Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L04-004 - KONDELIS ALE - WETLANDS FILLING SPECIAL PERMISSIONALE KONDELIS 53AVS&S 158 ST L04 -004 December 10, 2004 Ale Kondelis Cramer NW, INC. 945 North Central Suite 104 Kent WA 98032 Dear Mr. Kondelis: City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Re: Five Rivers Short Plat at 53 Avenue South and South 158 Street. File numbers LO1 -064, E01 -027 and L04 -004. As discussed at our meeting on August 12, 2004, your application for Special Permission Sensitive Areas Ordinance cannot be approved for filling of Type 2 wetland to accommodate the proposed street. Tukwila Municipal Code allows construction of new essential streets and roads, rights-of- way and utilities within a sensitive area or buffer, subject to meeting provisions of SEPA (TMC 21.04) and Sensitive Areas (TMC 18.45). TMC 18.06.285, defines "Essential Street, Road, Right- of-Way or Utility" as a utility facility, utility system, street, road or right -of -way where no feasible alternative location exists based on an analysis of technology and system efficiency. It was determined that the proposed street was not the only possible access for this short plat and that there may be other alternatives. Also, discussed were pending geotechnical items, particularly the two geotechnical reports that were sent to LSI Adapt, Inc. These reports were (1) Dames & Moore dated November 19, 1985 and (2) Geo Engineers, Inc. dated April 28, 1985. These reports were sent to LSI Adapt, Inc for their review and response back to the City. No return comments from LSI Adapt, Inc have been received to date. Further, please note that Tukwila City Council is looking at adopting changes to the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance on December 13, 2004. The new ordinance will be effective on December 22, 2004, five days after it is published in the newspaper. The draft copy of the ordinance is attached for your review. I have marked some of the changes that will definitely impact your proposal. Please note that wetland buffers for Type 2 wetlands are changing from 50 feet to 80 feet. The new code establishes procedures and criteria to request a 50% buffer reduction subject to mitigation. Also, Type 2 wetlands that are less than a tenth of an acre may be allowed to be altered subject mitigation. I have highlighted these sections in the draft copy of the ordinance. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Minnie Dhaliwal Senior Planner C: James Jaeger Please note that we do not have a short plat application for this project. You may need to evaluate if you would like to be reviewed under the new code or the existing code. If you choose to be reviewed under the new code, you can apply for the short plat application at any time after the effective date of the new ordinance. However if you want to be reviewed under the existing code, your application has to be deemed complete prior to the effective date of the new ordinance. If you have any further questions, please call me at 206 -431 -3685. Sincerely, id- 0 1i Lordeli 3 11 z t4 - E w �L r- .f 1+A-n3 p #; to 4e 1-, ktop 2 06- 9 3/ -3 68 s e— a06"131 -377 23 .52 2�3 -Sao- c: �e 6 327- ?'-/A S R&? cam- 15x6 6,_ -Kk9 Zo6- 13►- Z4la e,✓R Minnie Dhaliwal - Five Rivers Page 1 From: Cyndy Knighton To: Minnie Dhaliwal Date: 7/14/04 3:55PM Subject: Five Rivers As we just spoke about, I have no concerns with the TIA submitted for the Five Rivers Development. I concur with the trip generation, concurrency, and impact fee analysis. This development meets concurrency and is not subject to collection of any impact fees. As to the placement of the road into the development, the concern was raised about it being only 120 -feet north of S 159th Street. According to the TIA, a more typical minimum spacing seen in other jurisdictions is 125 -feet. I see no reason for the proposed 120 -foot offset to be allowed from a traffic engineering point of view. Sight distance requirements are met with the proposed alignment and the accident analysis did not indicate any current or expected safety problems. Pushing the roadway to the north to avoid impacting the Class 2 wetland could be considered, and if it is, I would want to revisit the site. The currently proposed roadway is approximately 300 -feet south of Klickitat Drive, a much larger road than S 159th Street (which dead ends and provides access to a neighborhood park). Pushing the roadway access point too far to the north could be more of a concern from a traffic safety perspective than the 5 -feet - under - *typical * - spacing for other jurisdictions. Cyndy CC: David McPherson TO: PLANNING DEPT. — Minnie Dhaliwal, Senior Planner FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. — David McPherson, Development Engineer DATE: July 13, 2004 SUBJECT: Five Rivers 53 Ave. South & South 158 Street Special Permission for Filling of Wetlands — L04 -004 Short Plat — LO1 -064 Special Permission for Filling of Wetlands Comments 1. Public Works has reviewed the letter from Jaeger Engineering, dated June 17, 2004, regarding the justification for the Private Street location and proposed construction. I have also reviewed the site plan provided by Jim Jaeger and made a recent field visit. 2. While Mr. Jaeger's provided information appears to be reasonable, the Public Works Department has no comments, regarding whether this should be considered an "Essential Street ". Short Plat Comments MEMORANDUM 1. Traffic Impact Analysis is being reviewed by Cyndy Knighton, Senior Transportation Engineer. No comments from Cyndy, to date. 2. LSI Adapt, Inc. was sent two geotechnical reports for their review and response back to the City. These reports were (1) report by Dames & Moore — dated November 19, 1985 and (2) Geo Engineers, Inc. — dated April 25, 1985. No return comments from LSI Adapt, Inc., to date. 3. Public Works has reviewed the Subsurface Soils Investigation from Spears Engineering & Technical Services, dated May 28, 2004. If the private road is approved as part of the Short Plat and Public Works permit, this report will be referenced on the plans and made part of the permit conditions. (07/28/2009) Minnie Dhaliwal - Five Rivers Page 1 From: Minnie Dhaliwal To: Ale Kondelis Date: 06/28/2007 4:40 PM Subject: Five Rivers Hi Ale, Please address the following to further process your Special Permission Director application for wetland impacts: 1.Tables in the wetland report on page 2 and page 5 are inconsistent. Wetland C is listed as 3503 sq. ft. on page 2 & 3417 on page 5. Further the Civil plan shows it as 4240 sq. ft. and the survey is shown as 3417 sq. ft. Wetland A is shown as 4322 on the Civil and Survey map but in the report is listed as 3712 sq. ft. Please revise the plans and the report to accurately show the correct area. 2. The mitigation for the impacted wetland is proposed as enhancement of the existing wetlands on a 3:1 ratio. The report states that the impacted area is 336 +1320 =1656 sq. ft. Three times of 1656 is 4968 sq. ft. The report states that a total of 5893 sq. ft. of wetland area will be enhanced. This area should be clearly shown on the plan. Please note that the wetland enhancement area has to be in the actual wetland and not the buffer. So for wetland C, if it is 3417, the area that can be counted towards enhancement is 3417 - 336 - 1320 =1761. It appears that you may have to mitigate more of Wetland A than is shown on the planting plan to meet the 3:1 ratio requirement. Therefore it is important to show where is 4968 sq. ft. 3. Also, the report must request buffer reduction for the creation of Lot 7. It appears that a small portion of buffer for Wetland C and A has to be reduced for lot 7 and the cul- de-sac road. The plan must show the existing wetland with standard buffer (50 feet) and the reduced width. Please note that there is a 10 feet setback from the buffer.The structures on Lot 7 will have to be setback 10 feet from the reduced buffer width. The buffer reduction request shall also be made for the construction of the retaining wall in the buffer of Wetland C (1320 sq. ft. buffer is less than 50 feet wide) 4. To our knowledge a jurisdictional determination was never done by the Corps of Engineers regarding the wetlands on the site, nor has the Department of Ecology reviewed the proposed mitigation plan. While it may be true that these are isolated wetlands for which the Corps has no jurisdiction, only the Corps can make this determination. You have been previously advised that it is your responsibility to follow all federal and state requirements for wetland impacts and mitigation. This means that even though the City will approve the wetland mitigation plan, there may be changes or additional requirements that could be imposed by these agencies. In a previous letter from the applicant it was stated that Nationwide Permit # 39 from the Corps of Engineers would be used as the federal permit for this project. If you intend to apply for this permit, thereby assuming that the Corps has jurisdiction over the wetlands, then the City must receive a copy of the Project Construction Notice. The applicant should be advised that under the recently issued Nationwide Permits, NWP #39 is no longer valid for multi- family housing. Instead NWP 29 is applicable. It is also suggested that the applicant begin coordination as soon as possible with the Department of Ecology, if that has not already been done. Let me know if you have any questions. Minnie Dhaliwal Senior Planner City of Tukwila 206 -431 -3685 mdhaliwak ci.tukwila.wa.us City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Ann: Minnie Dhaliwal, Senior Planner 6300 South:enter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila WA 98188 Minnie, e . F ILIN . Cramer Northwest, Inc. Surveyors *Planners *Engineers Re: Five Rivers Short Plat — Special Permission application of Sensitive Areas Ordinance This is in response to your letter dated February 18, 2004. We have prepared the additional information you have requested for the Special Permission Application. This package should include: ♦ Traffic and Safety Study prepared by Transportation Planning and Engineering • Further details prepared by Jaeger Engineering and Spears Engineering with regards to roads and wetland fills. • Grading and filling comments prepared by Spears Engineering Please note that the clients have changed geotechnicians. Spears engineering have commented on the LSI reports mentioned. The arguments for placing the road as proposed and filling the wetlands are addressed in Jim Jaeger's letter to me dated June 17, 2004 attached. The other professional submittals should support his position. If there is further information you will need please feel free to contact me or the professionals that prepared the reports. Please carbon copy my e-mail with any information requested of the other professionals so I can continue to manage the project. Thank you for your patience and assistance. Planner/ Project Manager 945 N. Central. Suite #104 Kent WA 98032 (253) 852 -4880 Fax (253) 852 -4955 www.cramemw.com E -mail: cnina cramernw.com June 22, 2004 Page 1 of I JAEGER ENGINEERING 9419 S. 204 PLACE - KENT, WASHINGTON 98031 PHONE (253) 850 -0934 FAx (253) 850 -0155 June 17, 2004 Ale Kondelis Cramer NW, Inc. 945 Central Ave. ; Suite 104 Kent, WA. 98032 RE: Preliminary Plat of Five Rivers - City of Tukwila Ale, I have prepared a revised preliminary engineering plan for submittal to the City to assist you in your response to the City's letter dated February 18, 2004. There were items in that letter that relate to other professionals, such as the traffic engineer and the geotechnical engineer. The attached preliminary engineering plan has been revised to show the proposed grading for the interior cul -de -sac road, the necessary concrete retaining wall along this road and 53rd Ave. S., and the foundation setback along the east property line as noted in the geotechnical report. To prepare this plan, I have reviewed the geotechnical reports /letters from LSl Adapt, dated September 4, 2003 and the letter from Spears Engineering Technical Services, dated May 28, 2004. The City's letter of Feb. 18, 2004, included concerns and a request for additional information. The items in that letter are addresses as follows: 1. The proposed short plat road will necessitate the filling of a portion of wetland C, a class 2 wetland. Approx. 800 SF of the northern tip of the wetland would need to be filled to accommodate the road and sidewalk. The City may allow this wetland to be filled if there are no other reasonable alternatives for the location of this road. The road cannot be moved to the south, as this would place it within the body of wetland C and would require.a greater amount of the wetland to be filled. The location of the road was chosen partly to minimize the impact on the wetland and because this is the highest elevation of the interior property slope along 53rd Ave. S. There is an existing retaining wall behind the existing roadway along 53rd Ave. S., south of the proposed road location. To the north of the proposed road location, there is an existing 10' high steep slope down from the back of the road, into the property. Even more significant, there is a depression along the north property line where the cul -de -sac bulb would be if the road were placed in this location. This depression is 8' lower than the elevation of the cul -de- sac bulb, if placed in this location. The elevation of the bulb is dictated by the internal road having a maximum grade of 15 %. This would create a grade transition problem with the property to the north of the site. 2. The operation and safety study for the street offset, between the proposed short plat road and S 159th St. will be prepared by the traffic consultant. Please include copies of this study in your resubmittal package to the City. 3. I have prepared a proposed grading plan so that the proposed wetland fill area can be accurately shown. In order to minimize the wetland fill, I am showing a 6' high concrete retaining wall along the south side of the internal road along the wetland interface length. This concrete wall would then be extended to the south along 53rd Ave. S. for the construction of the sidewalk. This was also done to minimize the impact to the wetland. The revised plan, as shown, more accurately reflects the impact on the wetland by the proposed project. 4. The proposed grading for the internal road has been shown. It requires fills that exceed the 2' maximum depth as recommended in the LSI Adapt letter. The letter from Spears Engineering further reviewed the site and the previous geotechnical information and now states that this fill limitation can be exceeded. 5. I have added the 30' buffer along the east property lines to the plans. This 30' buffer was recommended in the LSI Adapt report. I discussed this buffer requirement with LSI and it was stated that this buffer only applies to basements and deep foundations. The purpose of this buffer is to ensure that any excavations would not disturb the existing soil drains that were installed in this area by WSDOT. These drains are deep enough that a standard 30" to 36" footing would not impact them. This is shown and noted on the revised plans. This addresses all of the comments on the City's letter. Please call me if there are any additional concerns. Thank you. James Jaeger. P.E. 9cLRro s AMERICAN CANADIAN REAL ESTATE, INC. PO Box 3280 Kent, WA 98032 Attn: Mr. Saraj Khan Gentlemen: INSPECTION & TESTING SERVICES GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION/PROJECT MANAGEMENT SPECIALIZING IN ROADS & BRIDGES HTTP: /IVVW W. SPEARS- ENGINEERING.COM Re: Project: Report Date: Subsurface Soils Investigation Five Rivers Short Plat 05/28/2004 SPEARS ENGINEERING & TECHNICAL SERVICES As per your request, we have reviewed the letter from the City of Tukwila (dated 2/18/2004) from their Senior Planner concerning the proposed development for the above referenced project along with the report from LSI Adapt (dated 9/4/2003). The results of this review, together with our investigation and recommendations, are to be found in the following report. We have provided three copies for your review and distribution. During our review, the recommendation from LSI Adapt that site grading is limited to no more than 2 feet vertical and only in localized areas was extensively reviewed. We reviewed the site plan prepared and supplied to us by Jaeger Engineering. Additionally we took the site plan and prepared a visual reference for the proposed final grading with the finished % slopes as marked (see attached drawing). It is our opinion that the proposed road location and grading exceed the recommendations from LSI Adapt for more than 2 feet of vertical fill. The major concern for this limit on the placement of vertical fill seems to be so that there would not be any major earthwork performed on lots 4 through 7 which might impact the steep slope to the northeast side of the project area However the proposed road and grading should be acceptable for the road area grading operations provided that the following recommendations are followed. • All fill operations to be monitored by a representative of our firm. • All fill to be placed and compacted to least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D -1557. • All slopes on graded fill areas will not exceed 21/2:1 (H: V) and preferably they will not exceed 3:1. • Once completed all fill areas and slopes will be seeded. Often, because of design and construction details that occur on a project, questions arise concerning soil conditions. We would be pleased to continue our role as geotechnical engineers during the project implementation. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you and we look forward to working with you in the future. If you have any questions concerning the above items, the procedures used, or if we can be of any further assistance please call us at (253) 833 -7967. J. Frank Spears, P.E. Principle P.O. Box 1007 PHONE: (253) 833 -7967 AUBURN, WASHINGTON 98071 -1007 FAX: (253) 735 -2867 Respectfully Submitted, SPEARS ENGINEERING ES EXPIRES 06/16/05 Report # 04001 -077 Page 1 of 14 25% lopes LIMIT o'kNQko\og:ko4, Graphic Scale (in feet) Based upon Survey Performed By: DRYCO MI IN NINON TT Surveying, Incorporated 12714 VALLEY AVENUE EAST SUMNER, WA 98390 253-826-0300 FAX 253-826-9703 2000202 DATE PRINTED: 1/23/2001 Based upon Site Plan Provided By: JAEGER ENGINEERING 9419 Soufit 204th Place Kent, WA. 98031 Phone No. (253) 850-0934 Fax No. (253) 850-0155 Spears Engineering & Technical Services Civil Engineering Geotechnical Engineering QA/QC Services P.O. Box 1007 Auburn, WA 98071-1007 Phone: (253) 833-7967 Fax: (253) 735-2867 06/16/05 Revisions: SCALE: 1 inch = 50 feet MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING DEPT. — Minnie Dhaliwal, Senior Planner FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. — David McPherson",elopment Engineer DATE: February 19, 2004 SUBJECT: Five Rivers — 8 Lot Short Plat 53 Ave. South & South l58"' Street Special Permission Director Special Permission Director — L04 -004 1. Wetland `C' is shown on the Civil plan by Jaeger Engineering, to be partially filled. The private street and a portion of 53 Ave. South adjacent to the site, will need to be elevated and have side slopes or retaining wall(s). Therefore, the wetland area to be filled, will be greater than shown on the plan sheet, due to construction requirements. 2. The slope buffer along the East portions of proposed lots 5, 6, and 7, should be shown on civil plan sheet per Geotechnical recommendations. See LSI Adapt, Inc. reports dated August 6, 2001 and September 4, 2003. 3. Verify that the proposed private street location and alignment, as shown on the Civil plan sheet, is the only one possible for this short plat. Other locations may be possible, which avoid Wetland `C' or reduce the impact. 4. Verify how site grading and specifically within the area of the proposed private street, will conform to the maximum 2 vertical feet grading recommendation by LSI Adapt, Inc., page 5 of geotechnical report, dated September 4, 2003. 5. Provide operation and safety study for street off -set, between proposed private cul -de -sac street and South 159 Street. •••■•■••••. EX. PVMT 5' SIDEWALK DA4TNG VAULT BLOW OFF T 6 \ / •W[ L ND 33 / - + EW SSMH [ / � | } \\ — B0HIKD EW WA K) vg \ \ \ \ \ ` � | } � m C T o - ` A RE A LIMIT ( CLPiSS 2 \JT/ �\ — ' ^—' ' 4 20 SF ~~=� A \ \ \ � `` � � . � c —�� CRc^��^. ` m > �, ,� / DRAINAGE VETVAULT 91' LONG ./� DESIGN WATER L ELEVI 126.5' TOP WETPOND/ EL[V/ 121.5 DOT WETPOND/ EL[V/ 117.5 WETPOND VOLUME' 11284 CF DETENTION VOLUME' 14105 CF ,r Ex Sanitary Sewer Manhole Rim: 128.58 1E12"OCtr: 118.76 "s' �-_--� .� ' -' February 18, 2004 Ale Kondelis Cramer NW, INC. 945 North Central Suite 104 Kent WA 98032 City of Tukwila Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Re: Five Rivers Short Plat - Special Permission application for Sensitive Areas Ordinance deviation. Dear Mr. Kondelis: Based on a review of your submittal relative to those requirements as set out in the Complete Application Checklists for Special Permission Director, your application is deemed complete. Additionally, we have started code - related review and have following comments that need to be addressed before we can further review your application: 1. Per Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 18.45.080 (B), construction of new essential streets and roads, rights -of -way and utilities may be permitted within a sensitive area or buffer, subject to meeting provisions of SEPA (TMC 21.04) and Sensitive Areas (TMC 18.45) section of Tukwila Municipal Code. Further, TMC 18.06.285, defines "Essential Street, Road, Right -of -Way or Utility" as a utility facility, utility system, street, road or right -of- way where no feasible alternative location exists based on an analysis of technology and system efficiency. Please verify that the proposed private street location and alignment, as shown on the Civil plan sheet, is the only possible access for this short plat and there is no feasible alternative location based on analysis of technology and system efficiency. Please explain why other locations, which avoid Wetland `C' or have less impact on the wetland are not proposed. 2. As requested in the past, provide an operation and safety study for street offset, between proposed private cul -de -sac street and South 159 Street. This is required to approve the proposed location of the private access road. 3. Wetland `C' is proposed to be partially filled. The private street and a portion of 53 Avenue South, adjacent to the site, will need to be elevated and have side slopes or retaining wall(s). Therefore, the wetland area to be filled will be greater than shown on the plan sheet, due to construction requirements. Please provide additional details and accurately show the entire area to be filled. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Sincerely, Minnie Dhaliwal Senior Planner s 4. Please verify how site grading, specifically within the area of the proposed private street, will conform to the maximum two vertical feet grading recommendation by LSI Adapt, Inc., page 5 of geotechnical report, dated September 4, 2003. 5. Please note that the slope buffer along the East portions of the proposed lots 5, 6, and 7, should be shown on civil plan sheet per-Geotechnical recommendations. See LSI Adapt, Inc., reports dated August 6, 2001 and September 4, 2003. If you have any questions, you can reach me at 206 - 431 -3685. To Whom It May Concern: Cramer Northwest, Inc. • Surveyors *Planners *Engineers City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila WA 98188 Re: 5 Rivers Short Nat — Special Permission Director Waiver 945 N. Central, Suite #104 Kent WA 98032 (253) 852-4880 Fax (253) 852 -4955 www. cramernw.com E -mail: cni @,cramernw.com Lc. l-t - if We are requesting a deviation from City of Tukwila Sensitive Area Ordinance — Chapter 18.45, in the form of a wetland mitigation plan prepared by Habitat Technologies. The City of Tukwila regulates activities in and around wetland and stream areas. Such regulations also require that an undisturbed native vegetation buffer be retained along the upland side of the identified wetland areas. The City may allow a limited amount of alterations to wetlands and streams provided all impacts are mitigated pursuant to an approved mitigation plan authorized by the City. Our mitigation plan proposes that setbacks be waived and buffers be reduced and some wetland area be moved in order to be enhanced. The mitigation plan includes a wetland enhancement plan that will ensure the wetlands function and value be maintained. Development of the 5 Rivers Short Plat focuses on establishing independent lots for the future development of residential homesites consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoning provisions. 5 Rivers has four(4) significant wetlands on site. Each wetland is positioned in such a way that the creation of new lots is limited. Through compensatory mitigation the selected development action would NOT result in a "net loss" of regulated wetland area, function or value consistent with Chapter 18.45. We are proposing the following actions. Wetland A and its associated established buffer would be retained and resorted through the removal of invasive shrubs and garbage and the planting of native trees and shrubs. In addition, 1,939 sq.ft. of new wetland would be created along the southern edge of the wetland through the removal of existing soils and the planting of native trees, shrubs and emergents. Hydrology for the retained and new wetland would be supplemented by the addition of rooftop drains to these areas. Wetland B is proposed to be filled to provide for an internal roadway and new lot areas. Wetland C is proposed to be mostly retained. The retained wetland and the associated buffer would be restored through the removal of invasive shrubs and garbage and the planing of native trees and shrubs. A small part of this wetland (599 sq.ft.) would be unavoidably filled to create the access roadway for the new homesites. Mitigation for the unavoidable impact would be provided within the new wetland area to be created adjacent to Wetland A. Finally, we propose that Wetland D be primarily filled to provide new lot area. That portion of this wetland with in the buffer of Wetland A or Wetland C would be retained. Page 1 of 2 0% C 9 0 4, The present site design would retain the majority of the onsite Wetlands A and C, restore and enhance existing wetland and buffer areas and establish protective buffers in accordance to City of Tukwila's Chapter 18.45 for the retained onsite wetlands. Unavoidable impacts to Wetland C would be mitigated through the creation of an alternative onsite wetland area contiguous to Wetland A. Wetland B and the majority of Wetland D would be filled to created the internal roadway and new homesite lots. Both of these wetlands are isolated, less than 1,000 sq.ft. in area and exhibit a low functional value rating. Thank you for your careful consideration. Sincerely, Aleanna Kondelis Planner Attachments Cramer Northwest, Inc. • Surveyors *Planners *Engineers 945 N. Central, Suite #104 Kent WA 98032 (253) 852 -4880 Fax (253) 852 -4955 www.cramernw.com E -mail: cni @,cramernw.com Page 2 of 2 WETLAND SIZE (sqft) CLASSIFICATION (USFWS) CITY OF TUKWILA WETLAND TYPE FUNCTION AND VALUE RATING STANDARD BUFFER WIDTH A 4,320 sqft PFOC 2 low 50 feet B 898 sqft PSSC 3 low 25 feet C 3,503 sqft PFOC 2 low 50 feet D 663 sqft PEME, PSSE 3 low 25 feet HABITAT TECHNOLOGIES December 19, 2003 Mr. Jim Jaeger, @ Jaeger Engineering 9419 South 204 Place Kent, Washington 98031 Fax 1- 253 - 850 -0155 pages RE: Five Rivers Preliminary Plat, City of Tukwila Conceptual Mitigation Program for Unavoidable Wetland Impacts Dear Mr. Jaeger, The following letter report outlines the conceptual mitigation program that would be undertaken onsite to provide full and complete replacement of area, function, and value of onsite wetlands that would be unavoidable impacted by the proposed development of this residential community. This conceptual mitigation program also includes the restoration of the onsite wetland areas to be retained to protect the long -term environmental quality of these areas. WETLAND DETERMINATION As outlined in the Habitat Technologies letter dated September 16, 2003, wetland determination for the Five Rivers Preliminary Plat was based on sample plots which contained hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology in accordance with the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Wash. Manual) and the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual). Based on these methods four (4) areas that exhibits all three of these criteria were identified onsite. In addition, a very seasonal swale was identified generally along the southern site boundary, however, this swale does not exhibit an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and does not meet the City of Tukwila definition as a "watercourse" under TMC18.45.06.920. Wetland A: This wetland was located within a shallow depression at the eastern end of the defined onsite swale along the southeastern project site boundary. This wetland was dominated by a shrub and sapling plant community that had been altered by prior land use actions. As discussed with City of Tukwila staff a scattering of trees (red alder — Alnus rubra, black cottonwood — Populus trichocarpa, Pacific willow - Salix lasiandra) wetlands, streams, fisheries, wildlife - mitigation and permitting solutions .l P.O. Box 1088, Puyallup, Washington 98371 5 - Rivers 01248 voice 253 - 845 -5119 fax 253 - 841 -1942 e-mail habitattech@gwest.net . � c N o O were present along the edge of this wetland. This wetland appeared to remain%bnded into the early growing season. Hydrology for this wetland was provided by stormwater runoff from onsite and adjacent parcels. Surface water that left this wetland eventually entered a stormwater catchment near the southeast corner of the project site. Based on a review of the project site and discussions with City of Tukwila staff, Wetland A meets the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) criteria for classification as a palustrine, forested, seasonally flooded (PFOC). Since this wetland was less than one acre in total size, included a scattering of trees rooted along the edge, and exhibited a forested plant community over 20% of the wetland area this wetland meet the criteria for designation as a City of Tukwila Type 2 Wetland. Wetland B: This wetland was located within a shallow depression within the east - central portion of the project site. This wetland was dominated by a shrub and sapling plant community that had been altered by prior land use actions. The wetland was well shaded by red alder trees rooted primary outside the defined wetland boundary. This wetland appeared to be the result of an internal roadway which had compacted this small depression. This wetland appeared to remain ponded into the early growing season. Hydrology for this wetland was provided by stormwater runoff from onsite. Wetland B meets the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (Cowardin et al. 1979) criteria for classification as a palustrine, scrub /shrub, seasonally flooded (PSSC). Since this wetland was less than one acre in total size and did not exhibit a forested plant community over 20% of the wetland area this meet the criteria for designation as a City of Tukwila Type 3 Wetland. Wetland C: This wetland was located within a shallow depression near the southwestern corner of the project site. This wetland was dominated by a forested plant community composed of young red alder (approximately 15 years old) rooted both within and outside the defined wetland boundary. This wetland appeared to have formed following the removal of an old homesite and included the old concrete foundation and assorted garbage. This wetland appeared to remain ponded into the early growing season. Hydrology for this wetland was provided by stormwater runoff from onsite and offsite, and from a number of seeps along the toe of the adjacent fill supporting 53 Avenue South. Based on a review of the project site and discussions with City of Tukwila staff, Wetland C meets the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) criteria for classification as a palustrine, forested, seasonally flooded (PFOC). Since this wetland was less than one acre in total size, included a scattering of trees rooted along the edge, and exhibited a forested plant community over 20% of the wetland area this wetland meet the criteria for designation as a City of Tukwila Type 2 Wetland. Wetland D: This wetland was located within a shallow depression formed by an old internal roadway within the project site. This wetland was dominated by a shrub and emergent plant community that had been altered by prior land use actions. This 2 5- Rivers 01248 /1 /1t 0 44f 01pp wetland appeared to remain saturated well into the growing season. Hydrol ? for this wetland was provided by stormwater runoff from onsite. Wetland D meets the USFWS criteria for classification as a palustrine, scrub /shrub, seasonally flooded /saturated (PSSE); and palustrine, emergent seasonally flooded /saturated (PEME). Since this wetland was less than one acre in total size and did not exhibit a forested plant community over 20% of the wetland area this wetland meet the criteria for designation as a City of Tukwila Type 3 Wetland. Wetland and Stream Types CITY OF TUKWILA — Sensitive Areas Overlay — Chapter 18.45 The City of Tukwila regulates activities in and around wetland and stream areas. Such regulations also require that an undisturbed native vegetation buffer be retained along the upland side of the identified wetland areas. To assist in this regulation the City has defined "types" by which to regulate wetlands, streams, and their associated buffer area. These types are based on such features as size; the presence of endangered or threatened plants, fish, or animals; regionally rare wetlands; wetlands of local significance for wildlife or stormwater functions; the number of wetland classes and subclasses; and percentage of open water. A Type 1 Wetland means those wetlands which meets any of the following criteria: • 1. The presence of species listed by the federal government or state as endangered, or threatened, or the presence of critical or outstanding actual habitat for those species; 2. Wetlands having 40% to 60% permanent open water in dispersed patches with two or more classes of vegetation; 3. Wetlands equal to or greater than five acres in size and having three or more wetland classes, one of which may be substituted by permanent or open water. A Type 2 Wetland means those wetlands which meet any of the following criteria: 1. Wetlands greater that one acre in size; 2. Wetlands equal to or less that one acre in size and having three or more wetland classes; 3. Wetlands equal to or less than one acre that have a forested wetland class comprised of at least 20% coverage of total surface water; 4. The presence of heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees; 5. The presence of native plant associations of infrequent occurrences. A Type 3 Wetland means those wetlands that are equal to or less than one acre in size and have two or fewer wetland classes. 3 5- Rivers 01248 WATERCOURSE STANDARD BUFFER WIDTH 1 70 feet 2 35 feet 3 15 feet WETLAND TYPE STANDARD BUFFER WIDTH 1 100 feet 2 50 feet 3 25 feet Rc i l ✓4N V FO 0 0,1, 7 100 � p N� Streams (i.e. watercourses) are rated using the City of Tukwila methodology and'seria as defined within the City's "Watercourse Study" (1990). A Type 1 Watercourse scores from 21 to 33 points. A Type 2 Watercourse scores from 11 to 20 points. A Type 3 Watercourse scores from 3 to 10 points. Wetland /Stream Alteration The City of Tukwila allows a limited amount of alterations to wetlands and streams (i.e. watercourses) provided all impacts are mitigated pursuant to an approved mitigation plan approved by the City of Tukwila. Required Buffers The City of Tukwila has established a standard buffer to be applied to a wetland or stream to ensure protection of the wetland function and value. This buffer area is measured perpendicular to the defined wetland edge or perpendicular to the identified ordinary high water mark of a stream. Isolated Wetlands With the approval of the Director, isolated wetlands that are 1,000 square feet or smaller in area, and which are low in value according to the rating methodology used by the City's Water Resource Rating and Buffer Study, may not require the compensatory mitigation standards established by the City within Chapter 18.45. Impacts to Type 1 or Type 2 Wetlands Pursuant to 18.45.080.C, no use or development may occur in a Type 1 or Type 2 Wetland or its buffer except as specifically allowed by TMC 18.45.080.A, 18.45.080.B, and 18.45.080.H. One of these specifically allowed provisions is for the construction of new essential streets and roads, rights -of -way, and utilities (TMC 18.45.080.B.1). 4 5- Rivers 01248 WETLAND SIZE (sqft) CITY OF TUKWILA WETLAND TYPE FUNCTION AND VALUE RATING PROPOSED ACTION A 4,320 sqft 2 LOW This wetland and its associated established buffer would be retained and restored through the removal of invasive shrubs and garbage, and the planting of native trees and shrubs. In addition, 1,939 square feet of new wetland would be created along the southern edge of this wetland through the removal of existing soils and the planting of native trees, shrubs, and emergents. Hydrology for the retained and new wetland would be supplemented by the addition of rooftops drains to these areas. B 898 sqft 3 LOW This wetland would be filled to provide for an internal roadway and new lot areas. C 3,503 sqft 2 LOW Majority of this wetland to be retained. The retained wetland and associated buffer would be restored through the removal of invasive shrubs and garbage, and the planting of native trees and shrubs. A small part of this wetland (599 square feet) would be unavoidable filled to created the access roadway for the new homesites. Mitigation for the unavoidable impact would be provided within the new wetland area to be created adjacent to Wetland A. D 663 sqft 3 LOW Majority of this wetland to be filled to provide new lot area. That portion of this wetland within the buffer of Wetland A or Wetland C would be retained. SELECTED DEVELOPMENT ACTION 5 5- Rivers 01248 Development of the Five Rivers Preliminary Plat focuses on establishing independent lots for the future development of residential homesites consistent with the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and local zoning. Through compensatory mitigation the Selected Development Action would not result in a "net loss" of regulated wetland area, function, or value consistent with the City of Tukwila — Sensitive Areas Overlay — Chapter 18.45. The selected site development plan would result in the following actions: ';? �c SELECTED COMPENSATORY MITIGATION APPROACH c / r Site planning for the Five Rivers Preliminary Plat has focused on the mandated hierarchy of wetland impact reduction: 1) avoidance, 2) minimization, and 3) compensation. These avoidance and minimization strategies included a site design to reduce impacts to onsite wetland systems. The present site design would retain the majority of onsite Wetlands A and C, restore and enhance existing wetland and buffer areas, and establish protective buffers in accordance with City of Tukwila Chapter 18.45 for the retained onsite wetlands. Unavoidable impacts to Wetland C would be mitigated through the creation of an alternative onsite wetland area contiguous with Wetland A. Wetland B and the majority of Wetland D would be filled to created the internal roadway and new homesite lots. Both of these wetlands are isolated, less than 1,000 square feet in area, and exhibit a low functional value rating. Mitigation Benefits The development of the proposed mitigation wetland area, along with the restoration/ enhancement of the existing retained wetland and buffer areas is designed to accompany site development. The primary benefits associated with the proposed mitigation program include the creation of a viable wetland and buffer composed of native emergents, shrubs, and trees within an area presently impacted by past land use activities. The selected plant species would increase diversity and complexity within the mitigation site. DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPENSATORY MITIGATION PROGRAM 1. As compensation for the unavoidable impact to 599 square feet of City of Tukwila Type 2 Wetland (Wetland C), a new wetland area equal to 1,903 square feet would be created contiguous with the south - central edge of Wetland A. Wetland creation would be accomplished through the excavation of existing upland area to an elevation consistent with the adjacent wetland area. Wetland creation would include the placement of a layer 12 to 18 inches deep of clean, highly organic topsoil within the created wetland area. 2. The existing degraded wetland and upland areas adjacent to the retained portion of Wetland C, the retained portions of Wetland D, and Wetland A would be cleared of debris, piles of imported fill, and invasive shrubs. These areas would then be planted with a mixture of native trees and shrubs (Appendix A). These activities would restore the wetlands and create a buffer that protects and enhances the functions and value of these wetland areas. The width of this buffer would be established at consistent with the City of Tukwila Chapter 18.45. Buffer averaging would be used along the northern and. western edges of Wetland A. 6 5- Rivers 01248 / JO fr 0 o o 4,41. (004 3. Habitat features (i.e. standing stags and logs) shall be placed within the createeN, wetland, and restored wetland and buffer areas to provide structural diversity and habitats for wildlife common to the area. 4. All onsite activities would be monitored by the onsite biologist. Following the completion of onsite planting activities a "record- drawing" plan would be prepared and submitted to the City of Tukwila. A five -year monitoring program would be undertaken to assure the success of the mitigation program. A series of financial guarantees would also be implemented (if required by the City of Tukwila) to assure that the proposed work is completed and is successful. 6. Temporary and long -term erosion control measures would be implemented. These measures include silt fencing during site preparation and wetland construction, and seeding of exposed soil areas. 7. The outer buffer boundary of each retained onsite wetland shall be marked with standard City of Tukwila "Wetland Buffer Boundary" signs at 25 -foot intervals. 8. This outer buffer boundary of each retained onsite wetland shall be permanently fenced to limit intrusion into these areas. The fence can be either a six -foot solid - wood fence, a split rail, six -foot chain link fence, or other City of Tukwila pre - approved substitute. At least one access gate shall be provided through the fence for maintenance and monitoring purposes. GOAL AND OBJECTIVE OF THE MITIGATION PLAN The GOAL of the Compensatory Mitigation Program is to fully compensate for the unavoidable adverse impact to 599 square feet of impact to Wetland C. Upon the completion of this mitigation program there would be no net loss of regulated wetland acreage, functions, or values; and an increase in the potential for the wetland buffer to protect local aquatic habitats. To achieve the defined GOAL, the following OBJECTIVES and PERFORMANCE CRITERIA have are defined: Objective A. The created compensatory wetland area would total 1,903 square feet in size. Site design for the created wetland would focus on excavation and final surface elevations within the wetland area to establish an early growing season (March - April) water regime dominated by soil saturation to the surface over approximately 100% of the created wetland area. This design would allow soil saturation within the rooting zone to occur through the spring and early summer. The created wetland would be hydrologically connected to the onsite Wetland A and would receive hydrologic support from local rainfall and rooftops drains. 7 5- Rivers 01248 /J / oky24,M4 <400i Performance Criteria #A1: 1,903 square feet of compensatory mitigke4 wetland area would exhibit an early growing season (March - June) wateft regime dominated by soil saturation to the surface. Objective B. The created compensatory mitigation wetland area would total 1,903 square feet. This created wetland area would exhibit a scrub /shrub and sapling tree vegetation classes within five years following initial planting. Performance Criteria #B1: As defined by Canopy Coverage Method sampling (0.25 m plot frame) the emergent plant community within the 1,903 square feet of the compensatory mitigation wetland area would exhibit at least an 80% coverage within five years following initial planting. As defined by representative sample plots the scrub /shrub and sapling vegetation class would exhibit at least a 50% aerial coverage within five years following initial planting. Performance Criteria #82: As defined by representative sample plots the scrub /shrub and sapling vegetation class within the restored buffers Wetlands A and C would exhibit at least a 50% aerial coverage within five years following initial planting. Performance Criteria #B3: As defined by plant count at representative sample plots 100% of the trees and shrubs initially planted within the created compensatory wetland and the restored buffer would exhibit survival through the end of the first growing season following planting. Performance Criteria #B4: As defined by plant count at representative sample plots 80% of the trees and shrubs initially planted within the created compensatory wetland and the restored buffers would exhibit survival through the end of the fifth growing season following planting. Objective C. The compensatory mitigation wetland and the restored and enhanced buffer area would include the placement of snags and downed logs which provide nesting and cover habitat for passerine birds common to the area within five years. Performance Criteria #C1: A minimum of two (2) stumps (minimum 10 feet in length, minimum 20 inch diameter at the top, minimum 10 foot diameter at bottom of rootball) and a minimum of two (2) downed logs (minimum 20 feet in length, minimum 20 inch diameter at 10 feet above root collar, minimum 10 foot diameter at bottom of rootball) would be placed within the compensatory mitigation area to provide habitat for passerine birds common to the area. The same number and description of logs and snags would be placed within the restored and enhanced wetland areas. 8 5- Rivers 01248 PROJECT TASK TASK SCHEDULE Onsite pre - construction meeting Completed by August 15, 200x Placement of protective fencing, final marking, and identification of work area. Completed by August 30, 200x '../ 4N L FO 0 O 0447. ,4 �4 Performance Criteria #C2: A minimum of three (3) stumps (minimum 10 fe, length, minimum 20 inch diameter at the top, minimum 10 foot diameter at bottom of rootball) and a minimum of three (3) downed logs (minimum 20 feet in length, minimum 20 inch diameter at 10 feet above root collar, minimum 10 foot diameter at bottom of rootball) would be placed within the restored buffers adjacent to Wetlands A and C. SELECTED PLANT COMMUNITIES MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION The plant communities and plants selected for the created wetland and restored/ enhanced wetland and buffer areas would be obtained as nursery stock. These selected species are native and commonly occur in the local area. The plant species prescribed are selected to increase plant diversity, match present onsite communities, increase wildlife habitats, and enhance the aquatic environment. Essential to the success of the mitigation program is the accurate inspection of onsite activities immediately prior to and during the initial wetland creation phase. These activities include pre- construction site inspection, onsite inspection and technical direction during wetland creation and planting activities, and post - planting site inspection and evaluation. The pre- construction site inspection allows the project team and the project biologist to evaluate and, if necessary, adjust the onsite construction steps. These steps include analysis of project site elevation features, project sequencing and timing, final grade analysis, unforeseen required minor modifications to the original establishment plan, and the establishment of environmental protections (silt fences, etc.) required during construction. Onsite technical inspection during construction and planting activities would be implemented by the project biologist. The project biologist would perform construction oversight and address minor unforeseen construction difficulties to assure that the intent of the wetland creation and buffer establishment plan is met. The project biologist shall also be responsible for ensuring that the species and sizes of native plants selected and noted within the final planting plan are utilized during construction. If selected native species become unavailable, the project biologist would consult with the City of Tukwila wetland staff for substitute plant species to assure that the intent of the wetland creation and buffer establishment plan is met. Post - construction site inspection/ evaluation would include the preparation of a "record - drawings" which would be submitted to the City of Tukwila wetland staff. MITIGATION CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE 9 5- Rivers 01248 Grading of wetland mitigation area. Completed by September 15,` 00x Placement of clean, highly organic topsoils within the created wetland and enhanced buffer area. Completed by September 30, 200x Placement of habitat features within wetland and buffer. Completed by September 30, 200x Seeding of disturbed areas. Completed by September 30, 200x Installation of protective fence and buffer boundary signs along outer buffer boundary. Completed by October 15, 200x Irrigation of created wetland. As needed following seeding Planting of created wetland, and wetland buffer. Completed by November 15, 200x Record - drawings report to City Completed by December 5, 200x PROJECT MONITORING Following the successful completion of the proposed wetland creation and wetland /buffer planting a five -year monitoring and evaluation program would be undertaken. The purpose of this program is to ensure the success of the selected mitigation as measured by an established set of performance criteria (see above). This monitoring would also provide valuable information on the effectiveness of mitigation procedures. STANDARDS OF SUCCESS Vegetation Sampling Methodology and Monitoring Schedule Permanent vegetation sampling plots would be located within each planting community in areas representative of the communities being sampled. These sampling plots would be located along specific transects and at stationary identified points. Observations and measurements would be recorded for all plant species in order of dominance based on the relative percent cover for each species within the various vegetation strata. Sampling for tree and shrub species would be completed in 30 -foot radius sampling plots. The evaluation of the success of the wetland creation and buffer establishment plan would be based on the expected cover percentages and the selected 80% survival rate. These defined threshold criteria would be applied at the times of yearly monitoring. The percent of aerial cover and the percent survival rate would be based on combined counts of existing and planted species during vegetation monitoring. Sample location would be shown on the design and the "record drawings" plans, and would correspond to identified photopoints. Trees and shrubs would be visually evaluated to determine the rate of survivorship, health, and vigor of each plant. The categories to be used would include live, stressed, tip dieback, basal sprouts, not found, apparently dead, and dead. Vegetation Monitoring 1. Upon the completion of initial planting and as a project biologist would count the number of live part of each monitoring period the plants which were planted within the 10 5- Rivers 01248 /.,4N 2 Fp wetland and buffer areas. Plants would be identified to species and observat fcf general plant condition (i.e., plant health, amount of new growth) are to be recorded for each plant. 2. At identified sample plots within the created wetland and the enhanced buffer areas the project biologist would determine percent coverage of vegetation using the Canopy Coverage Method sampling (0.25 m plot frame) procedure for emergent species and by using representative sample plots for the scrub /shrub and sapling tree species. 3. At identified sample plots within the created wetland and the enhanced buffer the project biologist would count the number of undesirable invasive plants and estimate the aerial coverage (as if the observer were looking straight down from above) of these invasive plants. Undesirable plants include blackberries, Scot's broom, tansy ragwort, and other such plants listed in the Washington State Noxious Weed List. 4. At identified sample plots within the created wetland and the enhanced buffer the project biologist would count the number of desirable "volunteer" plants and estimate the aerial coverage of these plants. 5. The project biologist would take photographs that show the entire created wetland and the enhanced buffer. During the five -year monitoring period photos would be taken in the same direction and at the same location to provide a series of photos. These photos would show plant growth, plant species, and plant coverage. 6. Upon the completion of the initial project planting and upon the completion of each monitoring period the project biologist would prepare a report defining methods, observations, and results along with the date the observations were completed. 7. The monitoring schedule is defined as: A. At the completion of initial project planting. This report would include a "record drawing" defining the species used, locations, and general site conditions. This report would also include a "lessons learned" section to assist in future monitoring and final project assessment. This "record drawing" and report would be provided to the City within three weeks after the completion of onsite planting. B. Twice a. year for two years following the completion of initial onsite planting. For each monitoring year, onsite monitoring would be completed once early in the growing season (late March to mid - April) and once again near the end of the growing season (mid- September). For each onsite monitoring activity a report would be prepared and provided to the City within three weeks after the completion of onsite monitoring. C. Once a year for years three, four, and five following the completion of initial onsite planting. For each monitoring year, onsite monitoring would be completed 11 5- Rivers 01248 MONITORING YEAR PLANT COMMUNITY MONITORING HYDROLOGY MONITORING SUBMITTAL OF MONITORING REPORT YEAR -1 . on or about April 15, 200x +1 Once a week February 25 through May 10, 200x +1 report due May 7, 200x +1 on or about Sept. 15, 200x +1 report due Oct. 7, 200x +1 YEAR - 2 on or about April 15, 200x +2 Once a week February 25 through May 10, 200x +2 report due May 7, 200x +2 on or about Sept. 15, 200x +2 report due Oct. 7, 200x +2 YEAR -3 on or about Sept. 15, 200x +3 report due Oct. 7, 200x +3 /J441 Fp b 0 o4 �DO� once near the end of the growing season (mid- September). For each ons '@ P i,y monitoring activity a report would be prepared and provided to the City within three'r weeks after the completion of onsite monitoring. The last monitoring report would include notification to the City biologist that the monitoring program has concluded and that City review and site inspection is required for project analysis and release of the financial guarantee. This final report would also include a "lessons learned" section to assist and final project assessment and to potentially assist in the evaluation other mitigation projects. Wetland Hydrology Pattern Monitoring 1. During the spring of the first and second year's following the completion of the planting the project biologist would monitor hydrology patterns within the created wetland to ensure that the area exhibits a seasonal hydrology sufficient to meet the criteria of the 1987 Manual and the Wash. Manual. 2. Upon the completion of each spring monitoring period the project biologist would prepare a report defining methods, observations, and results along with the date the observations were completed. This report would be attached as a part of the first and second year's spring vegetation monitoring reports and sent to the City. 3. The wetland hydrology pattern monitoring schedule is defined as once a week for the first few months of the first and second growing seasons following the completion of planting actions. Onsite monitoring would use three established shallow ground water monitoring wells (maximum of 24 inches in depth) within the wetland area recently created and three established shallow ground water monitoring wells (maximum of 24 inches in depth) within the wetland area recently enhanced. Beginning the last week of February and continuing through the first part of May, approximately twelve weekly monitoring observations would be completed. Vegetation and Hydrology Monitoring Sequencing 12 5- Rivers 01248 common name scientific name percent by weight colonial bentgrass Agrostis tenuis 15 % . tall fescue Festuca arundinacea 40% perennial ryegrass Lolium perenne 30% creeping red fescue Festuca rubra 15% YEAR -4 on or about Sept. 15, 200x +4 Redtop repor tie Oct 7, 200x +4 YEAR -5 on or about Sept. 15, 200x +5 Alopecurus geniculatus report due Oct. 7, 200x +4 common name scientific name I percent by weight Redtop Agrostis alba 50% water foxtail Alopecurus geniculatus 50% VEGETATION MAINTENANCE PLAN Maintenance of the created wetland and buffer plant communities may be required to assure the long -term health and welfare of the wetland's and buffer's environmental functions. Such maintenance would be identified during the monitoring period and undertaken only following discussion and coordination with the City wetland staff. The overall objective is to establish undisturbed plant communities that do not require maintenance. Activities may include, but are not limited to, the removal of invasive non- native vegetation and the irrigation of selected areas. Established maintenance activities include the removal of any trash within the wetland or buffer. REMOVAL OF INVASIVE NON - NATIVE VEGETATION As a contingency, should the removal of invasive non - native vegetation become necessary, the project proponent would contact the City wetland staff to establish and define specific actions to be taken. Resultant contingency plan activities would be implemented when the ongoing vegetation monitoring program indicates that plants listed in the Washington State Noxious Weed List, blackberries, or Scot's broom are becoming dominant in the community. SEEDING FOR EXPOSED AREAS Seeding for all exposed surfaces within the created wetland and enhanced buffer would be completed within two weeks following the completion of debris removal and placement of clean, highly organic topsoil. Wetland Area Soil Moisture Conditions (apply at the rate of 120 pounds per acre) Upland Buffer Area Soil Moisture Conditions (apply at the rate of 120 pounds per acre) 13 5- Rivers 01248 RRc E��F iJAN D COMMM Zo CONTINGENCY PLAN 'E LoPM F As a contingency, should the proposed compensatory plan fail to meet the performance criteria, the project proponent would undertake required remedial actions. Where plant survival is the failing component, the project proponent would replant and ensure the success of this second planting which would be held to the same standard of success as measured by threshold criteria and monitoring processes. Should additional remedial actions be required, the project proponent would meet with the City wetland staff to establish and define actions to be taken to meet the desired goal of this program. PLANTING NOTES All plant materials shall be native to the Puget Sound Region. The onsite biologist shall inspect plant materials to assure the appropriate plant schedule and plant characteristics are met. The project proponent shall warrant that all plants would remain alive and healthy for a period of one year following completion of planting activities. The project proponent shall replace all dead and unhealthy plants with plants of the same specifications. FINANCIAL GUARANTEE Financial guarantee would be provided, if required by the City, for this project and would be defined in two parts. Part One (Construction Guarantee) would be associated with the initial onsite compensation elements of the proposed plan. Part Two (Performance Guarantee) would be associated with the monitoring and reporting elements of the proposed compensation plan. These bonds would be held by Pierce County and be equal to 125% of the actual estimated costs for identified activities. This increased percentage would allow for adequate funds to be available as a contingency should actions be required to meet the goals of these plans. The amount of each guarantee would be provided within the Final Mitigation Program documents. Following your review of this conceptual mitigation program document please contact me at 253 - 845 -5119 with any questions or suggestions. Sincerely, Thomas D. Deming 14 5- Rivers 01248 REFERENCE LIST Adamus, P.R., E.J. Clairain Jr., R.D. Smith, and R.E. Young. 1987. Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET); Volume II: Methodology, Operational Draft Technical Report Y -87, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, FWS /OBS- 79/31. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. 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 U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Cooperative technical publication. 76 pp. plus appendices. Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist. 1977. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Reppert, R.T., W. Sigleo, E. Stakhiv, L. Messman, and C. Meyers. 1979. Wetland Values - Concepts and Methods for Wetland Evaluation. Research Report 79 -R1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soils Conservation Service. Soils Survey of King County Area Washington, June 1973. Washington State Department of Fisheries, Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume 1., 1975. 15 5- Rivers 01248 APPENDIX A Beneficial Uses of Plants Proposed for Planting in the Wetland and Buffer 16 5- Rivers 01248 TREE STRATA BENEFICIAL USES OF PLANTS USED IN WETLAND AND BUFFER RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES BOTANICAL NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME INDICATOR STATUS PLANTING LOCATION BENEFICIAL USES Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU buffer Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and food for wildlife. Excellent insect habitat which are prey for wildlife. Important structural habitat component, alive or as a snag. Western red cedar Thuja plicate FAC wetland and buffer Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and food for wildlife. Habitat for insects which are prey for wildlife. Important structural habitat component, alive or as a snag. Good along riparian areas. Good soil stability value. Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU buffer Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and food for wildlife. Also habitat for insects which are prey for wildlife. Important structural habitat component, alive or as a snag. Good along riparian areas. Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC wetland and buffer Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and food for wildlife. Seed cones drop in fall. Also habitat for insects which are prey for wildlife. Important structural habitat component, alive or as a snag. Good soil stability value. big leaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU buffer Important structural habitat component, alive or as a snag. Stumps produce dense mass of sprout stems. Seed eaten by many wildlife species. Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Good soil stability value. Oregon ash Fraxlnus latifolia FACW wetland and buffer edge Female trees produce seeds that are eaten by many species of wildlife. Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Western paper birch Betula papyrivera FAC wetland edge Hardy, fast growing. Seeds especially valued by goldfinches, siskins, and juncos. Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- buffer edge Good soil- binding characteristics and grows well in disturbed sites. Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and excellent insect habitat. Fruit eaten by wildlife. bitter cherry Prunus emarginata FACU buffer Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Fruit eaten by wildlife. Good soil stability value. Western crabapple Pyrus fusca FACW wetland and buffer edge Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Fruit eaten by wildlife. Good soil stability value. black hawthorne Crataegus douglasii FAC wetland and buffer edge Dense crown provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Fruit eaten by wildlife. Good soil stability value. Pacific willow Salix lasiandra FACW+ wetland and buffer edge Excellent soil- binding characteristics and very effective erosion control. Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and excellent insect habitat. Does not produce seed or fruit for use, by wildlife. a) . TREE STRATA BENEFICIAL USES OF PLANTS USED IN WETLAND AND BUFFER RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES SHRUB AND GROUND COVER STRATA BOTANICAL NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME INDICATOR STATUS PLANTING LOCATION BENEFICIAL USES Sitka willow Salix sitchensis FACW wetland and buffer edge Fast growing. Excellent soil- binding characteristics and very effective erosion control. Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and excellent insect habitat. Does not produce seed or fruit for use by wildlife. Scouler willow Salix scouleriana FAC wetland and buffer edge Fast growing. Excellent soil- binding characteristics and very effective erosion control. Provides escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and excellent insect habitat. Does not produce seed or fruit for use by wildlife. red -osier dogwood - Corpus stolonifera FACW wetland and buffer edge Excellent soil- binding characteristics. Attractive multi -stem shrub with or without stems. Excellent escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. White fruit eaten by wildlife. salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC+ wetland and buffer edge Good soil- binding characteristics. Well adapted to disturbed areas. Fruit has high food value for wildlife. Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC wetland and buffer edge Excellent soil- binding characteristics. Well adapted to disturbed areas. Fruit has high food value and are persistent well into winter. peafruit rose Rosa pisocarpa FAC wetland and buffer edge Excellent soil- binding characteristics. Well adapted to disturbed areas. Fruit has high food value and are persistent well into winter. wild rose Rosa gymnocarpa FACU buffer and buffer edge Excellent soil- binding characteristics. Well adapted to disturbed areas. Fruit has high food value and are persistent well into winter. Pacific ninebark Physocarpus capitatus FACW- wetland and buffer edge Excellent soil- binding characteristics. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- buffer edge Excellent soil- binding characteristics. Multi -stem shrub. Excellent escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Winged fruit eaten by wildlife. salal Gaultheria shallon FACU buffer Good soil- binding characteristics and tolerant to poor soils. Produces edible berries used by some wildlife. Provides excellent ground cover for wildlife escape and refuge. Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UPL buffer Good soil- binding characteristics. Produces edible berries used by some wildlife. Provides excellent ground cover for wildlife escape and refuge. snowberry Symphoricarpus albus FACU buffer Excellent soil- binding characteristics. Produces edible berries used by wildlife. Provides escape and refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ buffer Good soil- binding characteristics. Produces edible fruit. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Pacific red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU buffer Good soil- binding characteristics. Produces edible fruit. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. prickly current Ribes lacustre FAC+ wetland and buffer edge Produces edible fruit. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and refuge cover, and insect habitat. � �� SHRUB AND GROUND COVER STRATA BOTANICAL NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME INDICATOR STATUS " PLANTING LOCATION BENEFICIAL USES gooseberry Ribes divaricatum • FAC wetland and buffer edge Produces edible fruit. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and refuge cover, and insect habitat flowering current Ribes sanguineum UPL buffer Produces edible fruit. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and refuge cover, and insect habitat. hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU buffer Excellent soil- binding characteristics. Multi -stem shrub. Excellent escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Nuts eaten by wildlife. Important small mammal winter stored food. kinnikinnick Arctostaphylos uva - ursi FACU- buffer Good soil - bidding characteristics. Produces abundant, edible berries used by some wildlife. Provides excellent ground cover for wildlife escape and refuge. thimbleberry Rubus parviflorus FAC- buffer Produces edible fruit. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and refuge cover, and insect habitat. evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum UPL buffer Good soil- binding characteristics and tolerant to poor soils. Produces edible berries used by some wildlife. Provides excellent ground cover for wildlife escape and refuge. oceanspray Holodiscus discolor - buffer Good soil- binding characteristics and does well on disturbed sites. Multi -stem shrub. Excellent escape /refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Seeds persist through the winter and are eaten by wildlife. slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL wetland Good soil- binding characteristics and does well in disturbed sites. Seeds persist through the winter and are eaten by wildlife. small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL wetland Good soil- binding characteristics. Seeds eaten by wildlife. common cattail Typha latifolia OBL wetland Good soil- binding characteristics and does well in disturbed sites. Stems and seeds are eaten by wildlife. Provides escape and refuge cover, nesting sites, and insect habitat. CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E - mail: tukplanna,ci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, co tractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 6 /59 II/ 5T / 53 AYES for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. The City shall, at its discretion , cancel the application without refund of fees, if the applicant does not respond to specific requests for items on the "Complete Application Checklist" within ninety (90) days. 7. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at (city), 1 / V4— (state), on ✓O4.7 a4-7 s, 'Q , z 'q 14465411•7/''."-tr7::.4v cu9LIC STATE OF WASHINGTON F' `C ,A c My ,; ,,arntme; r rto I;; May 1, 2006 JAScv /&vow 6R f/O,/ (Print Name) 2 7 J - i/5 Ave 5C T 960.30 (Address) b) b5/ - /198 (Phone Number) S . • (Signature) On this day personally appeared before me -F1SW te/ (N-'Q Se. k't+Of%) to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she signed the same as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. L SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS '+ DAY OF YA J 4 2 3 OTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington iding at 127 y Commission expires on ti YN 1 '24P0'107 FOR STAFF USE ONLY Sierra Type: P-SP Planner: File Number: L 0 _ v DI Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: NW o _ o Z Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: C . D ,.. e 27 Lo t —cif CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Developmenttk.0 SPECIAL 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 981 8 /f� ERMIS SION Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 - 366' l E- mail: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us ' 0 2 DIRECTOR WIN Op /Ty NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: 17 V1= VF.s s/c) - PLAT LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS. 53aA -YE . / s /fie 0 57: # • 115 tro ' Quarter: SW Section: 23 Township: Range: 04 (This information may be found on your tax statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: ALE / t PEL /5 , &ch./71a? NW iM Address: 445 M A NT/V91- � ST . /4 ,kEV7 W14 '?O2 . Phone: (25 652 4M0 FAX: 253) e52 - SS Signature( �i / ` / /� , / // ; i Date: /Z /3I /03 G: APPHAMSIGN.HNDISPD.doc.05 /06/02 Information Required. May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning " information Waived Office Use On ly Comments 8c Conditions APPLICATION FORMS: "I. Application Checklist one (1) copy, indicating items submitted with application. / 2. Permit Fee ($200). /3. Written description of the project, the deviation being requested and response to the applicable decision criteria. ZONING CODE PARKING DEVIATION 4. A complete description of the proposed construction relative to parking areas, and all supporting agreements. 5. Dimensional site plan(s) to demonstrate parking area consistent with Zoning Code requirements. 6. Parking studies as needed to demonstrate adequate parking is provided. LANDSCAPE DEVIATION 7. Landscape plan — two (2) copies showing size and species of existing and proposed plant materials, required perimeter landscape types, parking areas, buildings, walkways, transit facilities, property lines, dimensions and area of planting beds and any calculations necessary to demonstrate compliance with review criteria. TREE REGULATION DEVIATION 8. Tree survey showing size and species of existing trees, with trees to be removed and trees to be retained noted (unless request is for use of canopy cover method) COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST V The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Public Works Department and the Department of Community Development. Please contact the Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived, or should be submitted in a later timely manner for use at the Public Hearing (e.g., revised colored renderings). Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow starting project review and vesting the applicant's rights. However, they in no way limit the City's ability to require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. Department staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 - 431 -3670. G APPHAN\SIGN.HNDISPD.doc, 05/06/02 COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST TABLE .,, ,Znformatiori Required May be waived in unusual cas upon approval of both Public Workr and Planning , . . _ Information Waived PbWkIPing- Office ce Use n g C om me nts & Cpnairt 9. Tree replacement calculations per TMC 18.54.130.3 B or canopy cover calculations per TMC 18.54.140 B. ft 10. Description of the nature of the undue hardship caused by strict compliance with the Tree Regulations, proposed mitigation measures and justification for the deviation from Tree Regulations. C � /V�j / JON 2 1141 " '4. SENSITIVE AREA ORDINANCE DEVIATIONS 1/- i 11. Site Plan — two (2) copies showing all buildings, parking areas, walkways, property lines, planting areas, sensitive areas, their buffers and setbacks. 12. Sensitive area studies and enhancement plans to justify a requested buffer or setback reduction and demonstrate that the reduction will not result in a direct or indirect short-term or long -term adverse impact to the sensitive area. SIGN CODE APPROVAL/DEVIATION 13. Complete "Permanent Sign Permit Application" with all supporting materials and fees ($50). 14. The following information should be given on the plans: North arrow, title, scale and date; Vicinity map showing location and names of adjacent roads; Property lines; Locations of all buildings on site; Dimensioned elevations of building drawn to scale (for wall signs); Elevations, dimensions and materials of proposed sign(s) including advertising copy; Color elevation of proposed sign. CARGO CONTAINER APPROVAL 15. Proof of the date of purchase of the container or installation on the property. 16. Site plan showing the location of the container(s) in relationship to parking areas, property lines, buildings, streets, trails, landscape areas and setbacks. 17. Description of the proposed screening. G: APPHAMS1GN.HND4SPD.doc. 05/06/02 Es Catch Basi Rim: 141.01 1E8 142.65 Ex. San Sewer Manhole Rim: 146.70 IE Ctr. 135.51 NEV 5' SIDEWALK NEV VERT. CURB /GUTTER EX SAN SEVER EX WATER MAIN A9 r Sanitary Sewer Manhole Rene 166.32 Ctr: 158.00 • S. 159 ST. 5' SIDEWALK VERT. CURB/GUT DRYCO 193.9' t • F 37' E L (TO BE TED B D EV V K) SRI : 180 306 C.. 1---- ET' VV 9Vt 50 Catch Basin 001 Rim: 169.95 IE121W: 167.7 Surveying, Incor,)orated 12714 VALLEY AVENUE EAST SUMNER, WA 98390 253 - 826 -0300 FAX 253 - 826 -5703 2000202 ONE FIRM 1/73/2001 Es Catch Basin Rim: 136.59 IE8'W: 132.14 A PORTION of the S.W. 1/4, SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 23 N., RANGE 4 E., W.M. " N I 9 s e9 1 / FLOW RESTRICTOR RISER AND 12' OUTLET GRAPHIC SCALE 30 0 15 30 60 m 1sB ( Dr FEET ) 1 Inch 0. 30 ft. 120 Ex Sanitary Sheer Manhole Rim: 134.97 IE12'15Ctr. 120.49 DRAINAGE DETENTION DESIGN WATER LEVEL. ELEV. 126.5' TIP VETPEND ELEV. 121.5 DOT WETPOND ELEV. U73 VETPOND VOLUME. 11264 CF DETENTION VOLUME. 14105 CT Ex Sanitary Sewer Manhole Rim: 127.00 ABANDONED AULT Ex Sanitary Sawa, Manhole Rim: 128.58 IE12'OCtr. 118.76 10 9 `-Ex Sanitary Sewer Manhole Ram: 125.29 ABANDONED Ex Storm Manhole Rim: 98.79 IE24': 86.04 Ex Storm Manhole Rim: 98.91 IE12'S: 92.51 515'S: 85.66 IE24'N: 85.71 IE24'NE Out: 85.11 REN90N$ SCALE: 1' a 30' DESIGN BY: JJJ ORYM. BY: JJJ APP. 8)1 JOB Na _