Approximately 26% of the parcel is occupied by this wetland. Historically . (pre- 1989), the wetland was well forested and is contiguous with a forested wetland to the north. As such, it fits the criteria of a Type 2 wetland (6). I followed the methodology required by the City of Tukwila, Sensitive Areas Ordinance, as amended (6). This specifies that delineations are to be made using the 1989 Federal Manual (3). Within this methodology, I followed the procedures for disturbed , Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993 Page 2 areas due to recent (1 -3 years) grading and filling on -site. The methodology required both off -site and on -site review for assessing wetland boundaries. . My off -site review included using aerial photographs (Appendix 5) for the period 1968 to 1988. I also reviewed information on sensitive areas in King County (7), 'soils maps (1), wetland inventory information and the sensitive areas atlas for the City of - Tukwila, sensitive species information (8,9), and National Wetlands Inventory maps for this area. I carried out the survey and delineation on -site work on 15 June 1993. At this time, the site was well vegetated with this year's growth which exceeded 2 meters height in places both in the understory and openings. I approximated the boundaries of the wetlands and then refined these points with detailed vegetation and soils sampling. There was obvious filling and grading effects from past years activity through the wetland area. This was evidenced by drift fences along the watercourse, presence of exotic reclamation species, and mounding of fill at the base of trees, especially on the uphill side. -Due to the difficulty in locating the original soil surface or hydrologic regime, additional soil pits were examined throughout. A detailed soil pit and vegetation plot data form (see Appendix 2) was recorded once a boundary was located using Federal Manual Procedures (3) and best professional judgement. The location of the pit was numbered and recorded on the map. The wetland edge was flagged with pink flagging labeled "WETLAND DELINEATION ". These "data points" are identified on the map and data sheets by numbers 01 to 12. Sprout Engineers surveyed the location of the soil pits and the wetland edge as delineated the same day. A walk - through survey of habitat use, wetland class, and mitigation potential was made. Notation was made of all observations of animals species and additional upland or wetland plants. Site Conditions The aerial photographs indicate that the site was predominantly forested up to 1988. The only cleared areas were the location of the abandoned house site on the east end and the bladed area at the west end. (The house was removed between 1968- 1980). After this time, it appears some additional trees were removed especially in the central portion along the north property line. I observed a distinct wetland and drainage course in the central portion and the Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993' Page 3 north side. The remainder of the parcel exhibited non - wetland disturbed areas. The vegetation outside the wetland consisted of native weedy species and some exotics (see Appendix 1). Within the wetland areas numerous typical wetland species were present. Soils were highly disturbed. throughout. Recent grading changes may have altered the hydrology, but for the most • part it compares well with that visible on -the oldest aerial photographs. West End Housesite The site is well elevated above the remainder of the,parcel and is typical of well drained slopes throughout the area. A cut 6 -8 feet deep has been made at the extreme north end exposing the soil. The site is vegetated by native and exotic weeds and grasses and receives some shading from the forest canopy to the east. No obvious wet sites were observed. It is separated from the central wetland by a relatively steep (> 25 %) forested slope. East open area /abandoned homesite This abandoned house site area is now occupied by, exotic weeds and grasses and some native vegetation'. The site was barren in 1980, appearing recently plowed or graded. Currently, the site area is well drained for most of the year. Drainage along north boundary This watercourse /wetland area is contiguous with the upper wetland. It has been recently channelized with drift fences running along the south side and filling in excess of 3 feet in places. The effective riparian corridor is currently approximately 5 -10 feet in width. The canopy is young (5 -10 years) red alder, with an understory of reed canarygrass and giant horsetail. Open water of approximately 0.25 -0.5 cf* flows down the channel. Debris piles line the south side for most of the length. Central wetland area At the time of field studies the site exhibited considerable saturation throughout the profile. Surface ponding was encountered at a number of locations and running water was observed downslope from the "cistern" tank flowing northeast towards the drainage. Obligate wetland plants ( "OBL ") such as panicled bulrush, yellow willow, and American brockline were found in the upper wetland portion. The bulk of the wetland area was occupied predominately by more facultative wetland species ( "FACW" and "FAC "; see Appendix Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993 . Page 4 1 and Reference 2). The cistern (6' X'6') surface was covered by duckweed. A small depression east of the cistern was also flooded but the surface was unvegetated. At all soils pits, clear soil characters were not easily located due to recent grading /filling work. Mottling and dark chroma soils were present at most and saturated conditions during the growing season were obvious. The dense stand of wetland understory plants strongly suggested the wetland nature of the site. This wetland is connected directly to and is contiguous with the adjacent wetland forest /seepage area to the north. Forested wetland north of the property The large forested wetland north of this parcel is contiguous with the wetland on -site. The vegetation is typical of a permanently saturated wetland forest site of the Puget Sound. Lowlands. Vegetation Classes The central wetland area and drainage is classed using the Cowardin system (10) as a Palustrine Forested Wetland Seasonally Saturated (PFOE). This same classification would be appropriate for the remaining forested wetland to the north. Wetland Rating and Buffer Width The wetland as delineated on -site is a Type 2, wetland using the criteria of the City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Ordinance (6; see Appendix 4). The wetland is contiguous with the off -site forested wetland area. This relationship is evidenced by both current observations and in the historical aerial photographs. The overall wetland (contiguous across property lines) is in excess on 1 acre in size. Habitat Value and Use The wetland area currently provides habitat for a variety of animal species. The presence of standing dead wood and down logs throughout the area are beneficial for habitat diversity in an otherwise low diversity residential setting. Cavity nesting sites as well as steep slope and riparian habitats were observed. Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993 Page 5 Species encountered included: Birds Retiles Colaptes auratus Turdus migratorius Hirundo rustica Troglodytes troglodytes Wilsonia pusilla Passer domesticus Sturnus vulgaris Thamnophis ordinoides Northern Flicker American Robin Barn Swallow Winter wren Wilson's warbler House sparrow European Starling Conceptual Mitigation Proposal Northwestern garter snake No construction or development related work should occur within the wetland and buffer areas. Buffer widths could possibly be reduced with appropriate enhanced mitigation of the .wetland buffers elsewhere on -site (6). The fill or re- grading previously placed into the wetland'area is currently stabilized by the dense regrowth of wetland species. It appears that it would be most effective to leave it in place while continuing to stabilize erosion of the unanchored material. In the future, the fill or graded material that is at the margins of the slopes or in contact with the drainage will continue to erode. Sedimentation will continue as the existing drift fences deteriorate over time and material erodes further. Stabilization using native vegetation will reduce the potential for this erosion and sedimentation while enhancing wildlife use. Mounding of fill and abrupt grade changes in filled areas should be either removed or stabilized. Excess material should be removed and the grade reduced to not exceed a 1:3 grade. One area of concern is the slope towards the eastern building site(s). The fill located here is saturated and may migrate downslope over time. Construction of a drain curtain the edge of-the fill material, possibly along the 170' contour, may help to reduce the downslope migration by reducing saturation from the up slope seepage. All plantings in the wetland buffers should use native species. Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993 Page 6 Rhizome transplants (via soil cores) of giant horsetail would provide rapid cover along the drainage and possibly the east side of the wetland at the Lot B housesite. Such coring should be avoided in reed canarygrass patches as this exotic species is not desirable as a wetland cover type. Suitable shrubs for shaded or partially open areas include Osoberry, Common snowberry, and European red elder (see Appendix 1). These native species also provide valuable wildlife food sources. Red -oiser dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) can be planted on the very margins of the drainage way to enhance shading and cooling of the free - flowing channel. It would also aid in stabilizing the material pulled back along the south side of the drainage. Plant material is widely available from.native plant nurseries in the Puget Sound. Conifer saplings (2 -5 year old) should be included in tree planting to reestablish the canopy along the east and northeast portions of the wetland, including the drainage. Western red cedar (Thuja plicata) and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) are suitable for plantings in wetland areas. Deciduous trees could also be used mixed with the conifers. Red alder saplings (2+ years old) and big -leaf maple saplings could be placed in clusters with conifer seedlings (spaced 5 feet apart) to enhance mutual survival. Standing and down dead wood should be left intact to increase habitat diversity. Additional'woody• material could be added to the drainage to reduce the flow somewhat, although effect on year -round follows may be minimal. • Increased organic matter in the watercourse would increase biological diversity (especially invertebrate and bacterial populations) and water quality filtration and retention. REFERENCES 1. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil Survey: King County Area, Washington. 2. U.S.D.I., Fish and Wildlife Service. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Survey. Biol. Report 88(24). 3. Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993 Page 7 pp. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Cooperation technical publication. 76 pp. 4. Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest [and Vascular Plants of the Pacific Northwest, Volumes 1 -5]. Univ. of Washington Press, Seattle, WA. 730 5. Stevens, M.L. and R. Vanbianchi. 1993. Restoring Wetlands in Washington. Washington Department of Ecology Publication #93- 17. 6. City of Tukwila. Ordinance 1599. Regulating Development in Sensitive Areas and Buffers, adopted 10 June 1991; and amended by Ordinance 1608, adopted 30 September 1991. 7. King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio. 1990. King County, Washington. 8. Washington Department of Wildlife. . 1991. Status repport Endangered and Threatened Species. Olympia, WA. Washington Department of Natural Resources. 1991. Natural Heritage Plan: Biennnial Final. Olympia, WA. 10. Cowardin, L. M. et al. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habiats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS /OBS- 79/31. Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993 Page 8 APPENDICES 1. Vascular Plant Species Encountered on Hawkins' Property. 2. Data Forms for Wetland Delineation a. Notes for Data Forms b. Data Forms, MW -01 through MW -12. 3. Wetlands Edge as Delineated 15 June 1993 4. Citations from City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Ordinance 5. List of aerial photographs reviewed for off -site determination. Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993 Page 9 TREES SCIENTIFIC NAME Pseudotsuga douglasii Alnus rubra Prunus emarginata Acer macrophyllum Salix'hookeriana Prunus domestica Salix lutea Sorbus scopulina Craetegus monogyna SHRUBS Rubus discolor Symphoricarpos albus Oemleria cerasiformis Corylus cornuta Rubus spectabilis Sambucus racemosa HERBACEOUS PLANTS Phalaris arundinacea Calystegia sepium Nasturtium officinale Equisetum telmateia Holcus lanatus Dactylis glomerata Agropyron repens • Ranunculus repens Epilobium saximontanum APPENDIX 1 VASCULAR PLANTS ENCOUNTERED ON HAWKZN'S PROPERTY COMMON NAME Douglas fir Red alder Bitter cherry Big - leaved maple Hooker willow Domestic plum Yellow willow Cascade mountain - ash Gastonberry thorn Himalayan blackberry Common snowberry Osoberry Hazelnut Salmon berry European red alder Reed canarygrass Hedge bineweed Watercress Giant horsetail Velvet grass Common orchardgrass Quackgrass Creeping buttercup Glandular willow- herb INDICATOR STATUS NL FAC NL FACU FACW NL OBL NL NL FACU FACU NL NL FAC FACU FACW FAC OBL FACW FAC FACU FACU FACW FACW Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993 Page 10 Tellima grandiflora Gl yceri a el a to Veronica americana Athyrium filix- femina Lemna minor Rubus ursinus Elymus glaucus Tri ticum aestivum Pteridium aquilinum Polystichum munitum Lactuca serriola Lactuca biennis Plantago major Juncus balticus Juncus tenuius Circaea alpina Typha latifolia Carex stipata Carex pachystachya Trifolium repens Trifolium pratense. Cirsium edule Poa palustris Holodiscus discolor Scirpus microcarpus Tri ticum aestivum Fringecup Tall mannagrass American brockline Southern lady fern Lesser duckweed Creeping blackberry Blue wildrye Cultivated wheat Bracken fern Sword fern Prickly lettuce Annual lettuce Common plantain Baltic rush Slender rush Enchanter's nightshade Common cattail Sawbeak sedge Chamisso sedge White clover Red clover Indian thistle Fowl bluegrass Creambush oceanspray Panicled bulrush Common wheat NL FACW OBL FAC OBL • NL FACU NL FACU NL FAC FAC FAC OBL FAC FACW teL OBL FAC FACU FACU FACW FAC NL OBL NL Wetlands Report Hawkins Property,, Tukwila June 18, 1993 Page 11 APPENDIX 2 NOTES FOR DATA FORMS: Under "stratum" : 1 = herb layer; 2 = shrub layer; 3 = understory tree layer; 4 = canopy layer. • % Cover = Percent Cover of each species within each stratum estimated visually within a 1 m radius of pit. Botanical Nomenclature follows Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973 (4). Specific Notes: MW -01 Riparian corridor (2 -3 m wide) along north property line with free - flowing discharge of < 0.5 cfs. Dense Phalaris (1.5 -2.0 m tall). MW -03 See back of sheet for illustration. MW -04 'See back of sheet for illustration MW -05 See back of sheet for illustration MW -06 See back of sheet for illustration MW -07 See back of sheet for illustration MW -08 Very clear evidence of recent ( < 3 years) fill on site as • seen in mounding (2 -3 feet) on uphill side of alders. MW -10 See back of sheet for illustration. Soil pits #8, 9, 10, & 11 all at base of fill berm off south side of path /drive. 8 -2 DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s): ;c X14 e P CO; «i 0.444S Date* 1S .Tun! / 4 4 3 Project/Site: 1 1.+1Lt►4S tPrel.ar1 t State: LM County: Ki►ner Applicant/Owner: Dow: d thwle-:r.c Plant Community if/Name' M W - 01 PFO Note: If a more detailed site description Is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the ant comm Wily? Yes No ) (If no, explain on back) . ((3�� din Ad-, r era tcr,441 J a W5.IS~7 Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been signifi�anil disturbed? C 4. M Kalr a �y. (t.� d,4, tao Yes }C No (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Indicator Indicator rtr Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Bo9e 1. F arundihsceL F cW to + 11. s 2. et 1 s a SepiuM 1' 12. S 3, Nbt +1.41k. :uw� a ORsl. 1 ° 13 4 g :y►4+.... 4e l nvwte t e. F�.GW _l _ 14. 5 5, ;al(1C o1:Scolov' Ftu.0 15 6. 16 7. 17. 8. 18. 9. 19 10. 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes )( No Rationale: rS'3...AK { / StUt°( SOILS _ Series/phase ::.NPtA'k' t I kt .brrp.rt !-' Subgroup' Is the soil on the hydric soils list} ,a Yes No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No x Histic epipedon present? Yes Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No Gleyed? Yes No Matrix Color: Mottle Colors' Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No Rationale 544 c 144IA rte. 1 HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Yes X No ____ Surface water depth* SCIti X 3S tM u..t: X.t is the soil saturated? Yes x No Depth to free-standing water in pit /soil probe hole' List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturatio . 5 a. +..Y- .,.4..A rk..-- , ..l PIdttZly, ' ew.. 0. ..- u4 ear :y fbcin3 e u e..a�eei4 Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes X No i Rationale: �,eA: WED..., ED...,, c,L....w.t, T Amin 1. Is the plant community a wetland? Rationale for jurisdictional decision: 4i$ � - � w JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure, 2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy,' No ) t' : �t �1 a 1 C.a Qtc-1 lAk +yew h 3 t, i 6,..l ��5 . 15% 2. 3 3. - 4. •5 5. 5 6. 5 7 p1,3wk41 8. 9. 10, 8 -2 Field Investigatqr(s): .c li►4G( e- vv:llia Date. ( Meta ProJect/Site• 14- ntil 'AS • rcexr , TLLICw;f w. State: W Y- County* Ka h iN Appiicant/Owner• v : 1 thmaki A s Plant Community //Name* M Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. • DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD? Ct Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? 12.tc_evT �� l\ a �l►a t (• V � � 3 deer Yes No ,C (If no, explain on back) � r: �C {e wtLS c ( ro as W a1 • Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes lt; No (If yes, explain on back) Dominant Plant Species Sali�l Vl :4tw1. EQultiol uw. 4.e ki&fr,t.r 3 1 hot. :t.r9sS a i;6t 1- 61cu.S (4.4 at' MS 11na.'1 &s 1 taut r..t.. �LL6k ciSSc.Ia( ce tys p (...• 0.5c.p re p.m s 3 a. /. ‘,4.1 Series/phase: Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No Matrix Color: Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes Rationale* VEGETATION Indicator Indicator Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum FACt4 4° ear— lb F -'1 _ I. �tr.rt _ 2_ pAC I FAtu► t o 0 11 12. 13. 14, 15 16. 17. 18. 19 20 Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAC ?PO /S1.-r4t&v Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes K No Rationale* SOILS Subgroup• No Undetermined Histic epipedon present? Yes No Gleyed? Yes No Mottle Colors* No HYDROLOGY 1 yt CLts. AA Is the ground surface inundated? Yes l' No Surface water depth* t 5 i I 0 c v>^ Is the soil saturated? Yes X No I• c t+.•.•.+- L co..1. i S•tw -o-Vv• -5wa a c isi.s• -- O. Sn.. Depth to free - standing water in pit /soil probe hole: List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes , x. , No Rationale* JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No • Rationale for jurisdictional decision. tj 5 a :k So +LL / h etftra.. 3.1.4; 4.1 s i"At roc c11•tu.lnv4.A. t; :pnn3c►.... cevr tlo , r iti l (Sic / t 4A %. t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community f. Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy." B -2 ,r D 3 DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investlgator(s): MsCLtA4..1 E. W- 1(;•444.S Date' 1 6 S"-►u ( 43 Project/Site ( -+ tMS Pf1 TA (t i :1"' State: �Ar k County• f v`y Applicant/Owner: `Dr .• :• 4 *°•�+ - Plant Community #Mama• µ. w — a S Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No X , (I( no, explain on back) F:`te'k 4 cra.Ls•k '. Si. to- cLra�ws Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No (If yes, explain on back) * aver Dominant Plant Species go 1. kile+u -vr F444 la to 2. 'Dat;Ay l; • l (otvarrAD- F1►C ut 1 3. Rd.v..u.vut,clur refevk% FACW I° /0 4. 9: tab; u.% SAA FACW 1 ° - /0 5, jtiv.s (facetted- PAta 1 es- 141'k■ it u.b ra.. 5 7, t% r FACIA) ° j�katar a un Lfr &LtA. fACW SO 8. ANA.v. uS dcrneaNco. VEGETATION Indicator Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species 11 12 13 14 15. 16 • 17 _ _' 18 9. 19 10. 20 Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAC Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes X No Rationale' Series/phase: r � Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Is the soil a Histosol? Yes )C Is the soil: Mottled? Yes Matrix Color: to fit s7 Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes .. No Rationale ley ir+. tr/ : le; SA. .4 sKr�c�.st ' w,ati•tAS w a p ups to (�.a_ Sl;�t+44 d:ctv.04.4 l�. 501t. 11 HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No Surface water depth' Is the soil saturated? Yes X No Depth to free-standing water In pit /soil probe hole List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. SOILS I Subgroup Yes No No .2 No Undetermined Histic epipedon present? Yes Gleyed? Yes No Mottle Colors. Indicator Status Stratum No X C Mv1 11•^+- 6 l Yttvtb 4.11 Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes X No Rationale' S. t..... tidwi U4 :"fk TA. S -- F4 - hAbl¢. SC tti. of Su'Vf lUL '` c) co. d4.121 if4,:, S', JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes )C No Rationale for jurisdictional decision: !IL a e- hau.% L..1* wi•K is Ar 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy." ov eto fi 0 z VEGETATION Indicator Indicator 4 COWr Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum 9e 1. jciu(Se'4urr. 4- elna.tetw A c.J `./.2_____ 11 S 2. •.l•? :S & ' .4Ivukc.�. F►"-' _I 12 T 3. - II II; e- ir..�.1: {i•r... NI.- 1 13. 7' 4. 12 4Lub ritstatou .1°A_ t 14 to S. .0-1, : to b uN4 S.�C i Ha in ifti Eel++ -. _L ' _ 15. r 6. 4tycer:a. al.., +. FlkcvJ _'_12.___ 16 r 7 Ye ra■-wt•a.- an+t -: caa•. pal-. 1 ° 17. T 8. Af4Nyriur. {;I; X4w►;rvl FtaL _..1"___ 18 9. . up 19 v r reo 10. . Pc (A% wlr rs- F14t� fie _ 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAG "'SO% Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes )( No Rationale: 8 -2 DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD? Field Investigator(s): 0 -e I p• (.4,u.; 4.444.s Date. 15 - t 4 1 N Project/Site: 1( • ka nQL•✓ 1 T k ur: t& State: "'Ai County: K + ►1e., Appilcant/Owner• V0+4% rf W kt hs Plant Community #/Name• il.k W - O� Note: tf a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No c (If no, explain on back) 4ppatxs g^a.lc /(,W. i. a..r` Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No (If yes, explain on back) 1) :s'1 -4.1,4 Sc % ls SOILS PilKtt Series/phase: 4 "e 1 " 2- �?k �4'{�brw3b.l 'AO`'t Subgr p. Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined is the soil a Histosol? YesaJKNo Histic epipedon present? Yes No_ Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No )c Gleyed? Yes 1t' No 5 µ/ (u ;4 3 cw• • Matrix Color: to y (Z ';77, ottle Colors: S ~ r Other hydric soil indicators: Sn ..e 6 1 4 ++ IA- •tu S•r :/ r M . Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes is No Rationale• t"t4 re " 01 1L4,44:111 '1 cu.-111.- f rt 3.-4Atl i ./ 04.0 e.v.4. . HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No y Surface water depth. Is the soil saturated? Yes 1C No µ..,, c 01 i S,.v CA. 5•- h+►r -fi* Depth to free - standing water in pit /soil probe hole: List other field evidence of qurface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yos Nit No Rationale' Obv;nv► wet kets--411._ Zloy 64.• o46ru.yt• cL►..1 b uvla.,,,l JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No Rationale for jurisdictional decision. %1P-L-1 Abyca. A'L&(cuok cfelAwr * uaL i•..�b q So . t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.' su� vit '16.4 4C. 1 0 774 o - rfl Nq' Coi)_ f y f 110/P41,1 y 91 Jai, 7� B -2 d.Jl W 0 S DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field tnvestigat9r(s)• as( P i /l`MseS / S -T'"'� ' 3 Project/Site• / h: J' " "/J / T� k w. State: W County /�� y Applicant/Owner:' : tk 4 1 1 -wk• rt• Plant Community Of/Name- Ad taJ -WS Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. ' Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? A -� Yes No `� (If no, explain on back) A w s A k {o t taa & /. � Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been signifi disturbed? Yes X , No (If yes, explain on back) Appocrs iC / • VEGETATION Indicator Indicator l Curer Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum 90 1 . 6iut rtu . {elM4 FK.14 _AI_ 11 2. -a 11 i IN.r.. sra..�:i Or&. NI- . (6 12 GA 3• U.bu.s, LArS1nui a/L __EL_ 13 4, Carta. c►rta. COM ;; MS ,LL._ _.2.' 14 5, E 11obtu r. Sm.K&A.o►�hhw+i f _ ) � 15 6. Wt• w.4.4 t0•+4 wS Fi■c■i. 1° 16 4 7, Ater t4•••-• ftNftktlw.w PAC"( -__" 17 /pro 8, Coe ..`tw.s for w.1•A eh. .#-- 2_y 18. 9. 19. 10. 20 ' Canopy 'fat c - es as & upslope >as% CeL, Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC Is the hydro•hytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No Rationale' • • - r- • - • .ad•. - ho SEee tv slop . SOILS Series/phase: A S +s tisi 4tkriQrulaok Subgroup• Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes ± No Histic epipedon present? Yes,,,, k No lS Sku.* Is the soil: Mottled? Yes , X No Gleyed? Yes No sed v w .. olf A. ' Matrix Color: 10 R 'J 1 Mottle Colors' 4.5 •TR S 1 Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes X No Rationale C k r' +-a. /AAA.* 41‘7X. �.. -�o s.,�N..r.+t 64%11.0%...N. S dt is COS IAA •-'Y /l 41. r w. S.A. Vigil. C•tt- HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No ) Surface water depth. Is the soil saturated? Yes X No Depth to free- standing water in pit /soil probe hole' &+ 1•- w;•N••:' V i e $ List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. 5 a'fioi at': ••., t+* S't 6•• S v } +1t Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes yl _ No I' Rationale' 5.-4 r- � i5 a bYi'[1„� s o.T ■••• w- Sc.Y 4�c.Q • JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yos y - No Rationale for jurisdictional decision: 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community f. Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy" "..111ttet. 1 2 E ne:tAfizr-t la_ VEGETATION Indicator Indicator % (1or4- Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Q S 1, (ttb.a;S einovt, - l rur.~ . &. L 11 2, ck:St of Dv- 2 12 la 3, Ptc. t r v &i. cepL • � 13 2.0 4 Al w . rr.,b rw - 4 14. 5. 15. 6. 16. 7. 17. 8. 18 9. 19 10. 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No Rationale: 8.2 ii,A,fr DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s): ttIC214el P. Lai .11ia.u4.S Date I S.S•- L I ' '3 Project/Site: 11-121 t�' {' t.t' t L4ILtA°A4` State: t.uA County: lL■�. q Applicant/Owner {7 ' 4-404141w. 4-404141w. Plant Community #blame• Mid ' - Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No )C (if no, explain on back) 'pptwj �ejot 4 /oY � ' ti' & oOp «° ( Se• • -1 Ile; ht, Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes k No (If yes, explain on back) t D.•S•fNt.rM4. SOILS Series/phase p et) Gk.- a +-413 so • Subgroup' Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes }( No Histic epipedon present? Yes No A. Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No N. Gleyed? Yes No k Matrix Color: IU y g .2 t Mottle Colors .' Jc' .i Other hydric soil Indicators: Is the hydric nil criterion met? Yes k No Rationale Vt.4. At-'k_ c j ve y1/ — WI STbS.A ct•%.4..,...44 t •, t S HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No .41. Surface water depth Is the soil saturated? Yes • No Depth to free- standing water In pit /soil probe hole. List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. S % )of ` cart- r1'" � Sf t\4u --tea ins ti IY, Is the etland hydrology criterion met? Yes y No Rationale' JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No Rationale for jurisdictional decision• I This date form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy." 01-E1/4,-D C4\le" er-77 Attu.,. olo B -2 �{ W- o' DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(q): at • ( t• 141 Li 4444 Date' i s ,', q 9 3 Project/She• tlat-ultAtAs r4porto t' = °- State: hlJ _ County' 1G. t v�a� Applicant/Owner. P� kA: ► Lwk Plant Community #/Name• Note: if a more detailed site description Is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook., Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No kg (If no, explain on back) 6, „•,, em (.&t'. Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly isturbed? Yes X , No (If yes, explain on back) % Cew► Dominant Plant Species ipole 1. tit N.! kt+vake:A ST 2. t n(tyCelo■r 3 Tri: aw a c+ tS"kvu.nA /6$ 4. �Lw la v► 5 a rav et ate 5 jt:p:leb'un. SAic .t td►.t`+ws.ny S 6. Gtyte rts. a Lt s. f dr 7 Ai AAA rwtnr.. P v t olLu vv. dl t: want '' — g 14►1/4h4.144.4". 440t:6..r►. 10. is Series/phase: A -t A u - Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes Is the soil a Histosol? Yes , No Is the soil: Mottled? Yes a . No X Matrix Color: 10 / K s' a. Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes Rationale (get, eri eNbv'Da,,.r. VEGETATION Indicator Status Stratum Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAO Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes jC No Rationale: Indicator Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum f' -' f e 11. FMM 1 12 A t' 13. W 1' 14. i 15. F/rcuJ I' 16 FAt- $` 17. FKu. •I 18. 19 20 > SOILS ciatla Muck- Subgroup•2 No Undetermined XC Histic epipedon present? Yes Gleyed? Yes X. No Mottle Colors. it No tl._._ kwt3.AN. No S G HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No K Surface water depth. Is the soil saturated? Yes X No G , r Depth to free- standing water In pit /soil probe hole. /5 rr /U r Vi List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes ?C No Rationale JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yos No Rationale for jurisdictional decision. t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.' ilk E e: , ul` ' w" - ,. B -2 DATA FORM ROUTINE ONStTE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s): 4t4 - eAc.. 4 f . W:11.114.44.4 Date: (t'54 - l4 3 Project/Site: 1- wk.'• -s 6.1-w:1.4. State: L.41t' County: :' Applicant/Owner : * a f11166#41G+ ^t r te* +• Plant Community #Name• Kul -dB Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No )C (If no, explain on back) CVw /t Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes K No (If yes, explain on back) e e, VEGETATION Indicator Indicator a y 0 Cc7w „ Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum 6D 1 . N.. (Lt r: s Gr,+►...11%.0a f"RCW 1 11 ?-0 2, Whin._ 4,et...te ,. RikcW to 12. r 3. �w s elexolor (Attu, ___I 13. i 4. L64.1xcca $arr : °t• /keHIIS FILL i • 14. ?' 5, P lu.,.t -r ,.. y.r- PAC I ° 15 T . 6. - & . hc.s. 6 a-VW(AA. AIL_ —L° _ 16 7. 3 e._6 S ta►tu14. - _10 17. 8. 18 9. 19. 10. 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC > `Sss is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes ¥ No Rationale: Levi dtt A Rad ? SOILS Series/phase: Subgroup : Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No 1C Histic epipedon present? Yes No X is the soil: Mottled? Yes No Gleyed? Yes No Matrix Color: 1 A I R 1 . 1 1 - f - Mottle Colors* 4 • S Va up to 6141 1"-- Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes X No Rationale. jt.. C G ry .- at r.a. -w 11KA . HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No Surface water depth Is the soil saturated? Yes tiC No Depth to free- standing water In pit /soil probe hole m Listt otther field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. D . -t _-j ct — .ta L. L Is the wetland h droiogy cri erion met? Yes X No Rationale: JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes 'C No Rationale for jurisdictional decision: y / t -t 5 • • 1s . 1 b\ alp 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community . Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy." DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investlgator(s): 1 Date* 1 S .A l q 4 j Project/She• HKwtt:,•% 1`)f•••"'411 T�kw: w State: Pr County' 1c '%. Do--P: a-: S wttZ>7s Plant Community #blame• Ik w - 04 Note: 11 a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. 8-2 tit GU -- oq Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No )C (If no, explain on back) G.ro.• 4 /fi tf to/ Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes y No (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION / Indicator (Crete Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum *0 1, 'P Lt41sv Ci aru.vut:►+4e F14t.v.1 t • S 2. olsscel 'T 3 C-iy 31 -t :4. Stri l", FU- T 4, Metric &$1& 5. Tv.:4;61:va e t& itAS.E. FALK •T 6. F p;1 o' i -» s oAt it.rmesktiareo. fa 7. £ebt.4.: -414.613-. ri1Gv4 8. 9. 10. • 18 19 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAC Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No Rationale. Subgroup C 4 C `r' l to No Undetermined yC Histic epipedon present Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No Gleyed? Yes Matrix Color: . • S y `� • 4 /o�A3 /. Mottle Colors Other hydric soil Indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes )c No Rationale C kvtrt+•A 4 rUt�Ke 7l t S (.o.r Series/phase: Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No SOILS Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Indicator ? No Yes No ZC, 9'4 c4 vs • •Ty1's /R HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No ' Surface water depth' Is the soil saturated? Yes No ' L.: 6 L ? er Lt'1.r 3 as 9er+ Depth to free-standing water in pit /soil probe hole. List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yos X No Rationale. 1f1.•n 1 11[ - i•cr Sarc►S -. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yos )C No ` Rational for jurisdictional decision: 1" rSitiwv..l� S: (V4-5 - Sv:.1S ± k .b oi) �•-rT" 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.' • litt Gki ^ I 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigatpr(s)- &. P. Date. t S 3' 1 4 4 3 Project/Site. M+ ' t 1,..k. :I 06 State. Co R County' ' K Applicant/Owner: 'fat (.- ik t Plant Community #Name• IMw ..- rfi Note: tt a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? 3 ! .Ia.() Yes No ) (If no, explain on back) LL � d � . Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? J Yes K No (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Indicator Indicator (••• Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum 1 a14Ir•r:S 4r14++c14,4Ltn. Pecw 11 I 0 2. - " - " a : c col...- Ehc U . 12 T 3, Lat is hi to s4p:..•• 13. 3 4, t4 Its t.s te.%Ai h... 14 -1' 5, 'Tr :kol,∎u%•. p rn•khu P. C.A 15. S 6, Rolt Sti...funOKrw. EAS-w 16 9Q 7. Et 41IIu.}ei4. 17 8. 18. 9. 19 10. 20 Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAG is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes 1t- No Rationale. Series/phase : " Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes Is the soil a Histosol? Yes Is the soil: Mottled? Yes Matrix Color: • = ra- Other hydric soil indicators: �•' is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes K Rationale' CAA 0144•- + 1•44 ti■.aS No No Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yos No Rationale. 54 I s iu.•At•1 h«.t • SOILS ' O w ir4.t2 Subgroup• No Undetermined 1L Histic epipedon present? Yes No A Gleyed? Yes No Mottle Colors t .,. 51 s a rte ct No c444.4. e.. +.4.• . HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No K , Surface water depth; Is the soil saturated? Yes No (No'1 3 7 , .t - 1. b.' Depth to free - standing water in pit /soil probe hole• — List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yos K _ No Rationale for jurisdictional decision. is' a . 1J•-s• 1 t S e , o•.,JL goA S • 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy." B -2 ( A74-.r ize V�� s l/ /0 1,3 Tr I 4 l `164 S -7- tea-.,. Alrsc e r,y 8.2 DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s); is 1 tae I � � <<� - D 1 S 1911 Project/Site' l-f c . _.s Peppgal 1 41.1 . 1 c.' 114- State: W County: K^ �'►'} Applicant/Owner 17. �—:d rkO"'taro. Plant Community #/Name: M Note: If a more detailed site description Is necessary, use the back of data form or a fleki notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Ob o�t_ Yes No X (I1 no, explain on back) nn Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? r I4l 9 a". Yes x No (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Indicator Indicator ___ w u Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum �T 1 414r.ti arkvdtty 4 . F. 1. 11. /0 2. fit, A.+% A. 4+iwvCte\o.. Flit IA 12. S 3, C O I 1 y s s e . , sepia r+t AEC. 13. 1 4. i cwt; s_a,.•4 wS . FM.. 14. - r 5. C.rcr.. ad.•.1a FALW 15. 6. 16 7. 17. 8. 18 9. 19. 10. 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAC Is the hydro hytic vegetation criterion met? Yes k No Rationale. 15 cL f r C. - • pipes: N.� ......4./ cs. :cI tr+-* tooX D .,{,,.vt -e_.( 44u- Series/phase: Subgroup• Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes .No Histic epipedon present? Yes No Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No N Gleyed? Yes No ?c Matrix Color: I o y R. T Mottle Colors. Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No _ C L Rationale' R lit-c! PL14A-c+..$l.. L) d a 6 r;5 t 6 _611t` frettt4,..L..1-1a ..Q. .. SOILS HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No $ Surface water depth• Is the soil saturated? Yes No Depth to free - standing water in pit /soil probe hole' List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland Rationale: ydrology criterion met? Yes No JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE is the plant community a wetland? Yes No Rationale for jurisdictional decision• 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community . Assessment Procedure. 2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy." debr: s J4 B -2 w 1 DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field investigator(s)' LAZ c1 � •t( P. w' It 024,44.1 Date I S �K� 1 3 Project/Site• 1-�.wtty S tj�r 4 i '11..,kw :\.. State: UJfr County Ki LAN Applicant/Owner ; Luc 4- t4'a{unct, Plant Community #/Name' N1W-1 ")- Note: if a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? � Keck / ,4 Yes No x (If no, explain on back) Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes x No (if yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Indicator Indicator Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum 1. [ in•4 " - r. v z s aw►►.a A4Leo- " —If— 11 2. gu.bus diStolbr FAC • 12 3. M4.' rv-br E9C_ • 13. 4. Fir.: u {.. u. it f-e Cc. Fdt.W _L 14 5. C f ra...L . 4141+. rAcIA ___121_ 15. 6. 16. 7. 17 8. 18. 9. 19. 10, 20. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAG Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes X No Rationale: Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Rationale: 6 0-e y+.•- �---.� gogr V c s LQ S:CL- SOILS Series/phase: (GCC - c 1 betev Subgroup: Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No Histic epipedon present? Yes No Is the soil: Mottl d? Yes — tso Gleyed? Yes - No Matrix Color: Lxtcl Mottle Colors. Yes No ".,...tAs ' HYDROLOGY Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No h Surface water depth' Is the soil saturated? Yes No Depth to free-standing water In pit /soil probe hole: List other field eeviden�e of surface inundation or soil saturation. is the wetlandh drolo ccriiterion m =t? Yes No Rationale: . i . . ___■ Alb . _ . • • ' 1‘01h "4' g JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATiONA Is the plant community a wetland? es X No e Rationale for jurisdic iggal decision: ( ; t S.- r.....! aC1.1.�. -> ; cL -: f lot C. b t -IL 1V1 j <�.1 d: S & %Al"' 4.-4. ?IA a.l'. L,.•t�+�...lt K v u 4� 1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community 4. Assessment Procedure.' 2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.' Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993 Page 12 APPENDIX 3 WETLAND EDGE AS DELINEATED 15 JUNE 1993 c 144tH 511eE1 . 160 1 1 1 I R.21120 ab 10 SSP • \ \ \ \ I 1 r i I • \ HAWKINS SHORT I WETLAND FINN WYE HAWKINS SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993 Page 13 APPENDIX 4 Citations from the City of Tukwila Sensitve Areas Ordinance (6) 18.06.295 Forested wetland. "Forested wetland" means a regulated wetland with at least 20 percent of the surface area covered by erect, rooted, herbaceous vegetation as the uppermost vegetative strata. 18.06.656 Regulated Wetlands. "Regulated wetlands" means ponds or lakes thirty acres or less and those lands subject to the "wetland" definition contained in this chapter. Isolated wetlands that are 400 square feet or smaller in area may not require compensatory mitigation. 18.06.695 Sensitive Areas. "Sensitive Areas" means wetlands; watercourses; areas of potential geologic instability other than Class 1 areas; abandoned coal mine areas; and important geological or archaeological sites. 18.06.697 Sensitive area Buffer. "Sensitive area Buffer" means the area contiguous to a sensitive area that is required for the continued maintenance, function and structural stability of the sensitive area. 18.06.938 Wetlands. "Wetlands ". means those areas that are inundated or saturated by ground or surface water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and that under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of vegatation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include bogs, swamps, marshes, ponds, lakes and similar areas. Constructed wetlands are not considered wetlands for the purpose of this Chapter. However, those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non - wetland areas to mitigate conversion of wetlands as permitted by the City shall be considered wetlands. 18.06.939 Wetland Edge. "Wetland edge" means the boundary of a wetland as delineated based on the methodology used in the "Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands" (1989), as revised or updated. 18.45.020 Sensitive Area Designation, Rating Methodologies, Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila June 18, 1993 Page 14 Classification and Applicability., C. Wetlands, 2. Type 2 Wetiands...(are] Those wetlands which meet any of the following criteria: "...c. Wetlands equal to or less than one acre that have a. forested wetland class comprised of at least 20 percent coverage of total surface area..." 18.45.040 Sensitive Area Buffers., C. Ratings and. Buffer Widths "...1. For wetlands... ", "...b. Type 2- 50 foot wide buffer... ", "...3.a Setbacks:...all residential development shall be set back 10 feet. This setback shall be measured from the foundation to the buffer's edge." Wetlands Report Hawkins Property, Tukwila ' June.18, 1993 Page 15 APPENDIX 5 Aerial Photographs Reviewed for Off-Site Determination Date Type Scale ID 3 -20 -68 B/W 1:24,000 TUK I/C 071, 072 8- 25 -80, B/W 1:3,000 TUK -UST 1 -3, 1 -4 8 -14 -85 B/W 1:24,000 85 SO BLK 604, 605 7 -18 -88 Color IR 1:30,000 88 SO BLK 25- 1140,.25 -1141 Christopher E. Mathews LaVeeda Garlington- Mathews Harold Chesnin Sharon B. Shaw By Fax June 14, 1993 Mr. Jack Pace City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Short Plat #90 -8 -SS Dear Mr. Pace: ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW MATHEWS GARLINGTON - MATHEWS & CHESNIN This will confirm our telephone conversation of todays date. The new wetland expert and Mr. Sprout, along with Mr. Hawkins, will be going to the Property on Tuesday, June 15, 1993 to re- identify the wetland area, stake it, and survey it. Mr. Sprout will then draw the surveyed area on the short plat submission. In addition, I am informed that the report will be available by June 17, 1993 for review. Also pursuant to our discussion, my client will do a rough sketch of the proposed mitigation so that we can then meet with the City of Tukwila to finalize the mitigation approach. (I have also called Mr. Sprout and left a message that he should call Gary Schulz to invite him to the Property tomorrow during the wetland process.) Based upon the above, this is to confirm that I have asked for an additional 30 day extension for the purpose of concluding these matters with respect to the short plat. Please let me know as soon as possible if that timeframe is acceptable to the City. Sincerely yours, MATHEWS GARLINGTON - MATHEWS & CHESNIN Harold Chesnin 500 Court in the Square 401 Second Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98104 Telephone (206) 621 -7557 Facsimile (206) 621 -9494 ABA/net: MATHEWS.CE RECEIVED JUN 1 5 1993 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APR -20 -1993 01 :03PM FROM MATHEWS GARLINGTON -Mt) TO E enneff PS 10 E INC. April 19, 1993 Eugene Sprout Sprout Engineers, Inc. 100 - 116th Ave S.E. Suite #1 Bellevue, WA 98004 Re: Wetland Investigation Hawkins Short Flat, Tuk Dear Mr. Sprout, i am writing to inform you Flat. During my visit to the appears to be a low value w wetland offers little in the or water quality improvement site being in a developed impacts. This wetland would wetland according to the Tuk For an area to be delineated (3) of the parameters ou Identif and Del ineatin fl p 1 d parameters are: 3. Wetland Hydrology: the presence ofsuf during the growing drive a wetland ec The soils in the wetland are characteristics typical of h SURVEYORS AND ENGINEERS P.O. BOX 1031 • PUYALLUP, WA 98371 P0Y_ (206) 845 -8833 SEA: 1206) 838 -3474 FAX: (206) 8414734 2 ila 94313665 P.02 93 -3454 f my findings on the Hawkins Short site I found an area of the site that tland (see enclosed drawing). The way of habitat, stormwater retention apabilities. This is a result of the area and thus disturbed due human at most be considered a Category III ila Zoning Code. as a wetland it must meet all three lined in the Federal Manual for isdicti nal Wet an s (1989). The 1. Hydric Soils: To be defined as a hydric soil the soil must be saturated, flooded or ponded for a sufficiently long period of time during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part. 2. Hydrophytic Vegetation: For a plant community to be defined as hydrophytic; more than 50% of the dominant species in the community must be found to be obligate wetland (OBL), facu tative wetland (FACW) and /or facultative (FAC) s- ecies. Wetland hydrology is defined as icient water present for long enough eason to, under normal circumstances, logy. of the site were found to show field dric soils. The soils were found to APR -20 -1993 01:03PM FROM MATHEWS GARLINGTON -Mti April 19, 1993 have a dark layer (7.5 YR 2/1) over a glayed layer(5 0 5/1). The dark layer also gave off a distinct sulfitic odor indicating the presence.of rotting plant material. These indicators are typical of soils that are rarely if ever dry. The plant community of the wetland area is characterized by a dominance of Horsetail (puisetum arvense - FAC), Buttercup ()ianung3ilyi repent - FACW) , Reed Canary Grass (fhalaris 3rundinacea - FACW), Salmonberry (Rebus spectabilis - FAC) and Alder (Alnus ruby. - FAC). The on -site hydrology of the wetland area appears to be associated with a cistern that is located at the top of the wet area. The soil characteristics lead me to believe that this area is wet all of the time, which indicates the possibility of a spring in or near . the cistern. I recommend that the presence of a spring in this area be confirmed, if at all possible. This wetland is located upslope from a creek that is just to the north of the site. As the wetland is of low value and disturbed due to development in the area I would recommend pursuing the possibility of enhancing the creek buffer as a means of mitigating impacts to the wetland. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. Cordially, #Att ifli Janet R. Bean Wetland Biologist TO 94313665 P.03 Page 2 93 -3454 APR -20 -1993 01 :04PM FROM MATHEWS GARLINOTON —Mo TO 94313665 P.04 wetland location standing water bennett ps&e (206) 252 -5554 (206) 258-4060 FAX Darren Wilson City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Mr. Wilson, LAW OFFICES OF DENNIS JORDAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. P.S. A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CORPORATION 2907 HEWITT AVENUE E e r , X Re: Short Plat 90 -8 -SS APRD 91 -3 Leschi Trading Company, Owner DEC 0 81992 C:;CAVIMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DENNIS W. JORDAN CHERYL A. M. WEIBEL JAMES D. TWISSELMAN I am the attorney for Shawn Sanders and The Gene Sanders Employee Pension Fund, Inc., who have a first Deed of Trust on the property which was the subject of the Short Plat described above. At the time that my clients became lienholders, we were provided with a letter dated January 21, 1992, from Jack Pace to Leschi Trading indicating certain conditions of approval and requiring the short plat to be filed within six months, if not otherwise extended. The completion of the short plat was material to the transaction involving my clients and Leschi Trading. In October, 1992, we learned that Leschi had stopped working on the short plat. After Mr. Hawkins explained his position, I contacted Mr. Pace to verify the status. Mr. Pace explained that the short plat had been withdrawn by Leschi in an attempt to obtain a release of the assigned account at Frontier Bank in Everett. I requested a copy of the letter from Leschi withdrawing the short plat and any document releasing the assigned account, and Mr. Pace indicated that he would do so. To date, my file does not indicate receipt of that correspondence or request for withdrawal. I would appreciate your forwarding a copy of as soon as possible. The purpose of this letter is to inquire however about the status of short plat. Since the bond funds have not been released from the assigned account, is it possible to reactivate the short plat at this point and complete the required tasks? My client will also be instituting foreclosure proceedings against Leschi Trading and this property in the near future. In the event that my client acquires the ownership of the property through a foreclosure sale, what procedure would be required to complete the Page Two Darren Wilson December 1, 1992 short plat? I an particularly interested in whether the original short plat could be reactivated, or whether a new application would be required. If a new application is required, are there any material changes in the city's ordinances that would require or impose different conditions on the development of the property? Your prompt response would be appreciated. Very truly yours, C6. e 4,4 lam.!' Cheryl Weibel cc: Gene Sanders November 12, 1992 David Hawkins Leschi Trading Company 3601 East Terrace Seattle, WA 98122 ' City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director Subject: Short Plat 90 -8 -SS Dear Mr. Hawkins: Sincerely, Jack Pace. Senior Planner ?ova, cc: Harold Chesnin Phil Fraser Duane Griffin Nick Olivas John W. Rants, Mayor This letter is a follow -up to the phone message I left with your attorney, Harold Chesnin. The Short Subdivision Committee has granted your request for a six month extension. With the approved extension, you have until April 21, 1993 to complete the short plat. Under Section 17.8.090 of the subdivision ordinance, no further extension can be granted by the City. In addition to the extension, I mentioned to Mr. Chesnin, staff's willingness to meet with you to provide assistance in understanding the requirement to complete the short plat; please feel free to call or write. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 ti a1;1 a ` - i, cony;e;rsa i th hesnin, this :'is t;o confirm that outs re,quesa` xtension revious] and' ti'mel : xtension : period o six months r This a sour r Y5 xstention Please be advised that the money iii the: ti here and :has,;ne'ver ;be�n removed . f ;; .,, ._.'..,, , ,,,;• Leschi,Trading Company, Inc ••P.O,: Box '•22701 •;Seattle, WA 98122 • FAX (200)329:1554* (206) 720 7140 - .,' John W Rentz 'September. 1992. Mayor City of Tukwila Re Correction'.; of misrepresentation in:'letter from the city f;, T ukwila :dated S :14•.; 1992. �D. Mayor . Rantz, As the enclosed copy request•: :for . relief from th.e :' o f Tukwila , documents,. the letter dra • b r iMr "Pace zs in'accur•at.e and' needs to. be ,revised , :: • As 'you` might know';::•afte almost: two years. of. de'l'ay by :•th"e p'ermi•t_'process ,through :th,i city, we: were :provided - the,::letter :dated . January "21,,. 1992,.; promisin; to ., file• our short 'plat request if', we did; just o:ne: more, '' ' .. i .,e , ;'pro:vide a• for : :oa'd• b • When we ,met that .• single, final 'demand b'y the` city, the c th en . 's•topped work On .that,very' road :once:.a . ,to file e Short, and issued;. :yet . another letter. " .starting, f;or the fifth.time now; ••this •.old ' game -once ag from "the beginning, d riving us, , once, more, into serious 'f.in`anc 'ah`'.:d ff e,u ties•.:': " Our , associates then ,d'e:t.er.mined _.that; we had ?to.,p.ut thi ; project on ,hold and conCentrate• : o t her : : areas . ,, of , :company:, a ' acti.vity. To . .complete- those interests;- we need 'to tempo;rarz 'release. . the funds. . :tied up. under :this bond until ''tho,se activi can, be completed;' 'reinstate 'o:ur bond, and . .; come "back:`and ': attempt' to .1 .'- city ` demands.: most ,r.ecent:'.letter' But Mr. Pace's misrepresentation of requests to allow, us. to continue to , put ..:this' project on Bold;' h ,ask -that ' we` withdraw our request for the Short. plat filing we had., completed at major time and ::expense, makes i,t ap;pe,ar has �f..w:e .agre:e with that misrepresentation. our P 1 7 1992 C0iviMUNrrY : : .: • 1 contested.;t•he misrepresentations ":with,f., r. 'Griffin ,of the building department, ' our ,associate : Clif f "ord "'Andrews.�:.;and `-Mr' ' Pace at:- the time we_: were provided,: this; fetter.= °So there':'wasr;:no excuse. for not .unde the ' obvious `•c:onfusi.on ' o.f;- :th'etrec;or by'.thi letter drafted by: Mr_: .Pace But our' other assoc;i`ates`.'no,t : f . presen•t at ,that discus'sion::are.,concerne:d that the':'Pace eater .','. 'dist.orts'•.the record t.00 much. y .'. Please provide .a new letter. oux lender' that correctly state's request as: one. , put 'the: projec,t. on • - old; ot.; •one t'o "withdr:aw ". ;';; Sincer.ely,; ecretar. tYY RECEIVED af.cts /7- P fAcoia Dev, de-JA earreil. tert s I r2tv.T_ .0egre, err, 1 1 i ii 4 ;A frP r`ce 440m ocl 6i)//i PI,Ce September 14, 1992 David Hawkins Lekhi Trading Company 3601 East Terrace Seattle, WA 98122 Subject: Short Plat 90-8-SS/91-3-APRD Dear Mr. Hawkins: Sincerely, J ck Pace Senior Planner cc: Phil Fraser Duane Griffin City of Tukwila Department of Community Development If you should need further information, please feel free to call or write. John W Rants, Mayor Rick Beeler, Director This letter is in response to your letter dated September 11, 1992 withdrawing your.._ application for a short at. Since you no longer wish to proceed with the short plat application, the cash assignment can be released. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 4313670 • Fax. (206) 431-3665 September 14, 1992 . David Hawkins Leschi Trading Company 3601 East Terrace Seattle, WA 98122 Dear Mr. Hawkins: J.•'ck Pace Senior Planner cc: Phil Fraser Duane Griffin City of Tukwila • Department of Community Development John W. Rants, Mayor Rick Beeler, Director Subject: Short Plat 90- 8- SS /91- 3 -APRD This letter is in response to your letter dated September 11, 1992 withdrawing you application for a short plat. Since you no longer wish to proceed with the short plat application, the cash assignment can be released. If you should need further information, please feel free to call or write. • Sincerely, 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • 'Fax (206) 431-3665 June 19, 1992 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 David Hawkins Leschi Trading Company 3601 East Terrace Seattle, WA 98122 Subject: Short Plat 90- 8- SS /91 -3 -APRD Dear Mr. Hawkins: Sincerely, J k Pace Senior Planner Phone: (206) 433 -1800 City Hall Fax (206) 433 -1833 John W. Rants, Mayor In May you were sent a letter which explained the status of various department issues with your project. Since then, I have left two phone messages with no response. As noted in the May letter, to assist you with this difficult site, I will coordinate the various departments review and responses. You have until October 21, 1992 to complete the short plat, after that date, the application will be null and void. If you should have any questions, please feel. free to call or write. May 21, 1992 David Hawkins, Leschi Trading Company 3601 E. Terrace Seattle, WA 98122 Dear Mr. Hawkins: City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director Subject: Short Plat 90 -8 -SS, Administrative Planned Residential Development 91- 3 -APRD In January and February of this year, you were sent two letters which addressed the short plat and administrative planned residential development approval conditions (see attached letters). Since then some development has occurred on the site which has created additional issues needing to be addressed. The following is a review of the various issues not only affecting the Planning Division, but other City departments: The comments are grouped under the Building Permit for Lot A, Land Alteration Permit, and Short Plat Approval. Building Permit for Lot A 6 ?66 F cif Public Works needs an updated site plan addressing the 1 and 7 ft. vertical cut next to S. 144th St. (SE corner of Lot A).. Wherever a retaining wall or rockery is proposed below an embankment with a sidewalk above, a safety handrail is also required. Attached for your information is a Standard hand rail design. You needs to maintain the temporary erosion control facilities; desiltation pond filled in; rock check dam displaced; portions of silt fence no longer embedded. Public Works needs you to restore and maintain the pond, check dam and silt fence. The Building Division will require a separate building permit for the construction of any retaining wall which supports a surcharge. The permit application must include the design of the structural retaining wall with the seal and signature of a professional engineer. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431.3665 Page 2 Land Alteration Permit Short Plat Approval Due to the land clearing activities performed in Lot C -1, staff has identified "potential" wetlands on this lot. Before the short plat can be approved and recorded, a wetland study is required to assess whether the lot contains a wetland, the extent of the wetland, and mitigation measures. A written report needs to be submitted to the Planning Division and address hydrology influencing the identified watercourse and the associated wetland seep areas. Please see attached report criteria handout. Depending upon the results of the study, Lot C -1 may need to be consolidated or modified due to wetland regulations. As noted on the approved Administrative Planned Residential Development (APRD), there is a 15 foot wide landscape buffer next to the watercourse. Further land alteration activity on sire for Lots A, B, and C -1 must not impact the watercourse buffer: A restoration (landscape) plan for the disturbed watercourse buffer and any affected wetland area is needed. For completion of the Short Plat, the Planning Division needs the following items completed: * Declaration sheet needs to be signed * Affidavit of Ownership needs to be signed * Wetland study needs to be done prior to completion of the short plat. • Legal Description for Lot C -1 needs to note the boundaries for Native Growth Protection Easement. Survey Plan should be revised to reflect the approved setbacks for the various lots, or record letter dated February 21, 1992. After or before the Short Plat is completed, you need to submit construction site plans for approval to Public Works as noted in the Short Plat approval conditions. The Construction Plan will need to meet Public Works Standards. Also, the plan will need to include the private drive/ access in accordance with approved APRD. The plan will also include sewer, storm, domestic water and fire systems. • Page 3 As you know, this is a difficult site due to the sensitive areas and lot shape. If you should have questions regarding this letter, please feel free to contact me and I will coordinate with the various departments to answer any questions you may have. Sincerely, ack Pace Senior Planner cc: Rick Beeler John McFarland Phil Fraser Nick Olivas ,��,,.Scfiulz,•;-., January 21, 1992 Leschi Trading Company • David Hawkins 3601 E; Terrace Seattle, WA 98122 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 John W. Rants, Mayor Re: Short Plat 90 -8 -SS Administrative Planned Residential Development 91 -3 -APRD e Dear Mr. Hawkins: This letter is an update of the December 30, 1991 letter which contained conditions of approval. Since the, you have provided additional information regarding some of the conditions of approval. The revised conditions are divided into requirements under the Short Plat, Sensitive Area Ordinance, and Administrative Planned Residential Development. SHORT PLAT CONDITION: 1. All required improvements must be constructed by the applicant and accepted by the City of Tukwila, or a bond may be posted by the applicant for construction of same, prior to the short plat being filed. Said bond assignment shall be in an amount equal to one hundred fifty percent of the estimated cost of complete construction of such improvements as determined by the Director of Public Works. (Refer to TMC Section 17.08.080). Based upon your design detail, Public Works has determined the bond shall be $15,000. The construction plans shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. • SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE: • 2. For lots B, C -1, and C, the maximum amout of impervious surface calculated for the total development allowed on each lot will be 50 %. Phone: (206) 433.1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433 -1833 Page 2 Sincerely, ck Pace Senior Planner 3. For lots B, C -1, and C, further geotechnical review needs to be done at the time of building permit submittal. The technical data developed and presented in Cascade • Geotechnical Report (Job # 9112 -04G) along with 1 -9 -92 and 1 -16 -92 letters of Sprout Engineers should be used in the planning and design of the footings, stem walls, foundation walls, and physical improvements to the individual lots. 4. For lots B, C -1, And C, will submit a landscape plan in conjunction with building permit submittal, additional trees shall be planted on the south and east sides of the houses to provide screening. ADMINISTRATIVE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT: 5. The following are the modified setback standards for lots B, C -1, and C. Lot B: South min. 10 -feet w/ average of 15 feet •� East min. 20 -feet West min 12 -feet North min. 10 -feet Lot C: • South min. 10 -feet w /average of 15 -feet East main. 10 -feet West min. 31 -feet North min. 7 -feet and 6- inches Lot C -1: South Min. 10 -feet w/ average bf 15 -feet East min. 35 -feet West min 25 -feet North min. 7 -feet and 6- inches If the short plat is not filed within six months of date of approval, the short plat shall be null and void. Upon written request by the subdivider, the Short Subdivision Committee may grant one extension of not more than six months. If you object to the conditions and requirements stated in this letter, you have ten days from the date of this letter to submit a written appeal. If you should have any further questions regarding the various requests, please feel free to call or write. Dctommfibp oat._ s • r. 1301 13 !..L04.1 /111 . • . Ler* 1. • , I.M.F1 I I L J FetwitosEA. LtchI Trading Company. Inc. P.O Box 22701 Seattle, WA 98122 FAX (206) 329-7554 (206) 720-7140 • • :WV SI !mum( ITS /LS •It • . • • • • Estimate for road constrution: $10,000 110 111th Are: !L . t.lt. 1102 14.21.rr.,.14 ;11004 (201)411 -1414 20 P . O . W. 4 ' 7 .j. 2' C -L g' A r 4ALT C-c�NG • Co" RFAUNI7- 12" CA e 13 1? ANK. RIA Ut'.Avi. CAA R�c�uilzEn� 20' AG AMT, X - - Z"" 1✓� (7F<A•Gg.ETE (I(2 x IQ" x 4" Ore)- VVE42, coN;. 6LOGKe-7) I -4VKI OiT i' ,T hPRcUT \10.13 1.10. 1001- O°I 01/10/cm. . r. 1 .----- 1 : 1\ I 8 • I ., . igC/L A \ • I:- il.\ i , I ML J.1 vvii2n1 1 ,- \ 3\ 0!, 12!: (1.3 [ ' I . . .. . c) ' SI . f',6ff.L 1?). c.-, ■ ,) '7 m ' . • • \ I m wp - 82.8' 11 a. 77; 2-00 Direction: Scale: 1 40 Stamp: Page of • ) , ry4cApA.N.: ) (FAvta ...._ _ _ • '4:rem MAN . oo - '-----------1--------- F. 0Y171 \a/VALVe . . \ • \; 1 7 -.6.NT f EXPIRES • •• co 0 ft: 4-3. GO' u..LArkv. Short Plat Number 1:.a.naSU.rvey'or'S CerLfiCate: This Short Plat correctly resents a sur made by me or under my direction in conformance with the requirements of ap- propriate State statute and has been pro a erly stalsed. Name: E-u* . C. sPRoc.yr Date: Ki Dv. zq tcy / Certificate No PL Gc)cn 2 104'?. i2A Bd 0 0 IL 0 113 2 • 31 F1.19. t. MOO, V,J/C-411}TE 4C071-1 CrAVe.4 .February 2i, 1992 Leschi Trading Company . David Hawkins 3601 E. Terrace Seattle, WA 98122 Dear Mr. Hawkins: Cit of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 John W. Rants, Mayor Based upon our meeting on February 14, 1992, you have requested some minor modifications of the Administrative Planned Residential Development setback conditions. This letter is an addendum to the letter dated January 21, 1992. The revised setback standards are listed below. In addition, as we have discussed, the setback standards are to be measured from the foundation wall. Lot B: South min. 10 -feet w /average of 15 feet East min. 20 -feet West min. 13 -feet North min. 10 -feet Lot C: South min. 10 -feet w /average of 13 feet East min. 10 -feet West min 31 feet North min 7 -feet and 6- inches 2 Lot C -1: South min. 10 -feet w /average of 15 feet East min. 11 -feet West min. 31 -feet North in. 10 -feet Sincerely, ck Pace Senior Planner • ' Phone: (206) 433-1800 • City Hall Fax- (206) 433 -1833 Note: Setbacks for lot B, C, and C -1 are to be measured from foundation wall. If you should have any other questions, please feel free to call or write. Hel.h 3 Min. 4' Max Height • 1' Min. 8 4' Max Height 1 Undisturbed soil 2' Steel Pipe Rolling with Welded Joints GoM nixed. Ornamental Iron Handrail may also be permitted per City Engineer Approval. Undisturbed soil r Min. 18' Meg .° Tyakatv.nil No roadways or parking lots In this area. 2l:or flatter 1 r . SEE ABOVE DETAILS. ............::;J - / - 7/ : NOTES: Y No footings of structures (including other rockeries) may bear In stippled area. Free — draining backfill; min.12' wide layer of 2' -4" quarry spells odjocent to rockery. Stable cut face in native material 1' diameter washed gravel; min. 6- cover over pipe; min. 2" grovel under pipe. 12 wide. • Min. 6' dia. pert. PVC, SDR 35 pipe /MSHTO M278 /ASTM 3034; min. iX continuous slope to outlet; pipe wroped in filter fabric(Mlrofl or equiv.) • Place pipe between rocks to avoid weight. 1. Rock shall be sound and have minimum density of 180 pounds per cubic foot. • 2. The tong dimension of all rocks shall be placed perpendicular to the wall. Each • rock should bear on two rocks in the tier below. 3. Rockeries ore erosion — control structures, not retaining walls. Harty. material must be stable and free— standing In cut face. 4. Improved walking surfaces above and adjacent to rockeries over 30 in height shall be protected by a roil contomrtng to UDC 1711 . ROCKERY & SIDEWALK . WITH SAFETY RAIL O Mar 1, 1991 R -5 t.( Wetland and Watercourse Special Studies Report Criteria A development proposal that is within 50 feet of a sensitive area will submit appropriate studies to adequately identify and evaluate the sensitive area and it's buffer. Projects proposing sensitive area impacts will require specific studies to assess the impacts and propose mitigating measures. Professional Qualifications CITY OF TUKWILA Wetland and stream specialists performing work for City review will, upon request, submit professional qualification statements. A project list with references should be included to verify work history and performance. Wetland and Watercourse Analysis The exact location of wetland and watercourse boundaries will be determined by the applicant's consultant. Wetland delineations, performed by wetland specialists, will apply the wetland definition in TMC 18.06.938 and the methodology in the "Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands" (1989). Watercourse analysis will be performed by qualified stream or wetland specialists to characterize and classify the. watercourse according to the watercourse definition in TMC 18.06.395 and the City's Water Resource study (1990). All buffers will be measured from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM), if field delineation is possible, or from the top of bank. Wetland and watercourse reports submitted to the City should contain the following: '1. A plant species list or description with scientific names (nomenclature), relative abundance and distribution of species, and the major habitat types of vegetation. 2. Data plot forms, according to the Federal Manual method, to substantiate wetland findings. 3. Report site maps should include: a. Vicinity map b. Public resource document maps including City's Sensitive Area inventory mapping, if applicable. c. Accurate topographic mapping, if required, showing contours at the smallest available interval. d. Field delineated and professionally surveyed wetland and /or watercourse boundary mapping. Mitigation Proposals 4. The written report should discuss the following: a. Site description and general observations of habitat value related to wildlife use. b. Study methodology. c. Soil types mapped on the site including on -site verification and analysis. d. Vegetation description according to the classification system outlined in "Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States ", Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1979 (FWS /OBS- 79/31). e. Wetland or watercourse rating and associated buffer width according to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance of the Zoning Code. A mitigation proposal of wetland or watercourse relocation and /or buffer reduction should include the standard report format plus, the following: 1. Conceptual mitigation or enhancement plan to describe and illustrate what impacts and compensatory actions are proposed. a. Include hydrology aspects, vegetation composition, and wildlife habitat details. b. Describe how water quality and flood storage potential would be improved. 2. Upon approval of conceptual plan, a final mitigation or enhancement plan will be required to include the following components: a. Detailed planting and grading plan including species to be used for revegetation. b. Performance standards. c. Construction management. d. Monitoring program to ensure success of the plan. e. Contingency plan to correct performance standards or unanticipated impacts.' f. Performance security in the form of a monetary bond or other means to guarantee the successful completion of the plan. . Professional Qualifications CITY OF TUKWILA Areas of Potential Geologic Instability Development and Report Criteria All development applications on property having slopes greater than or equal to 15% are subject to the Zoning Code - Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Three primary factors that influence slope stability were incorporated into the geologic classification system. Important characteristics of the site are topographic relief, stratigraphy of subsurface soils, and local ground or surface water environment related to potential slippage and massive soil movement. Areas of Potential Geologic Instability are considered sensitive areas and classified as follows: Class 2 areas, where landslide potential is moderate, which slope between 15 and 40 percent and which are underlain by relatively permeable soils. - Class 3 areas, where landslide potential is high, which include areas sloping between 15 to 40 percent and which are underlain by relatively impermeable soils or bedrock, and which also include areas sloping more. than 40 percent. - Class 4 areas, where landslide potential is very high, which include sloping .areas with mappable zones of ground water seepage, and which also include existing mappable landslide deposits regardless of slope. - Areas of potential seismic instability, with soft soils, loose sand . and a shallow groundwater table. Areas of potential coal mine hazard, ie. subsidence from subsurface excavation and tunneling. In order to identify the extent of sensitive slopes, the applicant must submit a survey of existing topography, drawn in two -foot contour intervals accurate to within one foot of elevation. The topographic survey must be stamped by a professional.land surveyor licensed in the State of Washington. Mapped slope areas exceeding 15 percent should be designated on the site plan for potential geotechnical site review. The applicant is required to submit a geotechnical report appropriate to both the site conditions and the proposed development. A geotechnical investigation will generally not be required for development of Class 2 slopes when: 1) any portion of the site is a minimum of 200 feet from a Class 3 or.4 area and 2) the proposed alteration remains outside the sloping area. Development of Class 3 and 4 areas and any identified seismic or coal mine hazard areas requires a geotechnical investigation and associated report. All geotechnical studies must be conducted by a geotechnical engineer. TMC 18.06.323 defines this individual as a professional civil engineer licensed with the State of Washington who has at least four years of professional employment as a geotechnical engineer with experience in landslide evaluation. Geotechnical engineers performing work within the City.must submit professional qualification statements in addition to work history and references. Geotechnical Analysis The geotechnical report analyzes the site for overall stability and makes recommendations on the need for and width of buffer setbacks necessary to protect post - development site stability. The investigated geologic, hydrologic, and topographic conditions of the:site will be used to confirm or revise the City's geologic classification. The scope of the investigation should comply with the specific requirements presented below. 1. Landslide Hazards Class 2: Geotechnical reports for Class 2 areas are required to have, at a minimum, a review of available geologic site data and a surface reconnaissance of the site and adjacent areas. Subsurface exploration' of the site is at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant and the City. Class 3: Geotechnical reports for Class 3 areas are required to have a review of the available geologic site data, a surface reconnaissance of the site and adjacent areas, and a subsurface exploration program suitable to the site conditions and the proposed development. Class 4: Geotechnical reports for Class 4 areas are required to perform the tasks listed for Class 3 areas. In addition, detailed slope stability analysis should be performed based on the information obtained during the field investigation. 2. Erosion Hazards Class 2, 3, and 4 landslide hazard areas are also potential erosion hazard areas. Geotechnical reports regarding proposed development in these areas will include erosion and sediment control recommendations that are appropriate to the site conditions and the proposed development. a • • 3. Seismic Hazards Proposed development within areas of significant seismic hazards should include an evaluation of site response and liquefaction potential relative to the proposed development. For one or two story•single- family dwellings, this evaluation may be based on the performance of similar structures under similar foundation conditions. For proposed developments of other occupied structures, this evaluation should include sufficient subsurface exploration to provide a site coefficient (S) for use in the static lateral force procedure described in the Uniform Building Code. 4. Coal Mine Hazards Proposed development within areas of historical coal mine activities or mapped subsurface coal formations will require a detailed site reconnaissance by a geologist or a geotechnical .engineer. Site specific information regarding the presence of mine entrances or workings is needed prior to permitting new construction in these areas. T. Permitting Requirements Prior to permitting any development of an area of potential geologic instability, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: 1. There is no past or present evidence of slope instability and quantitative analysis indicates no significant risk to the proposed development or surrounding properties. OR 2. The potentially instable area can be modified or the project can be designed so that proposed impacts to the site and surrounding properties are eliminated, slope stability is not :decreased, and the increase in surface water discharge or sedimentation will not affect slope stability. May 14, 1993 City of Tukwila Mr. David Hawkins - Leschi Trading Co. c/o Mr. Harold Chesnin Mathews Garlington- Mathews & Chesnin 500 Court in the Square 401 Second Avenue South Seattle, WA 98104 John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director Re: Wetland Study for Hawkins Short Plat #90 -8 -SS, Administrative PRD #91 -3 -APRD. Dear Mr. Hawkins: I am responding to the wetland letter report• provided, on your behalf, by Janet R., Bean of Bennett PS &E Inc., Surveyors and Engineers. As the City's wetland expert and sensitive areas' planner, I am submitting the following comments and requirements: 1) Using the City of Tukwila - Wetland and Watercourse Special Studies Report Criteria (attached), a professional qualification statement needs to be submitted by Bennett PS &E's.wetland biologist. 2) In order to adequately assess wetland impacts, the wetland study must include a field delineated and professionally surveyed wetland boundary. 3) Sensitive area impacts have not yet been quantified; however, the City addressed site alterations in a letter to David Hawkins dated May 21, 1992 (attached). Under the Land Alteration Permit section, required information included identifying the potential on -site wetland, the extent of wetland, and mitigation measures. In addition, a restoration (landscape) plan will be required for the disturbed watercourse buffer and any affected wetland area. According to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45.040 C.4.), if site alterations removed existing vegetation from wetland or watercourse buffers, the applicant must replace it with comparable species to reproduce the value within 5 years. Similarly, TMC 18.45.080 C.2. requires a restoration, enhancement, or creation plan to compensate for the impacts resulting from any alteration of wetlands. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (2064313670 • Fax (206) 431 Mr. David Hawkins - Leschi Trading Co. M a y 14 , 1993 Page 2 To summarize this letter and relate my experience with this project site, the majority of the disturbed wetland area had a forest cover and the wetland seepage is not confined to the existing "cistern" well. It appears that there are wetland conditions from seepage on both north and south sides of the small watercourse. It also appears the restoration of the watercourse can be accomplished with a landscape plan associated with the development lots. Mitigation for the affected wetland area cannot be planned until there is a verified delineation of the extent of wetland area on the property and a reasonable assessment of the impact. Since this has been an on- going project, I can offer some assistance after a wetland delineation is conducted. If you have related questions please contact me or Jack Pace, Senior Planner at 431 -3670. Sincerely, C. Gary I hulz Urban Environmentalist cc: Rick Beeler, DCD Director Jack Pace, Senior Planner Ron Cameron, City Engineer ! TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City of Tukwila FIRE DEPARTMENT 444 Andover Park East Tukwila, Washington 98188 -7661 (206) 575 -4404 AgliOrED JACK PACE cry CHIEF OLIVAS R LESCHI TRADING CO. /TURNAROUND REQUIREMENTS MAY 12, 1992 MAY 13 1992 CI I t v1Afh1I *. Rarts, Mayor PlAWNIPNG ncpT • The requirement for a turnaround for this project was identified during the initial short plat review. At no point in time have I, or any member of my staff waived this requirement. The applicant has argued that we will access the homes from S 144th Street. Our position has been that access from S 144th Street is not reliable because of the severity of the grade. Furthermore, operations on that grade place our personnel, medical or fire victims, and apparatus at an unacceptable risk. Darren's letter of December 30, 1991, identifies the turnaround as a condition of short plat approval. No previous or subsequent documentation in the file contradicts our original review comments. Approval of future building permit applications will be contingent on an approved turnaround. If you wish to discuss this matter, I will be available the week of May 18th. May 11, 1992 To: Jack Pace and Darren Wilson From: Gary Schulz SAO requirements for the Leschi Shortplat: The geotechnical report, conducted by Cascade Geotechnical Inc. (12/91) , indicates (the surface soils on the eastern part of Lot C- 1 were saturated and soft. However, this area had been recently cleared and most of the vegetation removed). The only wetland related vegetation that we know existed is red alder trees. Geotechnical reports generally will not identify wetland areas. If we decide to require a full wetland study for restoration and preservation purposes, the following items can be used to support sensitive area studies. 1. The SAO Procedures section (TMC 18.45.060) states that any application involving land use and sensitive areas will have the location of the sensitive area and buffer indicated on the submitted plans. 2. TMC 18.45.020 - F.,1. requires the sensitive area study. A written report is needed and at a minimum should include the purpose, methodology, results, and investigation data. Attach report criteria handout. 3. According to the SAO, TMC 18.06.655, "Regulated Activities" include alterations to wetlands or watercourses or their buffers. TMC 18.45.080 contains the standards of wetland /watercourse use, alteration, and mitigation. This chapter requires an assessment and related restoration plan for those disturbed wetland and upland buffer areas on your property. An alternative approach to a disturbed wetland study would be to increase the watercourse buffer an fully restore with all vegetation layers. Some associated wetland would also be restored. TO: City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Public Works M E M O R A N D U M Jack Pace /Darren Wilson FROM: Phil Fraser DATE: May 7, 1992 SUBJECT: Leschi Trading Company - Requested Comments at 4/30/92 Meeting From our meeting on 4/30/92 I understand D.C.D. will develop an interdepartmental letter to the applicant outlining current outstanding issues on all phases of the Leschi Development. The areas staff was requested to respond to are: Past Lot A approval; Original LAO violation; current [potential] SAO violation; PRD & sub - division processes and, Lots B, C -1 & C construction site plan approvals. I said Public Works will provide our comments to D.C.D. by 5/7/92. Considering the applicant's past responses to City staff requests, I advise the following course of action: a. Prepare draft letter by D.C.D.; obtain staff concurrance by involved Departments. b. Staff meet with applicant to go over concerns. Solicit applicant's initial reaction; establish time frame for applicant response /city reviews. c. Send letter with schedule. I provide Public Works current concerns by ACTIVITY /ISSUE /ACTION REQUESTED: PAST "LOT A" SITE PLAN APPROVAL: Current Issue: Ross A. Earnst, P. E., Director t 7 ,1 2 Changed survey information /additional soils reports submitted since original Lot A Site Plan approval. ACTION REQUESTED: Provide updated site plan addressing 1 to 7 ft. vertical cut next to S. 144th St. (SE corner of LOT A). This updated plan will apply Item B -4 in attached 1/16/92 Sprout Engineers Report. NOTE: Wherever a retaining wall or rockery is proposed below an embankment with a ped. travelway above, a safety handrail is also required. (City can provide a Standard hand rail design, if requested.) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: (206) 43,3-0179 • Fax (206) 431-3665 • ORIGINAL LAO VIOLATION: Developer provided corrections to 11/18/91 Notice of Violation. Current Issue: Maintenance of temporary erosion control facilities needed: Desiltation pond filled in; rock check dam displaced; portions of silt fence no longer embedded. ACTION REQUESTED: Restore & maintain pond, check damn and silt fence. POTENTIAL SAO [LAO] VIOLATION: Current Issue: Gary Schulz /Darren Wilson 4/16/92 memorandum (attached). NO ACTION REQUESTED BY PUBLIC WORKS: Public Works staff field review: No new LAO violations observed. PRD PROCESS: Current Issue: The P.R.D. has been signed off by DCD. Conditions of approved PRD bond are outlined in 1/21/92 letter by Jack Pace (attached). ACTION REQUESTED: Request staff review PRD with applicant to reinform him of PRD approval conditions. SHORT PLAT & CONSTRUCTION SITE PLAN (ANY REVISIONS TO LOT A, AND NEW LOTS B, C -1 AND C) APPROVAL PROCESS: Current Issue: Short Plat must be filed by July 21, 1992 according to 1/21/92 letter by Jack Pace. A condition of Shot Plat sub - division process is the subittal /approval of Construction site plans. To my knowledge these Construction site plans have not been submitted to date. ACTION REQUESTED: Submit construction site plans for approval (REFER to July 21, 1992 letter, Item No 1 under SHORT PLAT CONDITION). These Construction plans shall meet current Public Works Standards. Also, these plans will include the private drive /access in accordance with previously approved PRD. These plans to include sewer, storm, domestic water and fire systems. Utility and access easements to be shown on the construction plans. The construction plans will apply Item B -4 in attached 1/16/92 Sprout Engineers Report. NOTE: Wherever a retaining wall or rockery is proposed below an embankment with a pedestrian travelway above, a safety handrail is also required. (City can provide a handrail design standard, if requested.) Attachments (5) cf: Nick Olivas, John Pierog, Greg Villanueva Development File: Leshi Trading, Read File lshiend t• efir"shigib its... .70 .• /YU% /..1 III ". 1— '1'. T. e• $1• • .• • \ \ -4- -4- listc4 ass a' . .1)..1.1 1111 ■• to _ LW tf „ It I egi9 Ci I Lochi Trading Cumpany, inc. P.O 8ux 22701 Seattle, WA 98112 FAX (206) 329-7554 (206) 720-7140 as 4, f4l29 41 01.Z FUI v_ t. `.... 114)I 4 Estimate for road dontrution: $10,000 D 100 11011 Ave: 03 '. 04114re44.WA :01000 felt* 010: 1101)011 -1414 t»ldlS96111115 2.0 R..O. l — (7RA (12" x IQ" . 4" ore,w -wee) co NC, . 6L.ocK) — 2' G am ' AbrNA.T GONG co" huRFAuN(� IQ c--A ` 15' 13.4NK Put J &14 CAs RE -w IgaP) 20' AC-C 4 EMT, X - sEGTIoN f = 1-1.AWKIN 4-1OKT 'PRo. rr et.1 1 ll' R .1015 }JO. 1001- 095 of /10 /cm. • i LSGEI_ A °1,134 a'. Mt=41\l W1P 1-1= •DEL 2Do WAN wl7Tfl - 82. ' �'APGI✓l G - I ' 7, a' M�1\I '1'114, • • • �vlap on File in Vault • Direction: - T Scale: 1'1... , 1! Stamp: F7 ' N 1! � •�''�� S4 : 58.43' rr ' J I ¢ I I� a o Page I of 'Z Date- 1\1ov. Zr? , i °)91 Certificate No. P L o Short Plat Number rav -ot• 1 Frw , I „L, $.1, Irma . no r MvC A74N , Rp (PO,ved - j -- 4 "wnrlz MAIN yr n'i is i ,.1v '(.1 V" = __' = - - • -t 2 l o l 0 11.00' F. uY3ReNT ( w /vgLve 1` I Land • Siuveyor's Certificate: This Short Plat correctly represents a survey made by me or under my direction in conformance with the requirements of ap- propriate State statute and has been pro•erly st. ed. Name: EuceKC C. SPQocyr - • (p , i ' ��•, R oeao i USD 021/ CI P4Q too . MoJ. w /roWINcP 0 0 3 . -30' 1 0 0 t 8 U O z 2 4 S ' 4co744 AVE LPav fL 5L A ° 1,134❑ Mt.4N 5' Direction: tLgGEL l' - 7 ) Q-00 ❑ Me.AN W11-\ ° 82.8` 7;2-00 t1 MEJ W\D Cdr. G,` • • •1 Map on File in Vault Scale:.1II 4,p, Stamp: 1 l Page 2 of 2 W 1n± cu1 - -, F.1-tYDRGNT w/vgLVe ti14G�l�a,ty 1 f=2.. ,F.Aven W4 'w.a7e2 rotors \- ' ,'- 11 w 1 14 o2 °10k2�a 11.00' \ \'j V 1Coo "7/2_00 a McAN1 �!I Short Plat Number .1 ma -,c r r I t' 1 • ica TRLE Aigve` t.7CN 7 44 --vER 4.J 1 W . G I 160 1'to ctf 1'72 1'14.. na 24 " 02 2) si �2ao! Land Surveyor's Certificate: Tnis Short Plat correctly represents a survey, made a or under my direction in conformance with the requirements of ap- propriate State statute and has been pro. - y staked. Name: EUC,cI» rr C. S PRoYr Date. klov. 27 1991 Certificate No. 71s h��o �� °l 042• N 1042 e. .- s hiiMI F) LoHG. Nio►J. ' 46,114 AVEh, w /4')4I R CPav-6(7j mom ..r 4111 ■rai .. 1 / / • _�� rc as,Fc�/ iPa ? Z1a /ao/e z f' fib ` Q C0C a division of SILVER ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. Job No. 1009 -095 r O > O s Mr. Jack P. Pace, Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila ( a 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 January 16, 1992 secely E© JAN 1:7 1992. TUKW►LA PUBLIC WORKS Re: Hawkins Short Plat (Brunner Hill Cottage Project) Located at 144th & Mac Adams Road 4 Dear Mr. Pace: H In response to the discussions in our meeting today, and the need for additional clarification of the engineering aspects of this project, I would like to offer the following for the city staffs' review and consideration: z 0 0 0 J.) m • a M • 0 0 } 100 -116th AVE. S.E. • BELLEVUE, V)A 98004 • 12061455-8454 A. Sight Distance Study The sight distance study submitted on drawing 1 of 2, dated July 25, 1991 was done in accordance with AASHT0 -1984 Standards. Our study was to determine the entrance and exit from lot C driveway on South 144th Street. The minimum stopping distance for a vehicle traveling on South 144th Street is 365 feet, which is controlled by height of drivers eye of 3.5'feet and average vehicle height of 4.25 feet. The object height of 6 inches only comes into play in the design of the vertical alignment of a roadway (such as the redesign of the vertical alignment of South 144th Street which of course is not covered here). With the removal of the "banks" at the driveway entrance to lot C, a sight distance of more than 430 feet exists to the east and a sight distance of 375 feet exists to the west, both of which meet and exceed the ASSHTO Standards. The removal of ' "banks" will create a safe pedestrian sidewalk use on South ai44th Street. B. Cascade Geotechnal Slope Stability Report - #9112-040 As further clarification of my letter of January 9, 1992 relating to the Cascade Geotechnical Stability Report #9112 -040, 1 would offer the following comments: 1. All four lots are "buildable" for individual single family construction, using standard construction features and procedures. ' 2. The technical data developed and presented in Cascade Geotechnical Report should be used in the planning and design of the footings, stem walls, foundation walls and physical improvements to the individual lots. FROM : SPROUT ENGINEERS Job No. 1009-095 January 16, 1992 Hawkins Short Plat Page -2- I hope this answers any questions or concerns you have. If I can be of further assistance, please call. Sincerely, SPROUT ENGINEERS Eugene C. Sprout, P.E., L.S. Pro3ect Engineer ECS:hmt cc: Leschi /David Hawkins P.O. Box 22701 Seattle, Washington 98122 PHONE NO. : 4558457 3. The pseupostatic analysis results shown on page 7 of the report should be used in foundation wall design. 4. With the exception of short (height) landscaping rockeries or walls, no free standing retaining walls will be necessary to protect buildings or South 144th Street and•the associated utility systems. Individual house foundations may be designed as retaining walls, depending on the "siting" of the building. The design and review of this should be accomplished at the time of individual residential permit application. As is the normal case with any single family residential design for an individual lot, the consideration of surface and ground water control design is very important. With the four short plat lots herein considered it will require the standard continuous footing drain design. In addition, the landscapping design should direct all surface water away from the foundation walls. As a third conditions it will be necessary to place an interceptor drain ( a french drain) in the uphill slope above the house. foundation walls. Although these drainage features are "standard" with side hill lots, they should be designed by a civil engineer drainage professional at the time of individual lot and house plans preparation. POD. *IILA . 1908 City Tukwila Z FIRE DEPARTMENT 444 Andover Park East Tukwila, Washington 98188 -7661 (206) 575 -4404 To: Darren Wilson From: Chief Olivas d Subject: Leschi Trading Date: May 6, 1992 John W. Rants, Mayor At the Tuesday, May 5th Public Works meeting, the site plan for Leschi Trading was discussed (copy attached). It is my understanding that this site plan is the most current. If this is the case, please be advised that fire will not approve it. Since the access road is in excess of 150', a turn - around is required; a turn - around is not detailed on the plan. Prior to approving this site plan, we need to see details of the turn- around. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me. (206) 252.5554 (206) 258.4060 FAX Darren Wilson City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Rd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Short Plat 90 -8 -SS Dear Mr. Wilson: I received a telephone message that the document had been approved. Enclosure LAW OFFICES OF DENNIS JORDAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. P.S. A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CORPORATION 2907 HEWITT AVENUE EVERETT, WASHINGTON 98201 April 17, 1992 Thank you for your cooperation. ch,2 1t 1L`cig Cheryl Weibel DENNIS W. JORDAN CHERYL A M. WEIBEL JAMES D. TWISSELMAN Enclosed is the original document. For -my records, please . provide me with a copy of the document after execution of the appropriate city official. Very truly yours, 51 � APR 20.1992 crry uKWILA DEPT. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) ASSIGNMENT OF FUNDS IN LIEU OF SHORT PLAT CONSTRUCTION BOND The Principal, LESCHI TRADING COMPANY, INC., a Washington corporation, hereby agrees that the sum of $15,000.00 will be held in an interest - bearing savings account (No. 3 a a 7- R o 4 g n ) at Frontier Bank, 2831 Wetmore, Everett, Washington, in the name of Dennis Jordan & Associates, Inc., P.S. ( "Escrow Agent ") to assure performance requirements for Short Plat 90 -8 -SS. THE CONDITIONS OF THE FOREGOINGOBLIGATION ARE THAT: (1) Principal shall construct all required improvements within the time period required by the ordinances of the City of Tukwila and this assignment shall remain in effect until all the required improvements are completed in full compliance with the ordinances of the City of Tukwila. (2) Upon Principal's failure to complete the improvements within the required time period or in accordance with City ordinances, the amount on deposit shall be released to the City of Tukwila upon written demand to the Escrow Agent. The amount demanded by the City shall be a good faith estimate of the actual cost of repairs. The accrued interest, if any, shall be paid to the Principal. (3) The Principal agrees that if it is necessary for . the City of Tukwila to take any legal action to assure the proper completion of this short plat, the City of Tukwila shall be entitled to its reasonable costs and attorney's fees. (4) Upon issuance of a letter of acceptance by the City of Tu,wila, this obligation shall be released and Escrow Agent shall disburse the funds in the account to Shawn Sanders and the Gene Sanders Employee Pension Fund, Inc. Any funds paid to Shawn Sanders and the Gene Sanders Employee Pension Fund Inc., shall be applied to reduce the principal of the debt owing to them by the Principal. Signed this 1 day of April, 1992. BY: TITLE: PRINCIPAL LESCHI TRA' NG COMPAN INC BY: Principal 7,7) Address lrg7 ( 72 Phone Number Escrow Agent: Dennis Jordan & Associates, Inc. e e 2907 Hewitt Everett, WA 98201 Telephone: 206-252-5554 4 6 Accepted this4a?" day of April, 1992 by the City of Tukwila. City of Tukwila �. VIOLATION: Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Mike Kenyon, City Attorney FROM: Antonio Baca, Code Enforcement Officer `22 RE: 90 -8 -SS DATE: April 17, 1992 This file is being referred to your office to initiate legal action for non - compliance of the City of Tukwila Municipal Code. Background Information: COMPLAINANT: Antonio Baca, Code Enforcement Officer • LOCATION OF VIOLATION: S. 144th and McAdams (Northwest Corner) APPLICANT: Leschi Trading David Hawkins 3601 E. Terrance Seattle, WA 98122 T.M.C. Section 17.16.070(C)(1) 17.16.070(C)(2) 18.45.080(D)(1) 18.45.080(D)(4) John W. Rants, Mayor Additional Background Information. Copy of Stop Work Notice Issued by Darren Wilson on 4 -16 -92 and Memorandum dated 4- 16 -92 . entailing on site inspection conduted by Darren Wilson and Gary Schultz. Should you require additional information please contact me at Extension 1661. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (204? 431-3665 Stop Work # • \\_. :3-) • 4 A POLICY on GEOMETRIC DESIGN of HIGHWAYS and STREETS 1984 AASHTOTM American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Suite 225, 444 North Capitol Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 624 -5800 Copyright, 1984, by American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserved. This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form without written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America. 158 AASHTO— Geometric Design of Highways and Streets Height of Driver's Eye For all sight distance calculations, the height of the driver's eye is considered to be 3.50 ft above the road surface. This value is based on studies (14, 15, 16, 17) which show that average vehicle heights decreased since 1960 to 4.25 ft with a comparable decrease in average eye heights to 3.50 ft. The average vehicle heights decreased 2.6 in. in this period, which correlates well with the 2.1 -in. reduction in average eye heights. In the same time period the minimum height of eye decreased 2.5 in. to 3.31 ft. Because of this significant change in the minimum eye heights, the design eye height has been reduced from 3.75 ft to 3.50 ft. This change in eye height has the effect of lengthen- ing minimum crest vertical curves by approximately 5 percent, thereby providing about 2.5 percent more sight distance. Because of various factors that appear to place practical limits on any further decreases in passenger car heights and the relatively small increases that further change would mandate in lengths of vertical curves, 3.50 ft is con- sidered to be the height of driver's eye for measuring both stopping and passing sight distances. Height of Object For stopping sight distance calculations, the height of object is considered to be 6 in. above the road surface. For passing sight distance calculations, the height of object is considered to be 4.25 ft above the road surface. Stopping sight distance object. The object height of 6 in. was adopted for stopping sight distance calculation purposes in 1965. The basis for its selection was largely an arbitrary rationalization of possi- ble hazardous object size and a driver's ability to perceive and react to a hazardous situation. If other vehicles were the only likely hazard to be encountered, the height of vehicle taillights, 1.5 to 2.0 ft, would be a sufficient object height. Such a height, however, would preclude a driver's seeing small animals, rocks, or other debris that are likely to be encountered in the roadway. It is considered that a 6 -in. -high object is representative of the lowest object that can create a hazardous condition and be perceived as a hazard by a driver in time to stop before reaching it. Using object heights of less than 6 in. for stopping sight distance calculations results in considerably longer crest vertical treets Elements of Design 159 eye is sed on eights verage in. in verage A eye in the 3 from gthen- hereby various ases in further is con - .opping .eject is g sight 4.25 ft in. was i5. The )f possi- react to azard to vould be cclude a likely to ;h object azardous to stop stopping vertical curves. For example, if the roadway surface is used as the sighted object, crest vertical curves would have to be about 85 percent longer than when 6 in. is used as the object height. The object height of less than 6 in. could substantially increase construction costs because additional excavation would be required to provide the longer crest vertical curves. It is also doubtful that the driver's ability to perceive a hazardous situation would be increased. Passing sight distance object. The object height of 4.25 ft is adopted for passing sight distance calculations, superseding the 4.5 -ft object height, which has been used since 1940. Because vehicles are the objects that must be seen when passing and because the height of the average passenger vehicle body has been reduced to its current 4.25 -ft height above the pavement, this height will be used for calculation purposes. Passing sight distances calculated on this basis are also considered adequate for night conditions because the beams of the headlights of an opposing vehicle generally are seen from a greater distance than its top could be seen in the daytime. Sight Obstructions On tangents the obstruction that limits the driver's sight distance is the road surface at some point on a crest vertical curve. On horizontal curves the obstruction that limits the driver's sight distance may be the road surface at some point on a crest vertical curve, or it may be some physical feature outside of the traveled way, such as a longitudinal barrier, a bridge - approach fill slope, a tree, foliage, or the backslope of a cut section. Accordingly, all highway construction plans should be checked in both the vertical and horizontal plane for sight distance obstructions. Measuring and Recording Sight Distance on Plans The design of horizontal alinement and vertical profile using sight distance and other criteria is covered later in this chapter, particularly the detail design of horizontal and vertical curves. Sight distance, however, should be considered in the preliminary stages of design when both the horizontal and vertical alinement are still subject to adjustment. By determining graphically the sight distances on the TO: City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director Mayor Rants John McFarland, City Administrator Rick Beeler, DCD Director FROM: Gary Schulz, DCD Urban Environmental t Darren Wilson, Assistant Planner *9, DATE: April 16, 1992 MEMORANDUM John W. Rants, Mayor SUBJECT: SAO and LAO Violations (unpermitted land clearing) on proposed Short Plat #90 -8 -SS. The above referenced property is owned by Leschi Trading Company and located directly northwest of the intersection of Macadam Road S. and S. 144th Street. Upon request, Darren and myself investigated the property, on April 16, 1992 and observed a large backhoe actively clearing, grading, and ditching within potential wetland seep areas located at the toe of the properties' uppermost slope. _A small watercourse with considerable flow originates from the same slope area directly north and runs along the north portion of the site. The two workers on the site assumed there was city approval to begin work for an access road. The on -site forested habitat on Lots B, C -1, and C was being cleared just upslope of the watercourse. It is apparent that there has been some attempt to avoid encroachment into this drainage channel; however, erosion and sedimentation are occurring and there is no protective buffer zone or setback present. Despite their objections to stop work, Darren insisted the activity was not permitted until all requirements were complete. Even though we informed them of a "stop work order ", they resumed tree clearing and road grading activities after we left the site. Approximately one hour later an official Stop Work order, # Planning 01 -92, was posted at which time all work activities had ceased. According to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO) TMC 18.06.655 "Regulated Activities ", these alterations are regulated and permitted through ordinance standards. Chapter 18.45.080 Uses and Standards (A., B., C., and D.) specify the standards of wetland /watercourse use, alteration, and mitigation. A wetland /watercourse impact assessment performed by a professional biologist, and subsequent restoration of disturbed wetland areas 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 4313665 cc: Ross Earnst, DPW Director Phil Fraser, DPW Senior Engineer Leschi Trading Memo April 16, 1992 Page 2 would be required for most project approvals. Wetlands and watercourses were not identified on the subject property by the city's sensitive areas maps. However, the on -site watercourse and Class II slope was identified during the Sensitive Areas Moratorium waiver hearing (February 19, 1991). The issue of sensitive areas and buffers needs to be investigated further for conformance with the SAO. In addition major construction activities may need to be postponed until the site is dryer and more stable. We continue to pursue these issues. ` t✓`'S� - 6"S` a , .. .,...04 ` I .dj .rJ'" .. 9 9 0- s February 21, 1992 Leschi Trading Company David Hawkins 3601 E. Terrace Seattle, WA 98122 Dear Mr. Hawkins: City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 John W. Rants, Mayor Based upon our meeting on February 14, 1992, you have requested some minor modifications of the Administrative Planned Residential Development setback conditions. This letter is an addendum to the letter dated January 21, 1992. The revised setback standards are listed below. In addition, as we have discussed, the setback standards are to be measured from the foundation wall. Lot B: South min. 10 -feet w /average of 15 feet East min. 20 -feet West min. 13 -feet North min. 10 -feet Lot C: South min. 10 -feet w /average of 13 feet East min. 10 -feet West min. 31 feet North min 7 -feet and 6- inches 2 Lot C -1: South min. 10 -feet w /average of 15 feet East min. 11 -feet West min. 31 -feet North in. 10 -feet If you should have any other questions, please feel free to call or write. Sincerely, ck Pace Senior Planner Phone: (206) 433 - 1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433 - 1833 Note: Setbacks for lot B, C, and C -1 are to be measured from foundation wall. January 21, 1992 Leschi Trading Company David Hawkins 3601 E. Terrace Seattle, WA 98122 City of f TukWlla 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 John W. Rants, Mayor Re: Short Plat 90 -8 -SS Administrative Planned Residential Development 91 -3 -APRD Dear Mr. Hawkins: This letter is an update of the December 30, 1991 letter which contained conditions of approval. Since the, you have provided additional information regarding some of the conditions of approval. The revised conditions are divided into requirements under the Short Plat, Sensitive Area Ordinance, and Administrative Planned Residential Development. SHORT PLAT CONDITION: 1. All required improvements must be constructed by the applicant and accepted by the City of Tukwila, or a bond may be posted by the applicant for construction of same, prior to the short plat being filed. Said bond assignment shall be in an amount equal to one hundred fifty percent the estimated cost of complete construction of such improvements as determined by the Director of Public Works. (Refer to TMC Section 17.08.080). Based upon your design detail, Public Works has determined the bond shall be $15,000. The construction plans shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE: 2. For lots B, C -1, and C, the maximum amout of impervious surface calculated for the total development allowed on each lot will be 50 %. Phone: (206) 433 -1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433 -1833 Page 2 3. For lots B, C -1, and C, further geotechnical review needs to be done at the time of building permit submittal. The technical data developed and presented in Cascade Geotechnical Report (Job # 9112 -04G) along with 1 -9 -92 and 1 -16 -92 letters of Sprout Engineers should be used in the planning and design of the footings, stem walls, foundation walls, and physical improvements to the individual lots. 4. For lots B, C -1, And C, will submit a landscape plan in conjunction with building permit submittal, additional trees shall be planted on the south and east sides of the houses to provide screening. ADMINISTRATIVE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT: 5. The following are the modified setback standards for lots B, C -1, and C. Lot B: South min. 10 -feet w/ average of 15 feet East min. 20 -feet West min. 12 -feet North min. 10 -feet • If the short plat is not filed within six months of date of approval, the short plat shall be null and void. Upon written request by the subdivider, the Short Subdivision Committee may grant one extension of not more than six months. If you object to the conditions and requirements stated in this letter, you have ten days from the date of this letter to submit a written appeal. If you should have any further questions regarding the various requests, please feel free to call or write. Sincerely, Lot C: South min. 10 -feet w /average of 15 -feet East min. 10 -feet West min. 31 -feet North min. 7 -feet and 6- inches Lot C -1: South Min. 10 -feet w/ average of 15 -feet East min. 35 -feet West min. 25 -feet North min. 7 -feet and 6- inches ck Pace Senior Planner ! 0 . df ...- iliflingygt!" 1111:1 1. ill efitiwigib I • 1)1.11 _ ---.—.—. -4- Firaiwose" 44.4- Leschi Trading Company, Inc. P.O Box 22701 Seattle, WA 98122 FAX (206) 319-7554 (206) 710-7140 r 1St* L45-41 ,. •lipL•PI III I It. .4).14.1 I I l .t.• ■)• s. t' • ') I 1/ e a. : 111 , 11 • uops, -..ouNtr IItT lt 1.14111 smici •7 figgfiatiiitiNia f. 100 110tb A... 1 A felts •101 ' I.1I.v...f1 .11004 (101)411 -1(14 4 Estimate for road constrution: $10,000 20 R.O. I (7RA4 ' C' - T E 02) 121 x 4" orEN -WE8 cow,. OLOGK�) (22' C LA ' 5' Qsr 4ALT GONG. C )f4 7 �uw =�UNly 12" G .A ` 15 E54NK Rukl & AVEL CAS u IIRED) 2o' ACC E1\47, X — E�`i"IoN I'`G!' RE: 1 WKIN i LAT hPRouT I= 1.1I tJ K* .108 NO. 1001-09G OI/IO/ . , F. 4YcFANT `N /vALVE X02.33' 2 4014 qv IoI & L. A °1,134 ❑'. Mau ( " 1 . 5� - 7, 200 to Mr-AN W\ 'Tl-1 = 82.8' ��t�Gficl1 C- 7; 2oO 1 M WPM = Cdl Gam' — Map File iri Vault Direction: Scale: ( z}p' Stamp: Page • ( N of 2 Land Surveyor's Certificate: C This Short Plat correctly represents a survey m under my direction in conformance with the requi propriate State statute and has been pro erly st Name: E.uc -, C. SPRoc.sr Date; N o pt. z T I g9 t Certificate No. P L Short Plat Number �pY'Ol. 1T Fn 1 Y n n r! `1, 200 b M _ near • :.S ' ,i.<•%k IG +ti %f LLANd 9590 ,„•/::';': de by me or ements of ap- ed. FNR LocisIG. MON. W/ � ,v A • RP CPavtt, "wareR. MAIN z • . 10 FWD Mo 4. w /yqtNerz 0 0 z co z IL 0 2 1x z 2 ►• �iMN TO: rf! /.., FROM: .../.4 PiE' .eCif DATE. 02o/roz. SUBJECT: LE'sC // T.QA n/q EA CITY OF T( :WII.A 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington 98188 4,' (206) 433 -186, P 'A E �C C . • . /9/5./ ■/o/S, P • -cor Q k.sk.-7 v MEMORANDUM 3N s� S- c \ 4, 40, .�N ' 4 1 3 4 ' Ca/`1/3V,VY ....c4 fore v o 4 T u g (, v F 64 • d t S �, E ?� • /S 7 7 7"/7/0 of /1 /4"9S i4A/ EX /ST /A ./2.A/ s2/ • Y /n, 779 7JS�E 1tik's7 TA f?EE4S!ittT3" .co c' .S7 ›.. " • .0 N ..702.17 / ' . r'r.4E r/✓F .���_s of Tf✓ STx)PAE/2 2/ ' /c4 r l■v Zo ny- C�+R �N4 �,4 ',PoM TiS�E 2),Pi ✓EIne.v Y �iV — r / rs( /4 .�.� 3 r.✓E.eE 2 A,4DvF A i is ,SY/ieF'ACE : S /9 ✓7 /STANCES TiVV ,U,P/ I/E7'V4/ ,17,y, ..: ,/RcgsSPEC77k LY. 4 �9 . .Co/2/q. • , 7X/.9N 7'/J /8D ' - 4, /,e z XG : I��liE4 ,cWcS.J7'' . LEr . ' l.ESGhf/ /V �o s�.E. 0 c.c 2.5"/9P4'. u z 0 • • r • w c z . W u W H • r N W 0 W I W 0 C u • u LE W O J r u c I- N • 0 x C W w 2 it it w J } a division of SILVER ENGINEERING SERVICES, /NC. Job No. 1009 -095 January 16, 1992 Mr. Jack P. Pace. Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6200 Southoenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Hawkins Short Plat (Bruamier Hill Cottage Located at 144th & Mac Adams Road Dear Mr. Pace: f /. ' 12' ' as *coi/ A zr; a /aoi< a z` LER gK20X,RRI BECE1V E© JAN 17 1992 TUKWjLA PUBLIC WORKS Pro3ect) In response to the discussions in our meeting today, and the need for additional clarification of the engineering aspects of this pro.iect, I would like to offer the following for the city staffs' review and consideration: A. Sight Distance Study The sight distance study submitted on drawing 1 of 2, dated July 25, 1991 was done in accordance with AASHTO -1984 Standards. Our study was to determine the entrance and exit from lot C driveway on South 144th Street. The minimum stopping distance for a vehicle traveling on South 144th Street is 365 feet, which is controlled by height of drivers eye of 3.5 feet and average vehicle height of 4.25 feet. The ob3ect height of 6 inches only comes into play in the design of the vertical alignment of a roadway (such as the redesign of the . vertical alignment of South 144th Street which of course is not covered here). With the removal of the "banks" at the driveway entrance to lot 0, a sight distance of more than 430 feet exists to the east and a sight distance of 375 feet exists to the west, both of which meet and exceed the ASSHTO Standards. The removal of ' "banks" will create a safe pedestrian sidewalk use on South 144th Street. B. Cascade Geotechnical Slope Stability Report - 19112-04Q As further clarification of my letter of January 9, 1992 relating to the Cascade Geotechnical Stability Report *9112 -040, 1 would offer the following comments: 1. All four lots are "buildable" for individual single family construction, using standard construction features and procedures. 2. The technical data developed and presented in Cascade Geotechnioal Report should be used in the planning and design of the footings, stem walls, foundation walls and physical improvements to the individual lots. 100 -116th AVE. S.E. • BELLEVUE, Volk 98004 • 12061455-9454 FROM : SPROUT ENGINEERS PHONE NO. : 4558457 Job No. 1009 -095 January 16, 1992 Hawkins Short Plat Page -2- 3. The pseupostatic analysis results shown on page 7 of the report should be used in foundation wall design. 4. With the exception of short (height) landscaping rockeries or walls, no free standing retaining walls will be necessary to protect buildings or South 144th Street and the associated utility systems. Individual house foundations may be designed as retaining walls, depending on the "siting" of the building. The design and review of this should be accomplished at the time of individual residential permit application. S. As is the normal case with any single family residential design for an individual lot, the consideration of surface and ground water control design is very important. With the four short plat lots herein considered it will require the standard continuous footing drain design. In addition, the landscapping design should direct all surface water away from the foundation walls. As a third conditions it will be necessary to place an interceptor drain ( a french drain) in the uphill slope above the house foundation walls. Although these drainage features are "standard" with side hill lots, they should be designed by a civil engineer drainage professional at the time of individual lot and house plans preparation. I hope this answers any questions or concerns you have. If I can be of further assistance, please call. Sincerely, SPROUT ENGINEERS Eugene C. Sprout, P.E., L.S. Proiect Engineer ECS :bent cc: Leschi /David Hawkins P.O. Box 22701 Seattle, Washington 98122 P0; Telephone: 242.9547 FP /aw W ater 2)a no. 125, J<nz Count January 16, 1992 Phil Fraser City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila Wa 98188 Dear Mr. Fraser: Sincerely, 2 eadUal--Th Frank Pearson, Superintendent P.O. Box 88147, Riverton Hts. Br. Office: 2849 South 150th SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98168 RE: Flow for South 144th Street All necessary hydrants to be installed by developer. ER NE) • AN 1 6 1992 1 j • FRANKLIN PEARSON Superintendent ANN WILSON Of lice Manager The calculated flow for South 144th Street at the Northwest. corner of McAdam Road South, Parcel A, B, C and Cl is 1000 GPM with 20 PSI residual. )epartment of Health and W & Land Development rith information necessary to ?valuate development proposals. Do not write in this box APPLICANT'S NAME % e sc,4; r.-c A.•� Lc, PROPOSED USE S, ,, f SEWER AGENCY INFORMATION 1. a. F279 OR b. ED number KING COUNTY CERTIFICATE OF SEWER AVAILABI ❑ Building Permit ❑ Short Subdivision VAL VUE SEWER DISTRICT Agency Name MANAGER Title 119 name Pleas eturn to: BUILDINU & LAND DEVELOPMENT 450 Administration Seattle, Washington 206.344.7900 ❑ Preliminary Plat or PUD ❑ Rezone or other ft IT JAN 1.6 1992 CIt'I vJ i LI PLANNING ` - )EP . (Attach map & legal description if necessary) # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Sewer service will require an improvement to the sewer system of: ❑ (1) feet of sewer trunk or latteral to reach the site; and /or Sewer service will be provided by side sewer connection only to an existing 6 size sewer 0 N3 goet frrem the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed use. ❑ (2) the construction of a collection system on the site; and /or ❑ (3) other (describe) 2. (Must be completed if 1.b above is checked) a. D The sewer system /improvement is in conformance with a County approved sewer comprehensive plan. OR b. 0 The sewer system improvement will require a sewer comprehensive plan amendment. 3. a. 0 The proposed project is within the corporate limits of the district or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of service outside the district or city. OR b. ❑ Annexation or BRB approval will be necessary to provide service.. 4. Service is subject t� the following: a. Connection charge: b. Easement(s): 'Se RA U) n t c. Other: I hereby certify that the above sewer agency information is true. This certification shall be valid for one year from date of signature. T. J. MATELICH Signatory Name Signature Date rz ceL A '►,134 ta' Me464 5 7 200 CO v1CAN we'rl _ 82.8' rA& L 7;200 ct 4504.1 , col • L -Ion-File in Vault ection: • mp: N of )rt Plat Number ---� v b NQ. 100°1- 015 rout erninte,r* r �,.►�..- ,�...��/, �/�, 171 (rAVI✓t ) 4 "wATek 1■44IN F. AS T oi ©TE : pA� o. � � LI � -hlat� i✓,QuAt,4,Y � 14RE 1• T1-\ Go'T 01 ?4,TlON ) MAihritgaNGE.. KePAtE, AND /o1Z 1 ? P. - GOtWiTRuGT1ON OF '11 ( 2o! ACt- • GA EMENT G KV11 torcztiv. A,k3, #C-1. rAR.0 L G 7,2OOn Me41.1 Wlt? = 0 ti ad Surveyor's Certificate: is Short Plat correctly represents a, survey ma • e by me or der my direction in conformance with the requirements of ap- )priate State statute and has been properly staked. me. Exed E• C spear �• 5 • —. tee tificate No. ec'.S. G9c' • 1042 E 14 w / °t• M014. ta7MN aC6hl AveA CPAVEt7) landscape coverage plan hawkins short plat Post.t0 brand P1FA SPROUT \ 11^ t \ ITrr . 1- ROM : SPROU I ENG 1 NEE PHONE ND. . 43524E. Pal Fax Transmittal Memo 7672 Tn C.om4lny ^r /41(4 L4 Location K Fel * 931_ Tslaphone Comments fa@BWED JAN 1 3 7992 CITY OF- TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. S -o - < No of ones From Compeny Location Fs* # T17 , / Time /4 :40(A.4o Dept. Charge Onpinal 0 tleatiny [1 Return ID Call for pickup Disposition Telephone ! 6u gmoxigg z a • • • N . 111 0 w I- z 4 In In Ui • • Z 0 I- z Ui 0 D a. • z (A UI 0 -1 D I- U D • 0 z UI 5 .7. ; Job No. 1009-095 January 9, 1992 / 1.7r / r;•• • • Mr. Jack P. Pace, Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Dear Mr. Pace: Sincerely, SPROUT ENGINEERS a division of r V f tt' Re: Hawkins Short Plat arummer Hill Cottage Project) Located at 144th & Mac Adams Road ECS:bmt cc: David Hawkins - Owner 100 - 116th AVE. S.E. • BELLEVUE, WA 98004 • 12061455 In accordance with your departments request to have a clarification of Cascade Geotechnical slope stability report - Job No. 9112-04G - it is clear that the proposed construction will have very little impact on the slope. The core sample establishes that there have been no movement on this site fOr over two million years. The house on lot C will be more than 20 feet away from the bank and the house on lot C-1 will be 15 to 20 feet away from the toe of this bank. The plans for individual building permit applications should incorporate standard construction features such as footing and stem wall design which would provide proper safety factors. The references to possible dewatering are very tentative. The dewatering should be addressed when requests for individual residential building permits are made. The individual building site plans and applications should include complete footing drains and up-slope interceptor french drains to below footing elevation. These drainage plans should, be Jdeveloped at the time the individual building site plans are prepared. For the sake of continuity & coordination with your office, with your approval, our office with the use of the Cascade Geotechnical Report, can develop the necessary drainage and slope stability plans, using standard' engineering principals. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: REVIEW OF ITEM A: REVIEW OF ITEM B: City of Tukwila Darren Wilson Phil Fraser January 8, 1992 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 M E M O R A N D U M REVIEW FOR LESCHI TRADING COMPANY'S SHORT PLAT SUBMITTAL OF ELEMENTS REQUESTED PER P.W. 12/6/91 MEMO (ATTACHED): A. CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. PHASE I - SLOPE STABILITY REPORT, BRUMMICE HILL COTTAGE PROJECT, SOUTH 144TH STREET, TUKWILA, WN. JOB NO. 9112 -04G - DATED DEC. 19, 1991 B. EUGENE C. SPROUT L.P.S. SHORT PLAT MAP DATED DEC. 5, 1991 (NO RECEIPT DATE) C. ACCESS - STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE ANALYSIS (DATE RECEIVED 12/24/91) John W. Rants, Mayor In reference to my attached 12/6/91 memorandum, Item A has been submitted by the developer. The soils report indicates that only Phase I work has been accomplished to date, and added information will be necessary to accomplish anticipated Phase II work. The soils report addresses Item "b" in my 12/6/91 memo; however, Items "a" and "c" are not addressed, as the geotechnical professional states they did not have a complete enough site plan to carry out this work to date. Public Works needs the completion of the geotechnical information to the extent that Items "a" and "c" are addressed. In reference to the attached 12/5/91 Eugene C. Sprout P.L.S. short plat plan (Job No. 1009 -095) requested is a resubmittal to address the following comments: 1. Per Section 17.24.030 of the Tukwila Municipal Code, 30 feet is the minimum width for private access roads. It is noted Phone: (206) 433 -1800 • City Hall Fax (206) 433 -1833 •Darren Wilson .• Leschi Trading Page 2 REVIEW OF ITEM C: the plan identifies a 20 foot width. Requested is the easement be widened to 30 feet. Recommended is the 10 foot utilities easement and 20 foot access easement be combined for a 30 foot access /utilities easement. 2. Prior plans have indicated that surface detention ponds will be necessary in the vicinity of proposed Lots B and C -i to control and manage storm drainage and surface water through the properties. Also, some of the surface /sub- surface flows from Lot C will have to flow through proposed lot C -1 B and A. All surface water easements for the construction operation, repair and maintenance of storm drainage facilities (i.e.detention ponds) which these lots will depend upon need to be addressed as part of the short platting process. 3. A preliminary determination of special structures that will be needed in order to develop the proposed four single family lots needs to be identified. Per the corrected topographic maps we have commented in past that special retaining walls may have to be developed adjacent to proposed Lots B an C -1 due to the steepness of the hillside in order to develop the lots and protect the existing road and utility infrastructure on S. 144th St. and also to stay within the maximum 15% roadway grade criteria for your common drive off of Macadam Rd. Requested is two foot contours (both existing and proposed) be shown on this short plat plan along with lowest floor elevations, the proposed grade of the common access road and identification of any proposed retaining wall structures that will be necessary resulting from potential development of single family residences - for Public Works Dept. review. 4. Water availability letters for the new 4 lot configuration from WD #125 and Val Vue Sewer Districts. Attached, submitted separately, is Public Works comments on the developer's submittal for the access - stopping site distance analysis requested in paragraph 4 of my 12/5/91 memorandum. Public Works is asking for the developer's response to this resubmittal request per the following: There are at least two safety concerns involving the proposed driveway for Lot C: 1. Adequate stopping sight distance along South 144th Street. 2. Ingress /Egress safety due to obstructed vision. The plan sheet submitted for the sight distance profile illustrates incorrect heights for the driver's eye and the height of the object. ... Darren Wilson Leschi Trading Page 3 Attachments (5) PF/ f ldar According to AASHTO Standards for the geometric design of highways and streets, these heights are considered to be 3.5' and 0.5' above the road surface, respectively, rather than the 4.25' and 3.5' shown on the sight distance profile. When recalculated, according to AASHTO design criteria, it would appear that stopping sight distance, for a vehicle proceeding eastward over the vertical curve crest, is not adequate to insure against collision with a vehicle either leaving the driveway and turning left on South 144th Stret, or stopped on South 144th Street to make a left turn to enter the driveway. The second safety issue involves danger due to limited visability when entering or leaving the driveway. The existing topography surrounding the driveway cut includes a mound approximately five feet high on the east side of the cut and seven feet high on the west side of the cut. This problem poses safety concerns for people on the property when entering the driveway and pedestrians and traffic on South 144th Street when leaving the driveway. The mounds can be flattened, but this may be a moot point if stopping sight distance is inadequate. A resubmittal addressing the above is necessary. In summary the developer is requested to provide the following: 1. Added soil information to address items "a" and "c" per my 12/5/91 memo. 2. Resubmittal of the proposed plat plan to address items 1, 2 3 and 4 above. 3. Resubmittal of the Access - stopping sight distance analysis to address Public Works comments (enclosed). xc. John Pierog Nick Olivas Development File: Leschi Trading Company Short Plat Read File WL_ January 8, 1992 Job No. 9112 -04G Attention: Jack Pace Dear Mr. Pace: CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. 12016 115TH AVENUE N.E., BLDG. H (206) 821 -5080 KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98034 FAX: (206) 820.6953 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Reference: Brummers Hill Cottage Project South 144th Street Tukwila, Washington Based on your letter to Leschi Trading Company (our client) dated December 30, 1991, and our telephone conversations with you, we understand that you want us to address the site drainage before the short plat application for the above site is approved. We will be conducting further subsurface investigation of the site, which will consist of backhoe test pits on Lots #B and #C -1. After the completion of our additional subsurface study, we will provide detailed recommendations for drainage of the site, which can be addressed on a lot by lot basis. We will also provide recommendations for the stability of the entire site along with erosion control, grading, foundation design parameters, pavement design and lateral forces. We request that the short plat application for the above lot be approved so that we can proceed with further investigations to address the site drainage in detail, along with other above mentioned aspects of the project. We also request that the site drainage be made a condition for the building permit process, rather than the site short plat application. We thank you for your cooperation. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact us at any time. Sincerely, CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Amjad Khan Project Manager /Engineering Geologist cc: Leschi Trading Company LAN 10 1992 . CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. C Seattle City Light M. J. Macdonald, Acting Superintendent Norman B. Rice, Mayor January 7, 1992 David Hawkins Leschi Trading Company 3601 East Terrace Street Seattle, Washington 98122 Dear Mr. Hawkins: Easement P. M. #230415 -4 -006 The ten foot utility easement shown on page 2 of 2, City of Tukwila Short Plat 90 -8 -SS, will allow Seattle City Light to provide electrical service to all lots in the subdivision. Your Truly, Stephen E. Hagen, SR /WA Senior Real Property Agent SEH:seh An Equal Employment Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer City of Seattle — City Light Department, 1015 Third Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98104 -1198, Telephone: (206) 625-3000, FAX: (206) 6253709 Printed on recycled paper 7201.87 SQUARE FEET 44' -6" gailim■ •_•• JAN 6 BR LOT C CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD, 7 WASHINGTON 98188 December 30, 1991 Leschi Trading Company David Hawkins 3601 E. Terrace Seattle, Wa. 98122 RE: APRD /SHORT PLAT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PHONE N (206) 433 -1800 This letter is a summary of the conditions of approval for the Administrative Planned Residential Development (91- 3 -APRD) and short plat (90- 8 -SS). The conditions are divided into requirements that need to be met prior to final approval of the short plat and requirements which will need to be met at the time of issuance of a building permit. CONDITIONS THAT NEED TO BE MET PRIOR TO SHORT PLAT APPROVAL 1. Provide a landscape plan according to Tukwila Municipal Code Section 18.46.060 (F -1) of Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone for Lots C,C -1, and B. The requirements of this section may effect the setbacks for the building pads (See Attachment). 2. Your plan must show compliance with a 50 percent impervious surface limitation. 3. The triangular study for access onto Lot C shall be approved by the Public Works Department. Four additional copies of this study are needed. 4. Provide a letter from Stephen Hagen of Seattle City Light approving the easement locations. 5. All required improvements must be constructed by the applicant and accepted by the City of Tukwila, or a bond maybe posted by the applicant for construction of same, prior to the short plat being filed. Said bond assignment shall be in an amount equal to one hundred fifty percent of the estimated cost of complete construction of such improvements as determined by the Director of Public Works. (Refer to TMC Section 17.08.080); Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor The required improvements are as follows: A. Provide a 20 -foot access for Lots A, B, &C -1; 10- feet shall be of impervious surface with 4 -feet of grasscrete on both sides leaving 2 -feet for additional improvements if necessary; B. Provide adequate turnaround (Contact Nick Olivas of Fire Department for standards); C. The short plat approval is conditioned upon improvements to site i.e. roadway up to Lots B & C- 1. 6. Based on the Geotechnical Report dated December 19, 1991, by Cascade Geothechnical Inc., extensive drainage will be needed to dewater the entire site prior to any construction starts on Lots B and C -1. The Geotech needs to make a recommendation on the dewatering issue, if this shall occur prior to final short plat approval with improvements or on a lot by lot basics. If this occurs, a plan shall be submitted and approved by the City before construction begins. 7. Based on the Geotechnical Report dated December 19, 1991, by Cascade Geotechnical Inc., each building permit shall have phase II recommendations for both the hillside and structures completed and approved by the City. CONDITIONS FOR BUILDING PERMITS 1. APRD Setbacks Lot B South Min. 10 -feet w /average of 15 -feet East Min. 20 -feet West Min. 12 -feet North Min. 10 -feet In addition the owner of Lot B; shall remove the underground storage tank and shall acquire a permit from the City of Tukwila Fire Department and the D.O.E. (Department of Ecology) 30 days prior to work being done. Lot C South Min. 10 -feet w /average of 15 -feet East Min. 35 -feet West Min. 25 -feet North Min. 10 -feet Lot C -1 South Min. 10 -feet w /average of 15 -fe East Min. 10 -feet West Min. 31 -feet North Min. 10 -feet The above setbacks for B, C, & C -1 m information provided by the Landscape above condition 1 for short plat appr The setbacks for Lot A were approved un 6786. Those setbacks are as follows: Lot A Macadam & S.144th South Min. 15 -feet East Min. 30 -feet West Min. 8 -feet North Min. 10 -feet excluding easement The APRD setback distances shall not b you chose to apply for a building pe short plat and APRD Application. Ther allowed on this approved plan and pe If the short plat is not filed within approval, the short plat shall be null a request by the subdivider, the Short Sub grant one extension of not more than six The delay in producing this letter was du Should you have any questions regarding contact our office at 431 -3670. Darren Wilson Assistant Planner cc: J. McFarland, City Administrator J. Pace, Senior Planner P. Fraser, City Engineer t y change based on the chitect as required by val. er building permit no. area used for Lot A because it for Lot A prior to fore, no changes may be it. 2. Implement approved landscape plans for each individual building permit. The APRD and Short Plat Application s all be consistent with setbacks and the location of vegetatio . Currently both plans are inconsistent with setbacks and location of landscaping. ix months of date of d void. Upon written ivision Committee may nths. to Jack Pace illness. these matters, please tASCADE GEOTECHNICAL TEL:206-820-6953 q0-• 8-55 LEsoll Dec 19,91 16:01 No.005 P.02 PHASE I - SLOPE STABILITY REPORT BRUMMICE HILL COTTAGE PROJECT SOUTH 144TH STREET TUKWILA, WASHINGTON JOB NO. 9112-04G 1 i DEC 1 9 1991 Cfl OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1 Purpose Scope Page 1 Project Description Page 2 - Site Description Page 3 Subsurface Conditions Page 5 Slope Stability Page 6 Preliminary Conclusions and Recommendations Page 8 General Page 10 Appendix A Test Pit Location Map Appendix B Test Pit Logs Appendix C Unified Soils Classification System. CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL TEL:206- 820 -6953 MI CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. 12016 115TH AVENUE N.E., BLDG. H (206) 821-5080 KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98034 FAX: (206) 820.6953 December 19, 1991 Job No. 9112 -04G Leschi Trading Company, Inc. P. O. Box 22701 Seattle, Washington 98122 Attention: David Hawkins Reference: Phase I - Slope Stability Report Brummice Hill Cottage Project South 144th Street Tukwila, Washington Dear Mr. Hawkins: As you requested, we have completed Phase I of our subsurface soils and ground water investigation for the steep section of the east - facing slope, located in the western part of Lot #C -1, at the above referenced property. The following report summarizes our findings and presents our preliminary conclusions and recommendations. PURPOSE The purpose of our study was to investigate the subsurface soil and ground water conditions of the steep section of the east - facing slope located in the western part of Lot #C -1, to address the stability of this steep slope, and to provide preliminary conclusions and recommendations for slope stability. We understand that this information has been requested by the City of Tukwila for the processing of your application for short platting the above mentioned site. SCOPE Dec 9,91 16:02 No.005 P.04 The scope of our work consisted of a visual surface reconnaissance LHLHIJE GE0iECHNICAL TEL :206- 820 -6953 Dec 19:91 16:03 No.005 P.05 CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC, December 19, 1991 Leschi Trading Company, Inc. Job No. 9112 -04G Page 2 of the steep section of the east - facing slope located on the proposed Lots #C and #C -1, the drilling of one (1) approximately fifty (50) foot deep test boring (to investigate the subsurface soil and ground water conditions of the steep section of the east - facing slope located in the western portion of the Lot #c -1), reviewing the existing geologic maps for the area and the information on the site in our files and library, conducting a slope stability analysis, and preparing a preliminary geotechnical report. The following report provides our preliminary conclusions and recommendations. PROJECT DESCRIPTION At the time of our site visit, we were provided with a topographic map of the site prepared by Sprout Engineers, Inc., dated September 13, 1990. We were also provided with an undated, unreferenced set of preliminary architectural drawings prepared by Dennis Mortenson Architects, showing the unfinished elevations and plans for the proposed residences. From these preliminary plans and conversations with you, we understand that the proposed project will consist of the construction of two - story, wood - frame, single - family residences, with daylight basements on Lots #8, #C and #c -1. We also understand that these structures will be supported by spread footing foundations. The daylight basement area will utilize a slab -on -grade floor, while the rest of each structure will utilize a crawl space. No building loads have been provided to us at this time. The site plan prepared by Sprout Engineers, Inc., dated September 1 , 1990, showed the property boundaries, existing structures, foot print of the proposed structures, proposed roads, and erosion control details. No information was provided to us regarding building loads, finished floor elevations, proposed grades, etc. CRSCfIDE G,EOTECHNICAL TEL:206- 820 -6953 December 19, 1991 Leschi Trading Company, Inc. Job No. 9112 -04G Page 3 SITE DESCRIPTION Dec 19 CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC, 16:03 No.005 P.b6 Elevations referenced in this report are referenced from the above mentioned topographic site plan. We understand that Phase I of our investigation deals only with the stability of the steep section of the east- facing slope, and does not include the stability of the entire property. The stability of the entire property will be addressed in Phase II report along with recommendations for the development of the entire site, excluding Lot OA. The site is located just north of and adjacent to South 144th Street, in Tukwila, Washington. The site is bounded to the west by a single - family residence and to the south and east by South 244th Street and Macadam Road South respectively. The site is bounded by undeveloped property to the north. The site is generally characterized by a gentle, east- facing slope, with a steep section occupying the western part of Lot #C -1. The steep section of the east - facing slope was at a grade of 2(H):1(V) and was approximately twenty -five (25) feet in height. No evidence of surficial creep or slope failure was observed on the face of this steep slope. At the time of our site visit, we observed that the contractor /owner had already regraded the area for the proposed residence on Lot #C. Vertical cuts up to seven (7) feet in height had been excavated into the existing topography prior to our involvement with the project. A silt fence was observed at the top of the slope on Lot #C along with two (2) approximately two (2) foot high berms. One of these berms was located at the entrance to _.__..�.. .....,.. 4-hn Tammi -Are, Pdae CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL TEL:206- 820 -6953 Dec 19.91 CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INp. 16:04 No.005 P.07 December 19, 1991 Leschi Trading Company, Inc. Job No. 9112 -04G Page 4 of the building excavations. We understand that the silt fence and the berms had been constructed at the request of the City of Tukwila to provide temporary erosion and sedimentation control. We understand that some fill was pushed out over the top of the steep section of the slope during the regrading activity on Lot #C to create a level pad for construction equipment. We also noted a cut approximately one (1) foot high and approximately thirty -five '(35) feet long along the toe of the steep slope on Lot #C -1. At the time of our site visit, the surficial soils on the eastern part of Lot #C -1 east of the toe of the steep slope were saturated and soft. Most of the vegetation had been removed from this part of the lot by the owners during recent clearing activity on the lot. However, the vegetation was not disturbed on the face of the steep, east - facing slope. The slope face was vegetated with several deciduous trees, low -lying brush, ferns, and grass. Wa understand from the site plans and conversations with you that ".here are a number of artesian springs located north of. Lot #C -1. the presence of these springs and saturated heaving sands encountered in our test boring suggest the presence of ground water under high hydrostatic pressure. Although no springs or ground water seepage was noted along the toe of the steep section of the east - facing slope on Lot #C -1, we believe that extensive drainage will be needed to dewater the entire site before any construction starts on Lots #B and #C -1. Specific recommendations for the dewatering of the site will be presented after the completion of Phase II site investigation for this project. At the time of our site visit, we observed the remains of a concrete water tank in the east - central part of Lot #C -1. We understand from conversations with you, that this tank was connected to the artesian springs by means of one and one -half (1 ,SCADE GEOTECHNICi, .. INC, December 19, 1991 Leschi Trading Company, Inc. Job No. 9112 -04G Page 6 sand layer became cleaner (trace silt) from forty (40) to fifty (50) feet below the existing ground surface. Ground water was encountered in the test boring at approximately thirty -five (35) feet below the existing ground surface. Heaving sand was noted from thirty -six (36) feet to the test boring termination depth of fifty (50) feet. Some mottling was noted within the upper five (5) feet of the glacial till (dense silty sand). The glacial till was damp at the time of our investigation. The area of our investigation has been mapped as ground moraine deposits within the Vashon Drift. The geologic time scale noted that glaciolacustrine deposits of silt and clay of the Vashon Drift could be found underlying the glacial till and can be found outcropping to the south of the site. The clayey silt /silty clay we observed underlying the glacial till during our subsurface investigation is consistent with this classification. The sand noted below the glaciolacustrine deposits in the test boring appears to be equivalent to the Esperance Sand. Slope stability We preformed a visual reconnaissance of the existing steep section of the east- facing slope in addition to the subsurface investigation. We did not observe any evidence of surface creep on the slope face, nor did we find any evidence of shallow seated failures in the area of the steep slope. We performed a slope stability analysis using the Simplified Bishop method of analysis on the east - facing steep section of the slope Waldron, H.S., 1962, Geology of the Des Moines Quadrangle, Washington: U.S.G.S. Map GQ -159, Scale 1:24,000. CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL TEL:206- 820 -6953 Stability Analysis Results Minimum Factor of Safety Static 6.16 Pseudostatic 4.51 Dec 19,91 CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. 16:07 No.005 P.10 December 19, 1991 Leschi Trading Company, Inc. Job No. 9112 -04G Page 7 located in the western half of Lot #C -l. The analysis was done in accordance with requirements outlined in the King County "Sensitive Area Geotechnical Report Requirements" leaflet. The analysis yielded minimum factors of safety for static and pseudostatic conditions. A minimum pseudostatic horizontal inertial force equal to 0.15 times the total weight of the potential sliding mass `was used in the pseudostatic analysis. Our fieldwork indicates that the site is locally underlain by dense to very dense native glacial and glacially preconsolidated soils except for some localized areas along the road and the top of the slope where uncontrolled fill was placed previously. We used conservatively chosen soil unit weights and strength parameters based on our previous experience and our findings from the site investigation. The soil parameters we used and the results of our analysis are summarized below. Native Native Native Native Assumed Soil Parameters Silty Sand Clayey Sand Sand Silt / with Silty silt Clay Density (lbs /ft 132.0 136.0 132.0 130.0 Cohesion (lbs /ft 1500.0 2500.0 0.0 0.0 Angle of Internal Friction 30.0 32.0 32.0 38.0 (degrees) C.�SCADE GEOTECHNIC AL INC. December 19, 1991 Leschi Trading Company, Inc. Job No. 9112 -04G Page 8 We conclude that the existing slope in the western part of Lot #C -1 is presently stable against shallow surficial and deep seated failures, and will not be adversely affected by construction if our recommendations are carefully followed. However, the small quantity of the uncontrolled fill placed at the top of this slope is unstable and should be removed immediately. PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report'are preliminary, and are based upon the preliminary plans that were provided to us, and our current understanding of the proposed project. Based on the stratigraphic positioning, engineering characteristics of the soils found on site, subsurface information, and subsequent slope stability analysis performed in our office, we conclude that the portion of the slope which consists of native soil is presently stable. The small quantity of the uncontrolled fill placed at the top of this slope is unstable and should be removed immediately. It is our preliminary opinion that the slope will not be adversely affected by the proposed construction if our recommendations are carefully followed. We understand that you propose to construct single- family residences at the top and along the toe of the steep section of the east - facing slope. From the preliminary plans that we were provided with, it appears that the residence located on Lot #C will be set back approximately forty (40) feet west of the top of this steep slope, with the proposed driveway set back approximately fifteen (15) feet. It is our preliminary conclusion that the proposed construction on Lot #C will not adversely effect this stability of the slope. However, we have not been provided with '.CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL TEL:206- 820 -6953 • CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC, December 19, 1991 Leschi Trading Company, Inc. Job No. 9112 -04G Page 9 Dec 19,91 16:07 No.005 P.12 finished building plans at this time. We recommend that we be engaged to work with your other design professionals in developing the final building plans for this project, which may also involve the augmentation and /or alteration of our preliminary conclusions and recommendations. The plans that have been provided to us show a single - family residence located in the northeastern section of Lot #C -1, along the toe of the steep section of the east- facing slope. No finished floor elevation or regrading information has been provided to us at this time for the proposed residence. We understand that cuts five (5) feet or greater may be required along the toe of the steep slope. With proper drainage and engineered retaining structures, the proposed cuts and structure should not adversely effect the stability of this steep slope. We recommend that we be engaged to provide you with a detailed drainage plan for the site, which may consist of a combination of horizontal wells drilled into the slope to decrease the hydrostatic pressure behind the slope face, and perimeter french drains to catch the surface runoff from the west and south, and divert it away from the site to a suitable drainage outlet. We recommend that we proceed with Phase II of our investigation for the site so that we can provide you with detailed recommendations for slope stability of the entire site, drainage, grading, foundation design parameters, lateral forces and erosion control. We also recommend that we be engaged to work with your other design professionals in developing the building plans. We recommend that we should be engaged to review all final building plans, so that we can provide more specific and detailed recommendations for the - CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL TEL:206- 820 -6953 Der. 19,91 16:09 No.005 P.13 ...' December 19, 1991 Leschi Trading Company, Inc. Job No. 9112 -04G Page 10 Genera, CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. All conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are preliminary, and may be augmented and /or altered after further subsurface investigation (Phase II investigation) and review of the final building plans. We recommend that we be engaged to perform a Phase II site . investigation before any construction work is initiated.' We recommend that we be engaged to review the final plans prior to initiating construction to see that our recommendations are properly interpreted and to provide additional or alternate recommendations as necessary. We expect the on -site soil conditions to reflect our findings; however, some variations may occur. Should soil conditions be encountered that cause concern and /or are not discussed herein, Cascade Geotechnical, Inc., should be contacted immediately to determine if additional or alternate recommendations are required. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Leschi Trading Co., Inc., for specific application to the Brummice Hill Cottage site, at South 144th Street and Mcadam Road South, in Tukwila, Washington, in accordance with generally accepted soils and foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. • CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. December 19, 1991 Leschi Trading Company, Inc. Job No. 9112 -04G Page 11 Thank you for this opportunity to be of service to you. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at any time. Sincerely, CASCADE GEOTECHNI de .r 0 , t ts: 9;.. . • OP :.4. .,'; 4) \ p\ Amjad 1. Khan Engineering Geologist AIK:pg Dec 1991 16:10 No.005 P.14 .+ Ln Lf1 • 0 LO z BRUMMICE HILL COTTAGE PROJECT TEST BORING LOCATION MAP PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT ? ?DO 00 7 ?° LOT B LOT A TB., LOT C -1 \ l LOTC L I S. 144TH STREET FROM SURVEYED PLAN BY SPROUT ENGINEERS Job No. Sae 1' = 50' 9112 -04G LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE Drip En •Ged 12/05/91 D By HLA t' CASCADE GEOTECHNICAi_ INC. i 120161151H AVENUE N.E., BLDG. H FM: (206) 82 6953 KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98034 a► 0 Project BRUMMICE HILL COTTAGE Job No. 9112 -04G Date 12/06/91 goring No. 1 Dwn.9y HLA Driller HOLT DRILLING Drill Type TRUCK MOUNTED Geo /Eng A. KHAN r Hole Die. 4° Fluid NONE Sample Interval Penetration 4 Soil Description & Classification N Notes Depth l i 0 a 0 co I I I I I • r _ 5 - _ 15_ _ 0 - 2 5 - - 4 60 9 60 33 50 20 - 30 60 - 5 - 50 - 44 - - - li 70 �` to 91 74 6% 2 5 '� ) i i �� SILTY SAND; with some gravel, red -brown to brown, mottled, dense, trace to minor gravel & sand, tan to -CL) very hard. (ML -CL) very hard. (ML -CL) very hard. (ML -CL) to minor gravel, red -brown to ISM) - - - - - - _ - F- - - - - - 12/06/91 �, . (SM) damp. . (glacial till) t'` 9 . < � l p ; No sample recovery e CLAYEY SILT /SILTY CLAY: with gray, hard to very hard, damp. (ML CLAYEY SILT /SILTY CLAY; as above, CLAYEY SILT /SILTY CLAY; as above, CLAYEY SILT/,;;ILTY CLAY; as above, :. 4 4 S AND; with some clay & silt, trace ` gray, very dense, wet to saturated. No .es: Dec 19,91 16:11 No .005 P.16 Conditions shown represent our observatiorx, at the time and location of the field work, modlticetions bawd en leb lasts, analysis, and oselopietl and anoinwrkq judgement. Thew conditio. may not exist at other times and locations, even In close proximity. This Information was pothered as part of our Invsetioetlsn, and we we not reeponsibte for any use or Interp1etation of t Information by Whore. �J CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TEST BORING LOG Page 1 of 2 CASCADE GE'0TEQ/ANTCPL TEL :206 -820 ='6953 v Dec 19,91 16:12 No.005 P.17 Project 'Driller HOLT DRILLING Geo /Eng A. KHAN 2 c d E 0 I I I BRUMMICE HILL COTTAGE 40� 45 50,_ 55 60 65 Penetration rb 21 50 20 25 50 69� 594 6 to 65 Notes: hEAVING SAND NOTED FROM 38- TO 50'. grained, gray, very dense, saturated. (SP) Job No, 9112-04G Boring No. 1 p.2 Soil Description & Classification • with trace to minor silt, trace gravel, medium- to coarse- SAND: medium- to coarse - grained, gray, very dense, wet to saturated. (SP) SANDt with trace gravel, medium- to coarse - grained, gray, very dense, wet to saturated. (SP) T.D. ,= 50.0' Date 12/06/91 Dwn.By HLA Drill Type TRUCK MOUNTED ,Hole Dia. 4e I Fluid NONE Notes ti Conditions shown r.prewnt our observ.tioni et the time and locedon of the field work, mediffe.tI►n bawd on lab tuts, enalye4, end geeloglsel and engineering lodgement. This oo ditiv may not exist at other time. and location, wen In close proximity. This Information wee gathered es pert of our kw,stlpetlen, end we we net reeponalble let any Um of ht,r sststlen information by others. �'`" i •.• r. �- fr'� •'•■ r7 11\ In I rt FNS GONG. MON. w/L -6,417 MeICAPAty Rp frAvto w %vAuvE T 7ro. �o0' A 1, 134 p' M�,1J WI DTI.I = cio. G lAfGL - 7,20o a' MILAN w \eT14 = 82.8' NoTE : PA.gC e1-e2 4., a, 4- cA 4 - L - tQUALLY ‘ INTh4 GOAT CK Ol'E?4.T1ON KNNTtNANGE y 4 PA1K AND /Os- i - Go1 iTRUCTION OF 20' EA A, I;4 G I . ANN& w/TtE 1o' u r�L4TY � 'MT rZ Cd L G- I 7; 200 ti MEA1,1 WI 2 CSI . --- Maion File in Vault Direction: N Scale: I'' 40' Stamp: Page I of 2 f AIZC L G - 7,200 & MEAN WV = G,3. f h rO J4) #1 V41. LASOw1 fJWRES 8117196 P Surveyor's Certificate: 4 ` ' -=`� Land Sur , � .. Short Plat correct! represents a survey ma� me or This Short P under my direction in conformance with the requirements of ap- propriate State statute and has been prop rly staked. Name: ,Eigede C'' SP,tve Date: tz. 6 '° Certificate No. iea'.ket. S• Short Plat Number , 'rout J o b No. 100 - d 4- 14.441N - 10 4 P1.117. 4. � Mop1 HOTe 1 e•cuALLY A-teze IN THE ccxv oF orEKATIoN, MAIRNENANce ANI2/ RE- • c-oNtv lo 0 THE- (2.d rdartEt'"' 47 '1,134 13 ' Mt.414 4111 C7' - 0.00 Me.AN Wit z 89 -. 8 % -r-mt t.Z&CNI7 • - 11.1...17EK FrWl!l • .- . a r I KAFLe J 1.1 1991 •• • • G 1 • 7;200 ' MEAN WPM- C,01 EN V•I a. (r„A. F. 1-1Y1 vs/RAL.Ve • rcw ur L\ -e i •-%7 • 1(dl 164 1 INC 1)1:P Ices' ci • ino 114 • • 1 118 180 - 7 ) ( 2-00 I (24 meAtNi ‘2.1 MoN. wp--E■417 -4" RP% (P.A.Vep I vi %were: MA)N II o Q. 11.00 la - 18e, V10%to 110 Vek a 0- 1°1 tand Surveyor's Certificate: This Short Plat correctly represents a survey y me or under my direction in conformance with the requirements of ap- propriate State statute and has been pro erly staked. Name' 6/404E a .5 Date; 12 " S" e )k Certificate No g . " 9 45c6 Short Plat Number 4Tret.if rtiricx4r47 olo No. 1009 -00* 1042. e. ‘o,tiet-} -30 z AAvh#11.1 4 405,4 FWD czosiG. Mco4. vi/0“Itele CrAVetij • MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Staff FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist - DCD RE: SAO Report Procedures DATE: December 16, 1991 I would like to re- iterate some of the procedures related to sensitive area studies. To date, the administrative waivers to performing studies have been limited to the geotechnical requirements for identifying and assessing "areas of potential geologic instability ". The uses described in TMC 18.45.080 are listed as activities causing minimum impacts and probably would justify a study waiver. The SAO requires an applicant to perform those studies needed to identify and evaluate the potential or existing sensitive area and its protective buffer if either are on or in close proximity to the subject property. The waiver portion of this section specifically allows the DCD Director to review and agree with the sensitive alea classification without the need for related studies. However, in most cases to insure there will be no detrimental impacts to the sensitive area and buffer, a boundary delineation of wetland, watercourse, or sensitive slope must be completed for the site plan. The Procedures section (TMC 18.45.060) states that any application involving land use and sensitive areas will have the location of the sensitive area and buffer indicated on the submitted plans. Certain procedural items in this section may be waived by the DCD Director if the size and complexity of the project does not warrant study or action. To summarize this memo, I have listed my interpretations of the SAO report procedures. 1) Because the majority of Tukwila's wetlands and watercourses, inventoried or not, are not accurately mapped, it is important to require a professional delineation and survey. TMC 18.45.020 - F., 1. requires the sensitive area study. 2) A written report is needed and at a minimum should include the purpose, methodology, results, and any data of the investigation. Acceptable report criteria has been written as a handout (attached). Having consistency and fairness to all applicants will support the staff and Ordinance. 12/16/91 Memo Page 2 Some projects may be small or the development plan may not affect the sensitive area so that a study waiver is warranted. In this case TMC 18.45.020 -.F., 2 applies and if the DCD Director is in agreement, the project proposal would not be required to submit a sensitive area study or be subject to the standard requirements. Ordinance No. 1608 amended SAO and reinstated the. SEPA Categorical Exemptions for some projects such as single family, short subdivision, and certain utility permits. However, all land use projects are subject to the standards or intent of the SAO. TMC 18.45.060, General states that all permits requiring some kind of land use review shall have the location of any sensitive areas and buffers on the site be indicated on the plan. Please refer questions to Jack or myself for the 12/31/91 Planner's meeting. Leschi Trading Company, Inc. • P•O.:Box 22701 • Seattle, WA 98122 FAX 3 • 790, C � 1a i r 1 1 , � To: :Jack Pace • . k Senior Planner, Tukwila From:.. David Hawkins 00 � t.S . 'Date: be 1, fj ,' ', r Date • Deceember 11, 199 , . 4 � .� I aril' a •revision - Of' . plat 'filing including the maintenance agreement Mr. ...Fraser-,-requested,- and • the surveying "triangulation ", reportfrom our ,engineersc,.. establishing 'vi sibi;.li ty from the entry,. to "•Lot •Cato ' meet standar • requirements. I .`am al so . attaching • a copy, .of the "eng i neers letter ' we .p.rovided.y at our last ,providing the,.• i m nfora,tion :the. "geo -tec" ' activities -you :al so,' -requ i red:.: .;That .letter 'stated that, "the 'initial on -site inspection (i'ndi.cated no , signs:::o.f potential geol ogoc i n s t a b i l i t y " . I n. the meeti n wit h ; -th'e geo •tech ".engineer Mr., :Amjad, the morning•followang; the •'meeti�ng between •: you and us, we were told that`preliminary , r:esults :from :the ';5 0' .` .. •. core - sample of . the bank confirmed that position. They reported that the hill was . of- 30' of. glacia, till, a layer of clay, . and sand under the clay,'. There :was evidence of . minor slippage. in.•the .clay Level. But a:s'that occurred at least 2 : million years ago , it did .not ind i cate . an p roblem. " Mr. Amjad had attempted to have his writtenL:report' available tomorrow for 'you. However,. it.: customarily takes . at. least 2 weeks after . drilling to.. produce that. fi nal ;document',. an d`: 'it wi il not be ready Until. next. As 'a r.esu l t, he suggested :. that you contact him to verify. our. report - to .yo u, obtain his s confirmation' that -these four ,hots •are l b'ui l d.abl e`, and preven further delay in' ` filing. ' the "sshort ...plat:;;:(82.1080) :;, Finally,' wi'th_.reference to . :th'e: ' rlocation an:d. t- bac.k on L`o C, we request that you at . that house location,; as o'ur architect has proposed to ..Locate: it, , unemcumber":ed •by Wi 1 son's arbitrary " standards The :,:front yard wiI '.;be the 50;' west side of the .house:' The back': y.ar;d.' wi 11: be:.the 30' ,east `s,ide1 of the house including .the automobile en;tr•y. ,;:..The ide`yard;:•on the south side, of the house,:. in addition . th:e 5' .easement.. granted King County .between :the::lot 'Thine a.nd th`e: existing sidewalk, is, drawn as allowing- '1;2'. to the house and 10' to the roofline, which meets your nor.mal.,`tide yard req.u 7' .ti1S,�t. it! •iii.YF''• li .oJ w ' F j n !"��._..� !• . ±.'1 • CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD, TUKWILA, H A SHINGTON 98188 TO: Darren Wilson FROM: Phil Fraser DATE: 12/6/91 PHONE g (2061 433.1800 Can L. FauDusra. Mayor M E M O R A N D U M SUBJECT: Leschi Trading Company - Revised Proposal - Comments for 12/5/91 D.R.C. The alternative providing for Lots A, B and C -1 by common access to Macadam Road is acceptable to Pubic Works. Private drive to have 30' wide easement. Applicant's substitution of asphalt for grasscrete is okay with Public Works if properly engineered. Review with Fire Department the driveway width. Requested is a soils study analyzing slope stability for sites to insure life of project: a. Single family foundation design recommendations b. Stablized steep slopes c. Potential seizmic conditions are fully mitigated by structural walls; drainage systems; building structures Identify all maintenance /construction /repair /monitoring easements for appropriate utilities, including sewer, water, storm lines that cross property lines (show in writing and on map. Provide Traffic Engineer's triangulation analysis for proposed access on proposed Lot C onto S. 144th Street. Take into consideration the following information: 12/5/91 Staff Report by John'Pierog. Also, as part of triangulation study, identify modification to land topography for safe access. xc. John Pierog Read file Nick Olivas Development File: Leschi Trading Company Short Plat Attachment (1) Phil:a:leschi Job No. 1009 -095 November 27, 1991 Dave Hawkins Legal Description - Before the Short Plat Subdivision: Beginning at a point 60 feet West of the Southeast corner of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, said point being on the West side of the road known as the James Clark Road No. 2; thence running West along the South line of said Section 15, a distance of 424 feet; thence North 73.6 feet; thence Northeasterly 428 feet to a point on the West line of said James Clark Road No. 2, a distant 132 feet of North of the Point of Beginning; thence South along the West line of said road to Point of Beginning; Except the South 10 feet of East 150 feet and South 20 feet of West 274 feet thereof heretofore conveyed to King County for road by Deed recorded under Recording Number 1158465; and Except that portion Deed to King County for roads recorded under Recording Number 6575305. Legal Description - Lot A - After the Short Subdivision: Beginning at a point 60 feet West of the Southeast corner of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, said point being on the West side of the road known as the James Clark Road No. 2; thence running West along the South line of said Section 15, a distance of 100 feet; thence North 30.0 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence North 02 °10'42" East 58.23 feet; thence North 28 °56'55" East 36.11 feet; thence North 84 °20'09" East 84.52 feet to a point on the West line of said James Clark Road No. 2; thence South 02 °10'42" West 77.00 feet along the said West line to a point of curve; thence along a curve to the right having a radius of 25 feet thru a central angle of 90° an arc distance of 39.27 feet to a point on the North line of South 144th Street; thence North 87 °49'18" West 75.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning, containing an area of 9,133 square feet. 1 Legal Description - Lot B - After the Short Subdivision: Beginning at a point 60 feet West of the Southeast corner of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, said point being on the West side of the road known as the James Clark Road No. 2; thence running West along the South line of said Section 15, a distance of 184.40 feet; thence North 30.0 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence North 02 °10'42" East 96.60 feet; thence North 84 °20'09" East 101.62 feet; thence South 28 °56'55" West 36.11 feet; thence South 02 °10'42" West 58.23 feet to a point on the North line of South 144th Street; thence North 87 °49'18" West 84.40 feet to the True Point of Beginning containing an area of 7,200 square feet. Legal Description - Lot C -1 - After the Short Subdivision: Beginning at a point 60 feet West of the Southeast corner of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, said point being on the West side of the road known as the James Clark Road No. 2; thence running West along the South line of said Section 15, a distance of 288.05 feet; thence North 30.0 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence North 02 °10'42" East 62.33 feet; thence North 84 °20'09" East 104.63 feet; thence South 02 °10'42" West 76.60 feet to a point on the North line of South 144th Street; thence North 87 °49'18" West 103.65 feet to the True Point of Beginning containing an area of 7,200 square feet. Legal Description - Lot C - After the Short Subdivision: Beginning at a point 60 feet West of the Southeast corner of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, said point being on the West side of the road known as the James Clark Road No. 2; thence running West along the South line of said Section 15, a distance of 424.00 feet; thence North 30.0 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence North 02 °10'42" East 43.60 feet; thence North 84 °20'09" East 137.09 feet; thence South 02 °10'42" West 62.33 feet to a point on the North line of South 144th Street; thence North 87 °49'18" West 135.95 feet to the True Point of Beginning containing an area of 7,200 square feet. 2 (: SURVEY NAME: HAWKINS SHORT PLA1 TRAVERSE NAME: BOUNDARY CLOSURE S PT BEARING HORIZ DIST (feet) 1 S84x20'09"W 2 3 8 S84x20'09"W S84x20'09"W 4 • S84x20'09"W S 2x10'42"W 6 887x49'18"E 7 S97x49'18"E S97x49'18"E 9 S87x49'18"E 10 N47x10'42'`E 12 N47x10'42"E 12 N 2x10'42"E 13 N 2x10'42"E CLOSURE TYPE: Closed CLOSING PTS: Beginning Ending (actual) Ending (correct) 84.520 ERROR SUMMARY: Relative 1 : 17239 Angular na Linear 0.0570 (ft) Northing* -0.0068 (ft) Easting* -0.0566 (ft) Elevation* 0.0000 (ft). Bearing* S83x07'25"W * from: correct ending pt • to: actual ending pt 101.620 104,630 137.290 43.600 135.950 103.650 84.400 75.000 35.355 R=-25.000 L=39.270 0.000 77.000 0.000 BOUNDARY CLOSURE Loop ADJUSTMENT RULE: Compass rule PT NORTHING 1 10000.0000 ? 9999.9932 ? 10000.0000 boU0 Y J4 AWV414 4 9 -�~~~ ~ N rou1 ��� �� � � ,^^ ^�� 0 «��~ �~~ ����� ^" ���' ����� »��^� �8-KV ~-~^~ � « " " ~ TRAVERSE SUMMARY: Length: * 983.0153 (ft) ** 986.9299 (ft) Points: * 13 Area: • 30555 (sq ft) 0.701 (acres) ** 30733 (sq ft) •**. 0.706 (acres) * Beginning pt to Ending pt ** Includes Curved Sides EASTING 10000.0000 9999.9434 10000.0000 ELEVATION 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SURVEY NAME: HAWFINS SHORT PLAT TRAVERSE NAME: PARCEL A CLOSURE S PT BEARING HORIZ DIST (feet) 1 2 4 5 7 7 8 ? 1 ��~� 1-1AW ^ o U 0 U �� K�^ ' oU Nov. ��x�- 8~0 ,���", Jp S84x20'09"W 84.520 S28x56'55"W 36.110 S 2x10'42"W 58.230 887x49'18oE 75.000 N47x10'42"E 35.355 R=-25.000 L=39.270 N47x10'42"E 0.000 � N 2x10'42"E 77.000 N 2x10'42"E 0.000 __'_________ CLOSURE TYPE: Closed Loop ADJUSTMENT RULE: Compass rule ERROR SUMMARY: TRAVERSE SUMMARY: • Relative 1 : 55857 Length: * 366.2153 .(ft.) Angular na ** .370.1299 (ft) Linear 0.0066 (ft) Points: *. 8 Northing* -0.0027 (ft) Area: 8955 (sq ft) Easting* 0.0060 (ft) 0.206 (acres) Elevation* 0.0000 (ft) ** 9134 (sq ft) Bearing* S65x20'47"E ** 0.210 (acres) * from: correct ending pt * Beginning pt to Ending pt to: actual ending pt ** Includes Curved Sides CLOSING PTS: PT NORTHING EASTING ELEVATION Beginning 1 10000.0000 10000.0000 0.0000 Ending (actual) ? 9999.9973 10000.0060 0"0000 Ending (correct) 7 10000.0000 10000.0000 0.0000 K SURVEY NAME: HAWKINS SHORT PLAT TRAVERSE NAME: PARCEL B CLOSURE . S PT BEARING HORIZ DIST (feet) . 1 2 4 5 6 S84x20'09"W S'2x10'42"W S87x49^18"E N 2x10'42"E N28x56'55"E N28x56'55"E 101.620 76.600 84.400 58.230 36.110 0.000 ` U �o �* V�/ v°_���~�— � �~— ��~��~�~-_�°wV~~ .~. X u��_��~��r8 0�� )4Awk—iti* —� ,~~o`�~ v �� A "U 1001-0.01 ��� _ . " � w �wov~ �'�~c�~, o. w vv A ~KK��� ~ �"~ ' �` '�� E TYPE: Closed e� �oo ADJUSTMENT Compass � _ ��w��un os p RULE: rule ERROR SUM'ARY: :TRAVERSE SUMMARY: Relative 1 : 57273 Length: * 356.9600 (ft) Angular na ** 356.9600 (ft) Linear 0.0062 (ft) Points: * 6 • � Northing* • 0.0038 (ft) Area: 7200 (sq ft) ' Easting* -0.0049 (ft) � 0.165 (acres) � . __- ' �� -- 'Elevatidn* 0.0000 (ft).` ** ' 7200. '(sq-ft) • • Bearing* N52x17'25"W ** ' '0.165 (acres) * from: correct ending pt * Beginning pt to Ending pt ` to actual ending pt . ** Includes Curved Sides CLOSING PTS: PT NORTHING EASTING ELEVATION Beginning 1 10000.0000 10000.0000' 0.0000 Ending (actual) ? 1000.0038 9999.9951 0.0000 Ending (correct) 7 10000.0000 10000.0000 0.0000 SURVEY NAME: HAM INS SHORT PLAT TRAVERSE NAME: PARCEL C-1 CLOSURE S PT BEARING HORIZ DIST (feet) 1 4 � 5 S84x20'09oW 104.630 S 2x10'42"W 62.330 S87x49'18"E N 2x10'42"E 76.600 N 2x10'42"E 0.000 CLOSURE TYPE: Closed Loop ERROR SUMMARY: Relative 1 : 49968 Angular , Linear ' 0.0069 (ft) Northing* -0.0068 (ft) Easting* -0.0016 (ft) Elevation* 0.0000 (ft) Bearing* S13x40'33"W * from: correct ending pt actuar CLOSING PTS: Beginning Ending (actual) Ending (correct) PT 1 NORTHING 10000.0000 9999.9932 10000.0{N0 ��~ ��K ���.~~�~ �.� v } m1' �� 8 U PLAT, °n�~�:��-~v ���x�u�,~����� j , m ` ��«�v v��� � ~ 347.2100 �� ���»��� PARCEL C-1 CLOSURE ==============... = ..... ==========�== ADJUSTMENT RULE: Compass rule TRAVERSE SUMMARY: • Length: * ** Points: * Area: EASTING 10000~0000 9999.9984 10000.0000 (ft) (ft) 7200 (sq ft) 0.165 (acres) ** 7200 (sq ft) ** 0.165 (acres) * Beginning pt to Ending pt - ** - Ihtludes Curved Sides ELEVATION 0.0000 0,0000 0"0000 ====_==================-==================== '-- '� ` sap Ts paA..m3 sapn'[nu1 ** a.d Fauxpu3 cad. 4d EuTuutF3c (_sa..a.:aY) '291'0 . • ** (1+ bs) 00Z/ ** (sa -mv)• g9T "0 • ( 3 Vs) O0ZL * • (4,+) OOL T " 6 L'_ . . (4+) OOLT "6L% * .L1415uaTI -1 k NWfS 3SW.JAdy1 0000 "0 00001'0 NOTrdA3 a inJ s swdm03 ^31n`J 1N3W1sf fCId r 0000 "00001 .017V6'6666 0000'00001 Sh.f I l SV3 ct��a..Id s=Fuio,d L1 ' YQ .A0N b0-- 4n&.1 1\71.c1 41\11,1 /Wgrt r��'10 i ,�J , '1] /D& 7 d J 0000"00001 0866"6666 C)000'C)O00T SNIH1JON 4d BuTpua '[L►7 ._)e :o4 4d Eau cpua 40a.aJOD !WO-4 .. (4+) 0000"0 *ua',r.4v?Aa [s (1) 09gc:) "0• -- (4.}) 2100 — (4!•). 09gO "O door pasca TO S.122 C6 " ci' 1 • 009"217 J ("1._7c).,1.,10 :7) EL.I 'C pl1"-1 ([ t r► y-a e) ►a LI I. ; , x_1.3 )U 'L l..i (..► ':: %i as t=l Sid Smi:r. S013 5La'1:4sv3 OuTL1.1..AoN at�aL.►r1 _.I\? 1r bud 69L9 : T. , aA1:70 1aJ A'Jri 4Wns HO`.�'.33 :3,:::IAJ. AWS013 3msO10 0 133ydd ==========—=========....=='= (1-aa }) • 1STG MOH 3,dnSO13 3 133 J id M„6O•, Oc,xti8S T. SNINU:Se Id S ? 3WdhI 1S3AVHI _Ldld 1,JOHS SNX ::IMVH :3WVN l.3Ains Leschi Trading Company, Inc. • P.O. Box 22701 • Seattle; WA 98122 • FAX (206),329.7554 •i (206) 720 -7140 To: Jack. Pace Senior. Planner City of Tukwila From David Hawkins Date: 11- 25 -'91 Subject: Our concerns about the delays ' .on -: The . Brummer's H i l l . Cottage ;Pro j . Land altering misreper.esentat°ions the owners by the. city • Attached to this list of points is our view of what has,.:: stopped this project this past six weeks or so, compounding. ".:: many months of delays already. The first cause involves - :misinterpretations.and misinformation. provided property owners like us, on land altering authority. On 'this site, the city complained 'when we were. simply - surveying the site last summer. Further . i t 'falsely told us we -could not clear the blackberry bushes and other brush necessary t obtain accurate surveys. The land altering alternanc clear'ly. allows brush to be cleared on land as. long as the rush is not cut to the ground. The city falsely .tol us we had no right to clear brush under any circumstan Because the city information was so patently silly, 'we ignored those claims about clearing what is now lot A. And based' on what we found to be a practically level lot, we were provided a waiver from sensitity concerns by the city council to build on- this lot and file our short plat. Recently, when the city claimed we could not move the fill. dirt for our water retention system on Lot A from lot C, even with a permit to move 300 yards, we then worked •on.'.the 'Lot . B portion, and cleared that area, establishing another buildable_ site. :- • Just as our original clearing established that this property'.. - Lot C -1 to the east and north —east, perfectly buildable without any affect on the bank itself. Further excavations. and observations at that location have established that the soil ,i's like pit run, very solid and firm, and there is no history of "`. slide or land movement on the slope. • Oth words,' misinformation... "f.r:om ` the :ci.ty `'Gn, ° 'c•l a earing --- brush .on this property :almo's.t'.c,ost us: an .entir:e buildabl;e'^si'.t and':caused the city •rto : concerns about • :,areas to this property .with very' comer. essed,. 1:i.mi ted..an.d'` :: - .unnaffected. slop'e., on *.a s mal l : perce of ;t :'prop _ We have .al so. been ' mi sinformed that. .dirtwor.k':invol =less than50 yards, excavations' - less than5 :feet ':.and ,f.i l:l :'..;.::.:;: *less .than .3 • feet, 'could • .not be performed. Someone :in...th.e needs to read this.. ordinance and s ; '. misinforming:.property owners about what .can cannot be done. '. and. `promised''b.ythe '_contai n:`' l the.i.d'emands III.. No central' coordination o•:.be our.;f.i:'na _`rew- i's : .and 'But . und;er. no circumstances 'does the city, : have ' any a'uthori ty override 'the city waiver from non- existant sensitivity - 'concerns' for the 'mere :;filing of .this plat'and construction ;of Lot A, to delay this project any further. We will most certainly 'comply, as our last year and a half :.of suffering with .the city establishes so well, . and .meet'any •and 'all PRD require- ;`ments ;on the plan the lots remaining. Of course ; as .I have - di scussed over . and over through this Aim and destructive history of false. 'starts,. we : are shuffled .. -f.rom department ' to- : department, _ and required 'to submit applications after application,'and meet demand after demand,. and'. still the ° city- has • not: - recorded'. our . short plat. The single instance of _ :coordination,. occu.r-ed when,' the permit for: was granted. But that was s.hort- and inaffective because the short plat was not r.ecorded.,, IV. 'Conclusion. In,short, we,request that the city'review:the 'land altering * ordi nanc.e and •pr.operly. inform property owners like ourselves of our rights a.nd /or supply us with copies we can,read ourselves for self - defense;. stop changing the operations when so- called final criteria have been met; and have a central authority that can terminate.these endless 'circles, of confusion. And for now, we. again request that the short plat be recorded immediately, 'with no further demands from the PRD. world imposea on this project improperly and prematurely. After our waiver was:prov.ided by the city council'as long ago. as • .February, 1991. -We-are more than happy to handle the PRD in the next phase. • CC: Mayor Gary Van Dusen • Leschi Trading Company, Inc: • P.O. Box 22701:• Seattle,: WA 98122 •FAX'(206).329- 7554:•.(2 CITY OF::TUKWI.LA: To: 'Gary Van D ,Mayor, .. C ty of Tukwi F ' David Hawkins Date: 'November. 19.91. Subject: • Fi l ing of short plat. for The rummer: Hill. Cottage Project, .located . 144th :and MacAdams. roa .,:Introduction 'Perhaps my 'very reluctant : aagr .ee ment to ::meeting ,with your; :senior planner . Jack. Pace', rather"—than. you, . had some meri But' listening to Tukwil"a's. side. o"f this.. only half .the 'story. I am requesting a second me'et'in,g..w.ith Mr.. Pace .to:,discuss' ..our side, _the side I- tailed' to: meet wit:h y.ou " 'abou.t,*..and.,.. h:;. am copying him.with t his note. The reason is quite simple. For over ,18. : now, e wehave.., allowed the city of Tukwila : to ' delay. and,. keep us al 1 :bogged down '.in it's lack of coordinati confus:ion,experi.me.nts., . ;and =., min.uti.a. Now it. is time to . honour :. the variance. :I,. was : by the city council from sens;itity concerns", to :`have short : recorded and construct a house. on. Lot A. Until that short plat is.. recorded, `the. f.unds;,to..bui;ld A -will not be dispersed. We requested::our'van::iance sensitivity concerns, precisely so that recordin c,ou.ld .be comple:te and allow us to , build on at ` least the first lot. In'fac't du.e.. to: the past 30 :day delay* in . th,at.'process,_':a;n, important portion. : : our financing has pulled o'ut, the job is and the :r could be terminated if this. does not turn around I I . Summary of the meeting today :. A. For the record, I will review my; u nderstanding of '.the poin addressed in our meeting today. letter 1. We went through the _.. not receive now two weeks 'late. Mr ". Frazer went; over his; improvements the work we finished November 6, 1991',. absent any speci fic information, in. this letter.` we were j' ustcop.ied .on.. We will;' be giving him his written; "plan "'for'the si.mple he discussed, tomorrow; and the.' site 'work will . ha.ve .been:;_ completed, by the first of next —week:. *Mr Pace's extremely revealing 'comment , today that about -3.0.: days ' ago, the sensitiv:i,ty ordinance, and . .PRD proces's,e.s, were putt in plac `by the city,. clearly explains 'why''Mr.. Wilson <the,n started'.cha'ngin' the `demands by the city ' so- :rad.i once again.,''.in':h, :; • characteri'sticall,y pi.e'ce. bypie'ce ou.t . ,of • c ontext, , . " so frustrated our ' :project ' :once: more,, a f Kese;;weeks The demands ,center around siltation considerations,: ,and .in Our- opinion, 'as the people who work .oh 'site ; :, these: demands wi.1.1. have' absolutely no affect oh any siltation whatsoever on -,the. :(Siltation is a nonexi stant ,threat to :,a.ny: drainage site anyway, a: total non - issue.) But :we: wil,l'.comply,`, builders always obedien:tly. do,' and because we have complied; ;with :everything the . city has demanded for ::a year and.. a 'half,, and: we 'acre not entirely exhausted yet. 2.` The balance of the .meet ng was : , consumed': with .whit: i n- affect are application of PRD requirements . to the short plat This,PRD ; is . totail.y'hew to us, and we 'do`not*disagree; :application. . However apply it to-the: short -plat process, and to Lot A is in viol ation of .the variance .we" obtained: front- t:he: City "council excluding: us from- sens,tivit y: concerns':to' complete': those two processes.:" As the atta : : states, that;` wa'i'ver:, was to :al l"ow us, "to apply for a short-.plat that Would 'include a >l nec.essaryr, SEPA processes abd - required , environmental. :perm as_ described ec:t to the ap_pll i cant f i.l i ng an °aareement to .conform to _t e , finally adopted SAp Now, we assume that you are now applying • th'e', PRD process under 'the "required environmental permits " - phraise, "or some:such nonsense. The silliest, thing' about till's entire `busi'ness, i` the building .sites 'in - world of residential construc'tion';,f.or all intensive purposes, on this project; are:: almost level. T.hatr alone excludes these sites, from sensitivity concerns. Additionally, our site excavatioins have` :e:stablished that the concrete structure is only a' :retaining_ t`ank,:.th:at that is no well or water source on the site, and' that the '"on.l'y. ,.wat'er...', considerations come from runoff from under` and from the hill above, 'coupl,ed with .clay: top: soil on a small portion; of site that does not pert. As the drawings we have . completed , establish",* normal storm '': drain provisions connecting to our water. Control -facility. addresses the runoff, and we will incorporate.•lan,dscaping • provisions for the yards for percolation, .when 'ad,dressing: those provisions are not.. so premature. 4 . For . the record, Mr. Frazer made e n:n i oc;ent,..error'`o f.. stating that the city , a'pp'roval . o .,street, entry to Lot: C was based on just a 2' cut' thr,ouh the burm: on , 144th, and.;the . location requires a'. much larger; cut,.. The location ^.was moved "sli:ghtly,. easterl . y,,; ",to allow - for : • driveway,turna,rou'nd- only av ai lable . f:rom,the..:eas`t . side "of`: th'e house. The n'. • th "e .b.u i s : exactly the .same as in origi nal Jocat'ion. • IV.. Resolution h•11.' The owner: /builder /developer' s:id "e :• A. First, let us address the-.PRD foul up. We first ra into :,this. some,. 6 Weeks ago •we asked .:Mr....'Wilson::f�r• -'comf i rmati on that, as . he had p.r,omi 'us, :: th`e short ;pl a`t..process had'' :b.een finalized.,; This. committment'.was -.Made 'when that ,the, only remaining - task fo,r.' : ',us: to complete :was'.not'i o f the , neighbors. That was' ;do;ne'.`;immed.i ately: To':our utter amazement, he- stated; that., had to supply. 6::sets of new :engineering drawings- w'i landscaping on those dr. awi:ngs, and provide the. appl i cat :for .the PRD, - .0S -we "• already paid the fee. • At. our meeting November 6, :..1991, . with Mr. W;i lso'n an`d. Mr, Frazer, attempted to deliver the ninth: set .of.revis;io`ns:.`f.r -om the `engineer .containing .the'' l andscapi ng ‘ pl ans, and the PRD application. He refused to accept „them" then, until, :they.. included • several' _other new demands clearly ' a'risin'g ; out` of the: PRD' Those demands` ha -ve been reiterated 'now,.: at' our meet�ing B . Then,: in the apparent belief that :the 'citywas having, prob.l' ems .' processing this because we : ''hay.e: not' been getting what they need 'to them,' Mr. Pace suggested that, provision of concerns by next Wednesday., would 'response .from the ci two: weeks from tomorrow. Then, .presum 'a.bly,;,.we::c•ould:look • forward t "another round of talks and eng.i'neerin taking' ':us wel into the second year of • d:el ays.. (In n th.i. s World', lawyers : .can ' : :t hold a candle to engineers.) We agreed to meet. all the :demand's 'city ma de; today, a's w e always have, as soon ,as humanly.•possibie. the city should m " eet the firs r e q uest we•. "mad In return, q the request the city council felt Wa•s;re_asonable and provided in• ',February, •1991. .We . are requesting the 7final signatures and filings and whatever else is: invoi.u'ed,, so. the short plat. can be recorded and finalized : this week. * What the city `fail,s to : understand, is,.•that everyt.i change the game, we must.obtain:'re.vis ion ; from : " our . .; en who;; '. though .'originally' very res now appear :totally burned ou :by thi.s,' the ninth and tenth'.revis,ions•- -on such - a ,simp;le: lit°;tle . 'project; ' and.`u.nable to- responit in . lessf than sev'eral..weeks, . proba . due. to' th;eir, ::pre:fe�rence..to. ,devote time o p;r ojects more li,kel to obt in ..a r•.oval,'in; other: Tannin de artments H ence Y' ' PP: . ��p�.. 9. p � .increases i n.'d ay, not to� , iti'On t'heenor.mou ; engi; :nears expense In. the.` process of . review t s , applicat.i`on the ind'ividuaT .houses • on the: rem'a ni..ng three '.lo.ts: the ;results of ur.ther -PR req.uirement's, cur•rent;ly 'u;nder ,.ia s ussi'on, can :be takei in,to.consider,ati,on:"by city a't their ; leisure.:- :;:The,bui;l'ding, permit .appl, i cat.i on for "the house on ;Lot .0 wi.l.l be prov�i'd a'fte:r.: Thanks;givin.g. However,••: he, ftnancing construction'''o.f - :C'ot A,;and sh "o rt :.plat:,should .not.be held up on day longer `;bec,ause of these,= ne'w: PRO reguirements. I`f: there ;wa :.re;ason ,to harbor any en "ns o n,this property whats oever these delays might have. some justificati But With such a simple str.aig `s ite, • ,`aal :this .`conjuri up `of :ghosts of .swamps S and r eathquakes, re ng "siesmic" and, "geo =tech studies ", g etting too 'ludicrous • for words. • Minutes - Regular Council Meeting February 19, 1991 Page 2 Cnnsent Agenda. can't PUBLIC HEARINGS • Hearing Closed - 8:35 p.m. MOVED BY DUFFIE, SECONDED BY EKBERG, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS SUBMITTED. MOTION CARRIED. The public hearing was opened at 8:10 p.m. Ann Seigenthaler, Assistant Planner, reported that the petitioner has requested the waiver in order to proceed with the environmental review process, the short plat process and also to apply for and obtain building permits for three single family homes. Slopes on the property are identified on the sensitive areas maps as Class II landslide hazard areas. There is also a small watercourse which emanates from a well on•the site that is not identified on the City's sensitive areas maps. The significance it has to the site is unknown at this time. The three houses that are proposed for the site would involve some cut and fill of the slopes. The SEPA review process would address the stability of the slopes as well as the impacts to the watercourse. Buffers addressed in the final SAO would have to be incorporated into this project at a later date. David Hawkins, petitioner, explained that he was working with recycling some of the condemned housing from the airport area. His proposal includes completing the short plat processes and obtaining a building permit for Lot A which is basically level. He stated that his company is buying the property on a contract and has a substantial amount of money tied up in the project. There are no contingencies in the contract. If they are unable to proceed with their project, they will still have to purchase the property. The applicant also owns the houses he plans to move onto the property. Ann Siegenthaler added that Lot A would not fall under the sensitive areas ordinance. Eugene Sprout, consulting engineer for the project, explained the results of a field survey conducted to determine the slopes on the property. The survey revealed that Lot A would have a slope of approximately 6 percent. The second parcel would have a slop:. of about 14 percent; the third parcel has a very steep slope on the east portion, but the on the actual building site, the slope is about 12 percent. The watercourse, which appears to be an artesian well, is located on the third parcel. MOVED BY ROBERTSON, SECONDED BY RANTS, TO GRANT THE WAIVER TO APPLY FOR A SHORT PLAT THAT WOULD INCLUDE ALL NECESSARY SEPA PROCESSES AND OTHER REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS AS DESCRIBED, SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT FILING AN AGREEMENT TO CONFORM TO THE FINALLY ADOPTED SAO.* Councilmember Ekberg inquired whether the waiver would include land clearing and grading. Rick Beeler, Director of Community Development, responded that the waiver would not include these issues. *MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER IS GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS. Council President Robertson explained his reason for making the motion was that the applicant could suffer a significant financial loss if he were denied the waiver. MOVED BY ROBERTSON, SECONDED BY EKBERG, TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO PROCESS AND APPLY FOR A BUILDING PERMIT FOR LOT A AS SUBMITTED, SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT FILING AN AGREEMENT TO CONFORM TO THE FINALLY ADOPTED SAO.* Council President Robertson stated that Lot A would not come under the sensitive areas ordinance if it was a lot be itself. The lot is already cleared and appears to have no significant environmental impact. Again, the applicant would suffer financial loss if denied his request, and there would be no benefit to the City to do so. *MOTION CARRIED. WAIVER IS GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS. CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 P /LONE N (206) 433.1800 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor November 18, 1991 Leschi Trading Company David Hawkins 3601 East Terrace Seattle, Wa. 98122 SHORT SUBDIVISION ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RE: Leschi Trading Company PRD /Short Plat Applications & Land Altering Violation This letter is a summary of our last meeting November 6, 1991 concerning the PRD /Short Subdivision Application for Leschi Trading Company. We met with David Hawkins of Leschi Trading Company to resolve outstanding issues with regards to the PRD /Short Subdivision Application for Leschi Trading Company. Currently, there is a Short Subdivision Application being process. In order to complete this project several items are still needed. You are required to submit a PRD Application. The items needed for completion are broken down by the Short Subdivision and PRD Application and Land Altering Violation: 1. The existing site plan is not accurate. The developer's land surveyor shall review this information and revise the site plan with the current and final configurations accordingly, for Lots B & C. 2. Provide a maintenance agreement for the joint access road 3. Lot C shall be segregated from the open space easement. 4. Identify the boundary of the open space easement for lot C. 5. Place surveyor marks where existing foundation and driveway location relative to the property lines on the map page for Lot A. This information is relative to the setback requirements provided under the original building permit. PAGE TWO PRD ADDITIONAL INFORMATION LESCHI TRADING COMPANY 1. Provide additional landscaping with a combination of Evergreen /Delicious Trees for all 3 (three) lots. 2. This plan shall be stamped by a Washington State Landscape Architect. 3. The setbacks for lot C; front 20 -feet garage; 15 -feet house; 8 -feet side yard; 10 -feet rear yard. 4. You proposed to add one additional lot. A Geo- Technical Report shall be provided to support this proposal. 5. There is a possibility with the change to add one additional lot that the SEPA Checklist may need to be revised and the determination issued in September 1991 be rescind to MDNS (Migitated Determination Of Non - Significant) . LAND ALTERING VIOLATION /PUBLIC WORKS CONCERNS Accordingly, to the Public Works Department there were some land altering violations. The corrections shall be submitted into the Public Works Office immediately. The corrective measures for this unauthorized land altering activity shall include the following: A. Provide a temporary erosion control plan developed and transmitted to Public Works for review and approval by Friday, November 15, 1991. A temporary erosion control devices shall be inserted on the site immediately. B. Provide a schedule for either restoring the site to the original conditions or provide a permanent erosion control to Public Works along with the revised site C. The present and future plan submittal shall include a triangulation study by your engineer for any access on to South 144th Street to demonstrate adequate stopping sight distance will be required. D. Failure to comply with the Land Altering Ordinance and measures for remedy immediately, shall be subject to penalties outlined in Section 6.6 of the Land Altering Ordinance. PAGE THREE Thank You This information is based on the three lot short plat proposal. Additional changes may occur with any new proposals. Should you have any additional questions regarding this matter, please contact our office at 431 -3670. Darren i son Assistant Planner cc: R. Beeler, DCD Director M. Kenyon, City Attorney D. Hawkins, Property Owner LESCHI TRADING COMPANY INFORMATION SHEET Public Works issued a site plan approval letter dated August 29, 1991 for Lot A for the Leschi Trading Development at Macadam Rd. /S. 144th (attached). Per our plan review with the developer's representatives it was understood that even though the 3 lot short plat was not completed, in order to accomodate their time frame to have Lot A go ahead with development, Public Works would approve a site plan limited to the development of Lot A. Also, Public Works would allow Land Altering for both Lot A and only that land altering needed to accomodate for drainage on Lot A. Public Works received a complaint that Leschi Trading Company developer was working off of S. 144th Street and regrading lot C. DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DATE: 11/4/91 INITIATOR: PUBLIC WORKS DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE /INCIDENT: ACTION TAKEN: Phil Fraser requested Greg Villenueva to review the approval letter, investigate the matter and if land altering activity was occurring beyond Lot A (or associated with Lot A), a Stop Work order informing the developer he must be posted to stop his activities. Greg Villanueva made a phone call to the developer and left a message regarding the concern of unathorized land clearing. At that time a Stop Work order was posted and the contractor was very pleasent and accomodating. Greg Villanueva discovered the developer was grading out Lot C and posted a Stop Work Order (copy attached). Greg informed the contractor he must limit his Land Altering activity work to Lot A. At that time I informed the contractor that further violations could resort to police action and possibly a fine. No threatening words were used nor intended. Again the contractor was pleasent and accomodating. The developer called requesting the removal of the stop work notice since it was an embarrassment to his development. Greg Villanueva responded that since the developer was aware of the purpose of the stop work notice that the relocating of the stop work notice to less conspicuous location would be acceptable. Please note at this time the developer was pleasent and accomodating. The developer requested a meeting with Phil Fraser. Phil met with the developer on 10/30/91. Phil informed the developer his site plan approval was limited to the work for one single family dwelling only Page 2 associated with the construction of a single family dwell•ng or controlling of drainage for Lot A only. That he can not be g ading and preparing for the foundation and access for Lots B & C [the short plat process is not accomplished to date]. It appeared to Phil Fraser and he so stated that the developer was trying to get the grading done for unapproved lot C since he h his contractor up at the site [even though Phil made it clear at th- plan submittal time the developer was to limit the site plan develop -nt to Lot A only]. Phil stated that for future lots B and C, Phil expected the de -loper to come in with specific site plans identifying existing and final contours. Included in the site plan for Lot C will be a trian• lation study by their engineer to assure safe stopping sight distance or Lot C will be accomplished by the final contouring. Phil indicate • that the grading activities to date indicate that more grading ay be needed to accomplish a safe and adequate access for lot C. 11/1/91 Public Works was in receipt of the October 30, 1991 letter from Leschi Trading Company (attached). Per Phil Fraser's 1/4/91 telephone conversation with David Hawkins, Mr. Hawkins was t ing to make a case for the fact he was under the 50 cubic yards f his activities on Lot C. (Phil has a problem with this interpretat'on). ACTION ANTICIPATED: Finally, Phil told the representatives per their request to cu ■ black berry bushes, that the cutting of black berry bushes was O.R. nd not covered by Land Altering as long as the bushes were cut abo e the ground line and the land was not denudified. They agreed to co ply. The developer will come in with final short plat plans at Publi' Works Department's next Tuesday meeting. I requested that the de eloper coordinate this with Darren Wilson as Department of Co unity Development is on point for the Short Plat process. The de eloper said he will do so. The City's Public Works inspector will continue to monitor the •ite. Attachments (2) • • • • CC: Mayor. Gary .L Van Dusen Eugene Sp'rout,. Engineers • •• • l eschi Trading Company, Inc. '• P .O. Boz Seattle,.WA'98122 FAX (206)329 =7554 •,(206) 720.7140 • i ..• ',. i'.. Hf,�• •,2 Greg..Vil.lanuev.a; ... : ..:'.:: ... ":;:.: • ;Uti l i'ties :'D pi) art me'n.t j ;:t;ti �':c:E�•_ `Tukwi a's h fn to r - v • Washingto :,,, ea:r.'Mr'•: Vi l 1'a'n.iie'va.;'` • ' Ns We :di sc•us•s - ed • th'i s • • morning after. David and I met :with . M.rr ....Frazer; ,Mr.' .F -razer ; conf.irmed':.:th•at on lot B, we have the right as -property owners ,to •.cl e,ar '•bru'sh on our •'l a•nd : to obtain accurate . .topographi' cal "'i nforrmation; ,for' .engineers,. and to ' :con'struct.. the drainage e' ditch •and';related pond's ', lots :A and B. •• .After= •re the • 'cop•y . :of . ..Tukwila .' O.rdi nance• number 1591 • • yo'u `.pr•ovided ;'us we'• : unab.le•., to understand. :what your • - • :reference "cut "' :;means.: .(•We also have.' difficulty. • • under•tanding• :,your •Irresponsible threats• to our contra:cter • • - - - he :failed ••to • stop work on lot '.B.) • • ...AS..we. discussed : with• : we are in' a' couple of french•. :.: :drai' related. to '.the" control . of water .seeping from the storage tank '.to our ' drainage system. so that portion• of the ,:.'can re : t o ..i t' nal.•..dr•y ..s,tate.. •' And of course,. we are ' • 'diverting that,.• as well as the water .from that storage tank to our control drainage system. • This falls into exemption A, B and C of that ordinance, and • was. included in n-our original permit to complete the drainage system for Lot A. • ..As Mr. Frazer explained to •us, our permit to move 300 yards • •• of dirt: on. our undivided proper•ti,• even. though i is •being used. 'as ,landscape •on what will be lot A,• did not cover moving •the• 'dirt from what will be lot C. Rather:than contest that position, we will wait for the next 'stage of permits to complete that work.. • .. Our engineers are attempting to submit. ..thei r ninth s•et of 'revisions in this past eighteen month period of review by your ' ' off i ces, , i n time for.. your regular meeting next Tuesday. • • • . However,• as your 'work.stoppage on. lot B was entirely uncalled• for,: we will - continue to do our drainage work and .topographical•surveyi:ng there. • Sincerely, David Hawkins • :.:mac .:,�t�►5 trom damage during grading operations. The permittee shall restore to the standards in effect a/ Abe time of the issuance of the permit. Sensitive Areas, their Buffers, ar& public improvements damaged by the permittee's operations. 2.8 AMENDMENT Application for amendment to a permit shall be in written and/or graphic form and may be made at any time through the same process as the original application. Until such time as an amendment is approved by the City, the land - altering activity shall not proceed except in accordance with the Land - Altering Permit as originally approved. 2.9 EXEMPTIONS The following activities are exempt from the application of this Ordinance and do not require a Land - Altering Permit; provided they do not occur in a Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone as defined by the City in the Sensitive Areas Ordinance: • A. Excavations less than five feet in vertical depth or fills less than three feet in vertical depth and involving the removal, deposit or displacement of not more than a total of 50 cubic yards of material for the duration of the entire project. • The stockpiling of less than 50 cubic yards of topsoil, peat, sawdust, mulch, bark, chips or solid nutrients on a site. C. The creation of impervious surfaces OR clearing a cumulative surface area of less than 6,600 square feet. D. Emergency and temporary sandbagging, diking, ditching, filling or similar work during or after periods of extreme weather conditions when done to protect life or property; provided that work undertaken after the period of immediate threat, unless undertaken within a reasonable time and for the purpose of restoring the property to its pre - extreme weather conditions state, shall not be exempt. E. Public Works Improvement Projects and Maintenance Programs shall be exempt from obtaining permits in accordance with this Ordinance but • shall conform in all practices with the intent of this Ordinance. F. Agriculture. G. Commercial Stockpiling Operations which are in existence at the time this ' Ordinance is enacted ABA which involve the stockpiling of materials as a normal part of daily operations shall be exempt from obtaining a Land - Altering Permit; provided that the property owner has obtained written approval from the Public Works Director. 2.10 PERMIT FEE A non - refundable permit fee will be collected at the time of the issuance of a Land - Altering Permit. The permit fee will provide for the cost of; plan review; administration and management of the permitting process; inspections; and, variance and appeals processing pursuant to this Ordinance. A permit fee schedule shall be established by the City Council based upon the relative complexities of land- altering projects, and may be amended from time to time. 2.11 PERMIT ENFORCEMENT If, through inspection, or other means, it is determined that a person engaged in land - altering activity has failed to comply with the approved Land - Altering Plan and/or other permit conditions, any or all of the enforcement actions prescribed in this Ordinance may be initiated. When permit violations are identified a notice of vinlatinn chap . • - STOP WORK POSTED: • . ALL PERSONS ARE HEREBY ORDERED TO AT ONCE * .. •.• ' TO.CONSTR.UCTION $ -ALTERATIONS OR REF ..: THESE PREMISES AT jR. ent, or the removal, Yri‘o ... • Works eoartm or con ealment • notice is punishable by fine and impri-sorma" CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD, TUKWIL.4, WASHINGTON 98188 August 29, 1991 PHONE k (306) 433.1800 Gay L. VanDusr,o, ,11ayor David Hawkins 3601 East Terrace Seattle, WA 98122 RE: Single Family Residence - Tukwila Cottage Site at Leschi Trading Property (1426X Macadam Road Site Plan Approval for Single Family Residence, Lot A Only Dear Sir: 04 The Public Works Department has reviewed and approves the site plan for single family residence (finished floor elevation of 166.0 on attached plan) for the unreplatted total property. This approval is for Public Works Department site plan review purposes only. You are referred to the Tukwila Fire Department, Department of Community Development, Water District No. 125 and Val Vue Sewer District for their separate approvals. All utilities serving this site, including power and phone, must be installed underground per Tukwila Municipal Code 13.08. Please call Denise Millard, Permit Coordinator, at 431 -3672 to have the following permits prepared for pickup: 1. Fire Loop /Hydrant Permit - 1 - 8" Fire Hydrant - CPermit Fee = $25.00) As a requirement of the construction of this single family . residence, the fire hydrant identified on plan as "new hydrant assembly" on South 144th shall be constructed per the City's standards. As this hydrant is serviced by Water District No. 125, permits and approvals to have the hydrant and domestic water meter /service constructed and inspected shall be applied for through Water District No. 125. At the completion of the construction of this hydrant, the developer will be required to formally turn over the hydrant to Water District No. 125. The applicant is referred to Water District No. 125 for their requirements, charges and latecomer's fee. (Refer to Water District No.25 availability letter on file). 2. Sanitary Side Sewer - The applicant is referred to Val Vue Sewer District for their approvals and permitting process including any latecomers fees, .etc., for the construction of the sanitary side sewers on this plan. No permit required from Tukwila. xc 3. Water Meter Permit - The applicant is referred to Water District No. 125 for their approvals, permits and requirements for the installation of the water meter and service line. The City of Tukwila's standards for water service and meter shall also be met. 4. Curb Cut /Access /Sidewalk (Permit Fee = $25.00) Requirement of the City's Fire Department shall also be met with regards to the hammerhead and internal driveway system. The concrete apron and curb and gutter shall be per the City's standard plans and field inspection. 5. Storm Drain permit (Permit Fee = $25.00) Requested is the property owner provide the SSWM bill for parcel no. 152304- 9040 -05 so the City may adjust this for a single family residence billing and change it to Rate .07 for your parcel. This will adjust your account to a flat rate of $30.00 per year after your construction is completed, in our next surface water cycle of billing. 6. Land Altering Permit - 300 Cu. Yds. (Permit Fee = $68.50) This permit is for the earth work portion of the project. Erosion and sedimentation control will comply with the plans. City may require additional measures if erosion and subsequent siltation are not completely contained on site. Please complete the attached Residential Use Certification and forward a copy to METRO. If you have any questions do. not hesitate to call me at 433 -0179. Phil Fraser Senior Engineer Public Works Department Enclosures: Application, Plan, Metro Form Greg Villanueva, City Inspector Permit Coordinator Finance Department Ginger Winn METRO Read File Development File: Leschi Trading ? /Vater a no. 125 —161 Telephone: 242.9547 P.O. Box 68147, Riverton Hts. Br. August 28, 1991 Phil Fraser City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila Wa 98188 RE: Flow for South 144th Street Dear Mr. Fraser: Sincerely, Frank Pearson, Superintendent FP /aw SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98168 All necessary hydrants to be installed by developer. COUfl Office: 2849 South 150th FRANKLIN PEARSON Superintendent ANN WILSON Office Manager The calculated flow for South 144th Street at the Northwest corner of McAdam Road South, Parcel A, B, C is 1000 GPM with 20 PSI residual. I I 1 i i EXISTING GRADE = 111 =1 I 1 =1 I 1= r1 =11 11 -111- 111 - 111 -111 =I 11 =111=1 I I— I I —I I 11- 111- -I 1 I -111==_11.1- a 1 —III —III --III ; 1oQ .1177_11 1 =111 —'a ✓o D r — 111 o � —111 =� °04 1I- 111= oU aoUt7_ — 111 = —Io °o GRAVEL 4" DRAIN TILE II ii,r0 i 'I� (1 II I 2x12 JOISTS I �_ R -19 BATT INSUL '. 1 2 "x10" A.B. �� IC X48 o/c .� TREATED PLATE ) 1 1 ,` IC. e l' v v, • • 8" 0 BATT INSUL 1/2" GYP BD 1/2" EXT PLY SHEATHING (2) #4 RE —BAR CONTINUOUS #4 RE —BAR ® 48 "o /c VERT (2) #4 RE —BAR CONTINUOUS VAPOR RETARDER 0 TYPICAL FOOTING DETAIL LESCHI TRADING .COMPANY SCALE: 1 1 /2" =1 '--O" 0 clozicz I 2: e- -asocki • aldknp..) Vr=tatafi (iq Rera913 .. -. -IQs 1)2E' gSc2L t i) 9 5 - aro cgp asp 4 . z's a2-E°Q 1 = -c-"c _ -1- j ltE9 °921 ,9 a S tea 'L \ `' ''l fi^ v • 3 : fr 12-17 FS cS ei) 15-if 3*-4 - r-1d I 5'-s 1/4. 1r-3 1/4- Q 1 5%-S 1/4 1 Y-1 342 6.-10 10-7 3/4 * of 6 25'-fr 53.-r FS 1 1/4 6*-5 3/4 4 4. ••••4 / / • :t ' 9 -.9 1 sn i -.0 :, n T n el h • __ VW Nit _ II' h '4/10 Ar, • MOON %W4S Pi my =ry — _a 1 II w MOON NOil l gel 4 6.-10" / / UNFINISHED BOMA NO011 UN H .. : oI —.9 1i11 t--.c ......... ...... I... ...... it A is r I 11 l■ 4 Mill. EP SINI . DN ra — — — — . 1 ......... ......... ......... :::: w••• •••• iiii: • Sowl INTORCINNI \ \ =1111111 I I l l II A 1111 • \ M I imow7=1111 3 : fr 12-17 FS cS ei) 15-if 3*-4 - r-1d I 5'-s 1/4. 1r-3 1/4- Q 1 5%-S 1/4 1 Y-1 342 6.-10 10-7 3/4 * of 6 25'-fr 53.-r FS 1 1/4 6*-5 3/4 4 4. IIIINlIH 1 ' ■�I - P. aill in r-cr 1OP of PLATE 0 4• -11 1/4 2 n 1OP OF RATE g ' 4 1/ g S• -4 1/4 ,TTPICAL OVERHANG 1OP OF RIOGE BOARD _ 4� r—v 9' -4 1/4' 10• -3 1/4 21"-7 ver 1 N. 6 6 6 1 N % b b b 3LY1.1 do dial 1101 3LY141 d0 dal 3LYU 40 dial IIr311 do dial MKS 3DON Al dal CRAWL SPACE VENTING AS REQUIRED Br COOS W Y-1 r illililliiiiiiiii II hitTli 1 Liir - ILti - i . 1 I 11_1_144-k-1- i iIiIIIIIIIII I IKIT11714--1 ILI Els Mil Illi i 1111 ,1111, 1 I I I , •••IMI •••••• MI11. 111111. 2-11i 17 II 11111 1 - 1 471 7 1-747x TIT 1/4- , —5. tr S'-5 1/4. W-10' 10-7 3/4 q. q. 2 129 0144- IQV 4 CONCRETE SLAB 10.—tr UI - L4t1 • • u � 1 •f J i i u i iii 3• -11' c U 1 6• -1 r 4, 3•-e 1 1 5. -5 1/e W -3 1/e S• -5 1/e 10• -7 3/4 I I I I I - i ii iiun i 1111111111 4, 15 1/e 21• •t0' s -e 3/e 1 . - -. :. .«.- ...: :r,..r:..u.�: ,.rsca- r:. ,::.. . fi .t/C 9-.9 .pl aJt l -st yy ?JC L-.11 /C-r� '1 i -.c j l s -s 1 1 1 .0 l -.9 ill t -.9 A .11 -.0 t/t s-s pt - .Z F 1 ? 4 4 ` p-S fi O O 0 O 1 1 �1 NORTH ELEVATION `,..J 1/8"=V-0" • • • • • • • •. r , .A.11.41,7:14...14.—srtEIVA7-31,47,7.114 c.x.7r,i;mr.w PAVED DRIVEWAY ACCESS (THIS LOT ONLY) 2.728.48 S.F. 1 4' DINING DEC 181.3. S.F. 180' . SETBACK HOUSE A FOOTPRINT:. 1860 S.F. HOUSE B FOOTPRINT: 1325 S.F. HOUSE C -1 FOOTPRINT: 1050 S.F. HOUSE C FOOTPRINT: 1325 S.F. HOUSE B: 875 S.F. HOUSE C -1: 650 S.F HOUSE C: 1025 S.F. NORTH ROAD BANK: 845 S.F. SOUTH ROAD BANK: 565 S.F. SUB TOTAL: 4310 S.F. ® 60 %= 2586 S.F. TOTAL: 2586 S.F. GRAND TOTAL: 10371 S.F. TOTAL LOT AREA= 30,715 S.F. TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE= 33.8% IMPERVIOUS SURFACE CALCULATIONS: Loschi Tracing Company, Inc. 3601 East Terrace Seank, Washington 98122 206 323.0732 Phil Fraser Senior Engineer Pulic Works Department City of Tukwila Dear Mr. Fraser, April 22, 1991 RECEIVED CITY OF TI IKWILA APR 22 I PERMIT CENTER Re: Return of the first resubmittal on overload permit request for the Tukwila Cottage Project*' -- /O L Thank you for returning our first resubmittal for the Tukwila cottage site project provided your offices March 27, 1991, in response to Mr. Helper's September 20, 1990 resubmittal instructions to us. As other departments in your labyrinth of cubicles have requested the same material, I am happy to be able to provide them duplicates of these items I will also return to you with revisions shortly with our second resubmittal. As I recall, our first submittal originated some 9 months ago. As you know from that material, our resubmittal was provided to you after the city counsel finally waived application of the sensitivity moritorium to our request for subdivision and permits for lot A of this project, at their meeting February 19, 1991. It was also supplied to you after our engineers, based on that waiver, completed the resubmittal drawings involved, and as I understand it, had obtained preliminary clearance through their discussions with the various city (including fire), departments affected. My March 27, 1991 resubmittal to you included everything on your September 20, 1990 checklist, except for item one, which was provided March 28, 1991, after the agencies involved had responded with the letters I handcarried to your offices that day. 1 With your request for a second resubmittal, I am taking this to my engineers today with every expectation that your concerns listed on your April 17, 1991 letter will be addressed shortly. In the meantime, I am requesting direction from your offices so I can be certain we have provided you with everything necessary today to obtain our overload permit for lot A of this project. I am attaching a copy of the letter also received from the inspection of the house to be moved to Lot A, a lot bounded on two sides with paved streets that requires no easement road; but for a 6% slope would be a perfectly level lot; a lot cleared years ago, so no questions about cutting down trees can be raised; a lot excerpted from the sensitivity moritoriom precisely because absolutely nothing in your offices affects this simple, straightforward building site within 150 feet of a fire hydrant. We expect to comply immediately with anything I am instructed about today, so this overload permit can be issued. We also look forward to being in the position to retain many more engineers, lawyers, and consultants to comply with concerns your offices have posed related to our interest in installing a house on Lot B, and of consulting the four directions and requesting priestly interpretation of the blood of a freshly killed badger. But as the thousands of dollars necessary to engage those specialists will have to come from the proceeds of the presold house on lot A, (our original capital having been depleted long ago from these past nine months of work with your offices) we simply need, as we requested originally 9 months ago, your action on this one overload permit for Lot A as soon as possible. CC: Mayor Van Dusen 2 Secretary Sincerely, April 15, 1991 CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 Dave Larson Building Inspector Leschi Trading Co., Inc. 3601 East Terrace Seattle, WA 98122 RE: Proposed house move to Macadam & 144th, Tukwila Dear Mr. Hawkins: The items listed below will be required repairs that need to be taken care of prior to occupancy. 1. Any broken glass replaced with thermal -pane glass per current code. 2. Replace rotten wood or infested areas. 3. Insulate under floor (R -19 insulation) if not over basement. 4. Install smoke detectors per U.B.C. 5. Attic space to be vented per U.B.C. 6. Obtain necessary permits: A. Building Permit (Foundation) B. Electrical Permit - Washington State Department of Labor and Industries (277 -7272) C. Plumbing Permit - Ring County Health Department (296 -4732) D. Utility Permits E. Mechanical Permits F. House Moving Permit 7. Existing addition rear of house to be deleted. Garage framing questionable, show on plans. Fireplace needs certification, and foundation details for fireplace to be included in plans. NOTE: U.B.C. - Uniform Building Code, 1988 Edition. PHONE # (206) 433.1800 Gory L. VanDusen, Mayor This certificate provider -she 'Department of Health and Building i Land Development with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. F279 number APR 2 2 1991 KING COUNTY CERTIFICATE OF SEWER AVAILABILITY PERMITCENTER i Do not write in this box name ❑ Building Permit ❑ Preliminary Plat or PUD ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ Rezone or other 2. (Must be completed if l.b above is checked) ❑ (3) other (describe) 4. Service is subject to the following: a. Connection charge: b. Easement(s): c. Other: VAL VUt; Agency Name MANAGER Title Plea( return to: BUILDING & LAND DEVELOPMENT 450 Administration Building RECEIVED Seattle, Washington 98104 CITY OFTIIKWIIA 206.344.7900 APPLICANT'S NAME L. 1 ,S et k 171-414 eO i Pa' 4t / ll >t PROPOSED USE _6/1/1147 fals A Al R rs/ de d7'�c LOCATION N I V .bQ!i4 • d / 09 7 1>` le G �d aglIa s' e Gcs�? a ev_ r l • (Attach map & legal description if necessa # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # SEWER AGENCY INFORMATION 1. a. ® Sewer service will be provided by side sewer connection only to an existing (o size sewer DA) feet from the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed use. OR b.0 Sewer service will require an improvement to the sewer system of: 0(1) feet of sewer trunk or latteral to reach the site and /or ❑ (2) the construction of a collection system on the sites and /or a. © The sewer system improvement is in conformance with a County approved sewer comprehensive plan. OR b. ❑ The sewer system improvement will require a sewer comprehensive plan amendment. 3. a. The proposed project is within the corporate limits of the distri( or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of service outside the district or city. OR b. ❑ Annexation or BRB approval will be necessary to provide service. I hereby certify that the above sewer agency information is true. This certification shall be valid for one year from date of signature. 'r J MAC c:LICH Signatory Name ignature Date PERMIT CENTER RECEIVED (-Try OF TI IK1Alll A h ' APR 2 2 � ��� � � LESCH1 TRADING SINCERELY YOURS, g i -e-C$AALL: FRANKLIN PEARSON 21 V0. Water ,~'.~=-, J6 County Telephone: 242.9547 P.O. Box 68147, Riverton His. Br. SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98168 WATER AVAILABILITY Office: 2849 South 150th PROPERTY ADDRESS: SOUTH — 144TH ST & MACADAM N/W CORNER PARCEL A SEE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ATTACHED THE LINE T ON STREET IS ON A 6'` LINE WITH NO FzR HYDRANTS. THE LINE ON 51ST STREET I S A 4" LINE �c HYDRANT 200' NORTH WITH APPROXIMATELY WITH � -^E FRANKLIN "",en/ ANN V Office. t DIA*** yam. • f_iC i �y� s •..meLF ∎P 1i:fss! s. 15r- s 1 J frO) ]S St114 rTrl ••.T lir 14 \ o tr -.. -4- • �. • ut d C %thowt oil o f Fi /t '41.1.44I 11 rt It' d tt J •. J o. 4 -+- Vittwose* •44.- 11,0*1 140 Lexhi Trading Company, Inc. P.O. Box 22701 Seattle, WA 98122 FAX (206) 329 -7554 (206) 720 -7140 90,9 •1 SO*.MK I tt'• IR - Q Itll I.14111 SIRE N S .4 9079.43 SQUARE FEET " ■ ■! 11 WWII S. ` 1a1111b\it 1.f11ir► 11•aaaaa111a ■ ■••.V•fI ■at •••■••110x1 i \N "f►11111OROI .VLJI'IiL1/ ■f,1•111llallal ■aa!•Rr►1 1 111••.1•111 ••11111111M• ■11a•►,a, ' 13' -0' 209', 7230.26 SQUARE FEET o 113 03 N 25' -e ufro - -AD - a. • ID 0 47'-6" to 0) 0) 7201.87 SOJARE FEET 44*-6" 103'-8" -040Seesee h 11111P �ilai■ ," ��� r UIL am rkArraaaaaa■ 41 ai�maaraaaa■uIam aaaaa ■a! =�aaara ■ma rrrrrs■ ■aaaampcdaawgaaaaarw ',1UU���Uaaa�sraaara��'�rt�rr .:aaaaaaaai■ milli■ �araPl7raaa ■ /C um *qiNlimiiimmr.w. mime 1 NOM II Lod L #:7 90ZE90Z oZtr99 119 90Z ZbBS 17E9 90E : '0N 3N0Hd bSr : WOSA WdZ,:l : l8- ZZ- ll:9t1L8ZB 90ZONd s,o)uDl ;A9 1108 350• .11r 4111MEMIA. I t%.a►Nat.v •• f►�NNf.ff1■• ts�ral�tNU ■Nt11Nasat "ms's OO► NO�tO1 11 � tNNaa /! NNatfa hmi 124 sang MOWNOMIV ..tfiratst =fatf.�tfs._ fiiiii....2dWa.g5a••- •ta� - • • -- �•ata5at��j .t ■� - �• -∎∎0 008 -•.atit. fat• •_ �f►ae�a 511 ahtltlt:ISO■ 1115■. It / At / �. ■ t• •11a /tilt■ APO WI 1 a115111/5�mr.• •.� ■1.. •.t a- / f 5■ ... .........../ /WSg= P ,5 . &5511■ 5,..55.1. . saitrO'ta + � �, • SONS11111tH 1 • of../..-, 1 \ 5at St .�a� \v.:.• 11 � ,� I t•ttimu5Y I , 1` �/ Isr.a.Nafff. teaa5f5f ` 1 , i/ rums. fr ' �. ifrie ■Naun1 ► t MEMO IOMMEMIN r444.1111.&. ■iiuiuiiii.0 _ . ! 1 ' 1 1. ��:: ■r ■ /a .a .s • i 11' -er 13' N N N N ry N Y 7203.33 SCUARF FEEL as - 135*- cf c o 10 37 ' -r N c+ ` 0 ry —t— i US a c c m rn 00'87 SQUARE FELI 209' m 7730. ?6 SQUARE fEE 46• -0 64 4 O m m N 27:4" 5' -0' 2' 80 OOOOOO . .. -* r. () r r co 'n 9079 43 SQUARE FEET 6Y- t Lac • —[f 1 1 + 1 1 1 1 ( t ?r! T 29 — Zoning District R -1 7,200 R -1 7,200 R -1 7,2nn Existing Use vacant vacant vacant Proposed Use single family residance single family residence single family residence Proposed Lot Size 9 s.f. 8,678.35 s.f. 18,055.59 s.f. �'. ' ►�I SHOr -T PLAT AP I ` PL CA � 10 ram Kg APPLICANT Name: (29 /PLAT.APP) Address: PROPOSED PARCELS: DATE OF LAST PLAT: City: Seattle, WA Leschi Trading Company, Inc. 3601 East Terrace Signature: 1, David S. Hawkins, P Fi5 7D1 LOCATION Street Address: 1426X Macadam Road, Tukwila, WA If vacant, indicate lot(s), block, and subdivision; or tax lot number, access street, and nearest intersection. QTR SECTION -A- 15 SECTION - B- Zip: 98122 Phone:323 -0372 23 North TOWNSHIP -C- Date: .4,4. S Iyyd 4 East RANGE -D- 7411130527 Thomas L. Kelly 811 W. Steward St. ' Yakima, WA 98902 and, THIS AGREEMENT made this FORWARD THRUST R/W 2009 -10 ' ;ASEMEPT FOR SLQPES day of , 19 , by and between e/ vst/IYSVj7 ere na • r c e a e an ' •un y, as ng , rea or a WITNESSETHLX;v Gem. 7 Xdos ha, That WHEREAS the GRANTOA herein is the owner of that certain pal t11 of land described as follows, to- wit: 30 S (•.l t) Tax Lot 40 " That portion of the SE i/4 of Sec. 15, Twp 23 No., kge 4 East, W.M., described as follows: Beginning at a poi''' 60 ft. West of the S.E. corner of said Sec. 15, thence West 424 ft., v thence North 73.6 ft., thence 1::iy 428 ft. to a point 132 ft. North of the point of beginning, thence South to said point of beginning, LESS County Road. kV" WHEREAS, it has been found necessary in the construction and improvement of So. 144th St. (Pacific Hwv. So, - 518 S9 to make slopes on the said proper of the GRAHiUR for cuts and fills, as follows: A strip of land lying adjacent to and Nly of the Nly R/W line of So. 144th St. as surveyed by K.C. Survey. No. 20- 23 -4 -46, described as follows: BEGINNING at Engr. Sta. 106 +80 with '-) zero ft. in width, thence increasing to 5 ft. in width at Engr. Sta. 107 +00, thence decreasing to zero ft. in width at Engr. Ste. 107 +70, thence at Engrs. Sta. 108 +50 with zero ft. in width increasing to 9 ft. in width at Engr. Sta. 109+50, thence decreasing to 8 ft. in width at Engr. Sta. 110 +00, thence decreasing to zero ft. in width at Engr. Sta. 110 +33. Containing: 1,232 sq. ft. or 0.028 Acres M /L. NOW, THEREFORE, In consideration of the premises, the said GRANTOR hereby agrees that the said slopes may be made on his property as herelnbefore set forth, In conformity with standard plans and specifications for highway purposes and to the same extent and purposes as If the rights herein granted had been acquired by condemnation proceedings under Eminent Domain statutes of the State of Washington. n IS MUTUALLY AGREED AND UNDERSTOOD by the parties hereto that this Easement has been given to and accepted by said County subject to and upon the following conditions, to -wit: If any part of said right of way shall be abandoned or shell cease to be used or main- tained as a public highway by said County, or the route thereof changed, then as to such part all rights under this easement shall thereafter be null and void, and such portions of such rights of way shall automatically revert to the GRANTOR, successors, or assigns, without any notice being required. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said GRANTOR has hereunto signed his name this AA '`•` day of 4 • 19 2.Y... W I TNE r STATE OF WASHINGTON ) County of 1t eg A,t4yc r/..weieA: On . •" 40y of ,'ry . / -• , 19 7y, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State •.i 4A ?o Duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared l • '( 1 c ,Inv /1 /14 ! " t • to me known to be the n. v •rschl• qpa.. and who executed the within instrument and acknowledge] to me that 7411130527 and s i i i the same as K free and voluntary act and deed for purpos e..•: edit toned. WIT •ya,{ind and official seal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC In and for +he State of Washington <, Wt.,. Residing at 67,.••y L0111.0 7809060680 District" to pay .$100:00 for easevoent uppi; • • . . • Jor %he purposaof•constructing, installing,%recOnstractingi • ing, repairing# maintaining and operating t newer pipeline and lines and.all necessary connections and appurtenenceathereto, • vgether:%. ; • with the right of ingress thereto and.egreas.therefrom for the'pur--':, • pose of .enjoying the easement, and also granting to Grafiteei and to'. . - those acting under or for Grantees the use of such additional area • • • • immediately adjacent to the above.easement as shall.be•required,for.: .. the. construction of the sewer pipeline or lines ill the easement,. .""y.s.." such additiOndi area to be held to a minimum necessary for that pur-• : ' pose, and immediately after the completion of the construction and • • installation; orany subsequent entry upon.the easement, Grantees shall 'restore the ,premises as near as may be to its condition, immed-'.• iately before such construction or entry. . . - 4.1. WITNESS WHE . . this :day Of • - STATE OF WASHINGTON 1 • •-• • ) SS % OY.KING. . • ULTO 110 EASEMENT • GRANTORS; Virginia Fraley 14836 - S. L. 16th, Bellevua, Ma., 98607 • For and in consideration of one dollar '($1.00) and other valuable considerations, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, grants and conveys to GRANTEES, VAL VUE SEWER DISTRICT, Xing County, Wash- ington, a Municipal Corporation, an easement and right-of-way, over, . across, along; through, and under the following described property . situated in King County, Washington, to wit: • • THE WEST 10 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING: 'SEC 15 T 23N R 4 EWM T.L. 9040 BEG 60 FT W OF SE COR OF SEC TH W 424 FT TH N 73.6 FT TH HELY 428 FT TO PT 132 FT N OF BEG TH S TO BEG LESS CO RD . . • On this 0.,.' daY of the undersigned, a NOTARY.PUBLICLim and f euly commiss . 1ed .nd sworn, personally app red I. . b....I.A • tone known to be the individual ' Zoscrl e .. "an w o c ecute t e foregoing instrument; and acknow- ledged to me that T , } She) signed and seriled the said instrument as '(T 1r, H Her free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes t °rein mentioned. . . " WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day .• '.and year. in this.cer.tificate written. VG" r: . Divition — ' • .141.( pep * • • - • •••■•■ ; 4 :1 , 1•4:".• • • • • , MUIBMIIMW • . •• . • . 15-40 . . . • • •• -• • . • .. , . OF; arantorshavehereUnto their hand • )V■001'\ in and for the Ington, residing at • ,19 ,•before me . e State of Washington.. . • c).-eir-/F• H 6 ti- Certificate No. Short Plat No. (29/PLAT.MAP) - Ic)'‘ si 17E.WAL,1- t Date: - — c:9C) r?ro" %TAT •• Land Survey r's Certificate: • • i ivrAc-Ar7/N1 [21A17 M A P This Short Plat correctly represents a survey made by me or under my direction in conformance with the requirements of appropriate state statute and has been properly staked. Name: (:)rre, Stamp: • F17 Kr> PP- IN c_D 1-7__01 10 E. r Rts-- PA HH 1.01 WI 21 '2s4. o • 1 r-, Vreeelch-I 1—ar WI P14-i 91, vL. tz.oa.l. A- 012 . e;r Al2-e:1 LT 2(" Lrt I 1(7 Map on File in Vault Direction: Scale: I N.0a Page 1 of • SIGNATURES DECLARATION: Know all men by these presents that we, the undersigned, owner(s) in fee simple and /or contract purchaser(s) of the land herein described do hereby make a short subdivision thereof pursuant to RCW 58.17.060 and acknowledge that said subdivision shall not be further divided in any manner within a period of five years, from date of record, without the filing of a final plat. The undersigned further declare this short plat to be the graphic representation of said short subdivision and that same is made with the free consent and in accordance with the desire of the owner(s). In witness whereof we have set our hands and seals. Name Name Name STATE OF WASHINGTON County of King s On this day personally appeared before me Short Plat Number (29 /PLAT.SIG) Name Name Name On this day personally appeared before me :4114;41/ S l k A e to me known to be the individual described in and who xecuted the within and foregoing instrument yd acknowledged that signed the same as free and vo untary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN under my hand and official seal this & day of 0 TRA(1 s V �... E�.A .q% q ;c, �� r : ;Notary P bl i / an for he tate o p U B1, v. :. , � W ashin , r ' STATE OF WASHINGTON County of King GIVEN under my hand and official seal this day of , 19 to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that signed the same as free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Page ( of SHORT PLAT NO. LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS After the short subdivision: SEE PAGE 2, ATTACHED. Before the short subdivision: Beginning at a point 60' west of the S.E. corner of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, said point being on the West side of the road known as the James Clark Road No. 2; thence running West along th South line of said Section 15, a distance of 424'; thence North 73.6'; thence Northeasterly 428' to a point on the West line of said James Clark Road No. 2, distant 132' of North of the point of beginning; thence South along the West line of said road to the point of beginning; except the South 10' of East 150' and South 20' of West 274' thereof heretofore conveyed to King County for road by deed recorded under King County Recording No. 1158465 and except that portion deeded to King County for roads under Recording No. 6575305. This space reserved for recorder's use Filed for recr,rr1 at the request of: Name CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Return to: Planning Department City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (29 /PLAT.LEGAL) 19 APPROVAL Reviewed and approved by the Short Subdivision Committee and hereby certified for filing this day of Chairman Short Subdivision Committee DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS Examined and approved this clay of , 19__ Assessor Deputy Assessor NI LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS After the short subdivision: PARCEL A Beginning at a point 60' west of the S.E. corner of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, said point being on the West side of the road known as the James Clark Road No. 2; thence west 85'; thence north 120.3'; thence northeasterly 85.8' to a point on the west line of said James Clark Road No. 2 , distant 132' of north of the point of beginning; thence south along the west line of said road to the point of beginning; EXCEPT the south 10' thereof heretofore conveyed to King County for road by deed recorded under King County Recording No. 1158465 and except that portion deeded to King County for roads under recording No. 6575305. SUBJECT TO an easement for the purpose of utility and vehicular access to the adjacent western property. The easement is described as follows: The north 20' of the property; parallel to the northernmost property line. PARCEL B Beginning at a point 145' west of the S.E. corner of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, said point being west of the West side of the road known as the James Clark Road No. 2; thence west 85'; thence north 108.6'; thence northeasterly 85.8' to a point distant 120.3' of north of the point of beginning; thence south to the point of beginning; EXCEPT the south 10' of east 65' and south 20' of west 20' thereof heretofore conveyed to King County for road by deed recorded under King County Recording No. 1158465 and except that portion deeded to King County for roads under recording No. 6575305. TOGETHER WITH an easement on the adjacent eastern parcel for the purpose of utility and vehicular access to the property. The easement area on the adjacent parcel is described as follows: The north 20' of the property; parallel to the northernmost property line. PARCEL C Beginning at a point 170' west of the S.E. corner of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, said point being west of the West side of the road known as the James Clark Road No. 2; thence west 254'; thence north 73.6'; thence northeasterly 256.4' distant108.6' north from the point of beginning; thence south to the point of beginning; EXCEPT the south 20' thereof heretofore conveyed to King County for road by deed recorded under King County Recording No. 1158465 and except that portion deeded to King County for roads under recording No. 6575305. Page 2 of 2 i' L.gGt L 4 °1,134 0' . MAN W PTu = °1 Fes. G, - 7,110o ❑' Mt,AN w\b`rq = 82. 8 1 77; 2-DO cI' . Mme! W1271-17 G2' �vtap on File in Vault Direction: Scale: 1 z}0I Stamp: Page • I;aiid'Surveyor's Certificate: Name: C. S pRo�1- Date_ Klo■t• 2!?, et a t Certificate No. P L S `� co� X02.33' of 2 4 w4T1z MAIN 4 . 12" GI JI.V• = __ -_ o ° 1 0 ° E '11.00 - • - vv/vAuve \ F. LIYPKANT ■ I I 390 °0 '2> \ .\ iI !;\ PAI<C - L G 7, 20O n' M •Ki 1 I.11 4 {) ` ' ( ` 'Z "1A 'L 1 L 1 y 4'SPI \ w "VAL. LANd EXPIRES 81171 Short Plat Number h proud E ►''O► i n P ,' n 1\1 n. 10o 0.)G, This Short Plat correctly represents a survey made by me or under my direction in conformance with the requirements of ap- propriate State statute and has been pro.erly st .L_ O ! A F■D. C.0NC -. MON. w /l-GAD i i • i 1 10 42. 1 8 1 FWD. t.oNG. MoN w /ci{.itNeR 0 z 2 • • to <-MMN 4C'11 -N a� CPAv z ta V F.0 W. 'YAWS t1 3p?' 11(.4efrAfo eft i iZrE .►RvEY lP ALMA !) FlR BUT ggRELE WONG. ttiptem 7`w. i$ Plat Number 100 116t1; Ave. SE. Ste. 102 Bellewe, WA 98004 (206) 455 -8454 Surveyor's Cardea ete Short Plat correctly represents a survey made by me or r my direction In conformaaee wi th the requirements of ap. , riate States , and has been • , - y slaked. .a,$ 0.5 Pao.i e R .00► •uro 1 (he.. .1oe t# Boa, -opt) —4 a GcNG. MON. W • tiacAPAm Izv. RMaC.o ((.o' IMPiovemENT`,) PAgle1, A °91 31e o s MAN wIDTI4 a 41 rAgrZL, 8 I3' o' r+AN wnvT1a 81.M &.144T1-1 ter. Icw -coo' (20' IMP CtI McN'ro) PARCEl, G 5,222 0 r af-Ceepr7 FROM h.144110 /Lap on Mein Vault . Smote tD tti.. cot MCN e:R06100 ' INCR 1C11- croN/CO'