HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L04-034 - FOSTER RIDGE DEVELOPMENT - PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTFOSTER RIDGE
4602 S 139 STREET
L04 -034
July 29, 2004
John B. Friel
P.O. Box 27
Everett, WA 98206
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
NOTICE OF DECISION
RE: Foster Ridge Development
L04 -033 Boundary Line Adjustment
L04 -034 Administrative Planned Residential Development
Dear Mr. Friel:
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
The Short Subdivision Committee has completed review of your boundary line adjustment and
administrative planned residential development applications and determined that they comply with
all applicable City code requirements. The City SEPA Responsible Official has previously
determined that the project does not create a probable significant environmental impact if specific
mitigation conditions are imposed on the project and issued a Mitigated Determination of Non -
Significance (MDNS) requiring compliance with those mitigation conditions. An addendum to that
determination was issued on June 18, 2004 to address the change from a 12 lot to a 6 lot plan.
This letter serves as the Notice of Decision per. TMC 18.104.170. Based on the latest project
submittal, preliminary approval is granted subject to the conditions stated below.
There are three basic steps in the approval process:
1. Preliminary Approval
This letter constitutes your preliminary approval. The application was reviewed by the
Tukwila Short Subdivision Committee and approved with conditions. The conditions
imposed are to ensure the boundary line adjustment is consistent with the Criteria for
Preliminary Approval listed at TMC 17.08.030 C in the Tukwila Subdivision Code.
Page 1
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
Utilities
Access
Fire Protection
g.
Geotechnical
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL CONDITIONS
a. Drainage design for the site shall be reviewed as part of the PW infrastructure permit and
shall meet City of Tukwila Surface Water Ordinance Requirements.
b. Pursuant to the Tukwila "underground ordinance ", all utilities shall be placed underground.
c. Extension of the sewer and water lines to the lots shall be approved by the appropriate
utility and conform to the PACE Composite Utility Plan dated July 2003. As -built plans
shall be provided to the Public Works Department prior to final approval.
d. Identify the location of the point of connection to the existing storm drainage pipe. If the
point of connection is off site on lots 10 and/or 11 agreements must be made with the
property owners to permit construction activity.
e. Access roads built to Public Works and Fire Department standards must be provided to
all lots as shown on the Site Plan prepared by Pace Engineering dated July 2003. This
requirement must be met prior to issuance of any building permits.
f. Your submittal for a Public Works permit to construct the access roads and install the
utilities must contain a grading plan that shows the location of all proposed retaining walls
and gives estimated cut and fill quantities. Certain retaining walls may require separate
building permits and structural review. Please contact the Public Works Department for
additional information.
There must be a fire hydrant within 250 feet of all building sites. If the fire hydrant is not
capable of a 1000 gallon per minute flow the future houses will be required to provide
interior sprinklers, to be approved by the Fire Department. This requirement must be met
prior to issuance of any building permits.
h. The property owners will need to sign, notarize and record the revised geotechnical
covenant as a condition of the PW Type C infrastructure construction permit. The permit
will not be finaled until the covenant has been recorded.
i. The recommendation from Associated Earth Sciences, contained in their July 11, 2002
letter, that there be an on -site inspector representing the geotechnical engineers during the
L97 -0026 Page 2
General
construction of foundations, retaining walls, water, sewer, and surface water utilities, and
driveways shall be a condition of the Public Works permit. The on -site inspector shall
verify in writing, on a daily basis, with the reports sent to the City's Department of Public
Works, that all construction work has been performed in accordance with approved plans
and specifications, permit requirements, and that the construction work complies with all
of the geotechnical's recommendations.
The plantings specified in the wetland mitigation/buffer enhancement plan prepared by
Sheldon & Associates for the reduction of the wetland buffer from 50' to 25' along Lot 2
must be installed prior to final short plat approval. Blackberry control should begin
immediately to match the seasonal recommendations in the report.
k. The plantings along the north side of the detention vault must be shown on the land altering
permit and installed prior to final short plat approval.
1. Submit a tree permit showing all regulated trees to be removed by species and diameter and
the location and species of replacement trees per the table in the Tree Ordinance. All trees
to be retained within the clearing limits must be flagged and have tree protection measures
in place prior to the start of work on the PW permit.
m. The edges of the wetland buffer easements on lots 2, 3, 4 and 6 shall be delineated with a
split rail fence and signage per TMC 18.45.060 6.
n. You will need to obtain all required permits prior to beginning any construction. For water
and sewer permits, contact the individual provider District. For City of Tukwila utilities,
site grading, and access driveways contact Tukwila Public Works at (206) 433 -0179.
o. Install all required site improvements, including those proposed in the application and those
identified above as conditions of approval.
P.
Submit a set of recording documents in either legal or record of survey format that meet the
King County Recorder's requirements and contain the following items:
1. A survey map as described in the application checklist that is consistent with all of
the conditions of approval. The surveyor's original signature must be on the face of the plat.
2. Existing and proposed legal descriptions for all lots.
3. Legal description of the access /utility easements.
4. Joint Maintenance Agreements for the easements, drainage system and open space
tract.
L97 -0026 Page 3
January 14, 2005
John B. Friel
P.O. Box 27
Everett, WA 98206
RE: L04 -085 Short Plat
L04 -033 Boundary Line Adjustment/Lot Consolidation
L04 - 032 Administrative Planned Residential Development
E97 -0013 Environmental Review
Dear Mr. Friel:
Your application for a short plat located at South 139th Street and 46th Avenue South has been
found to be complete on January 14, 2005 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time
requirements and vesting under Tukwila's previous Sensitive Areas Ordinance. You must still
submit a revision to your existing boundary line adjustment permit to change it from a
consolidation of 18 lots to 1, rather than the 6 you had previously proposed. Your SEPA and
planned residential development permits will transfer and apply to the new short plat application.
The next step is for you to install the notice board on the site within 14 days of the date of this
letter. You received information on how to install the sign with your application packet. If you
need another set of those instructions, please call me. Once you have notified me that the notice
board has been installed I will post it with a laminated copy of the Notice of Application and the
comment period will start.
This notice of complete application applies only to the permits identified above. It is your
responsibility to apply for and obtain all necessary permits issued by other agencies. This
determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that you
submit additional plans or information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure
the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process.
Sincere,
Nora Gierloff
Planning Supervisor
City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
December 14, 2004
John B. Friel
P.O. Box 27
Everett, WA 98206
Dear Mr. Friel:
Cizy of Tukwila
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
RE: L04 -033 Boundary Line Adjustment
L04 -032 Administrative Planned Residential Development
E97 -0013 Environmental Review
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
I am writing to you regarding your application for a boundary line adjustment and planned
residential development located at South 139th Street and 46th Avenue South. I am sorry that you
chose not to discuss the project with me when I called on the 10 or attend the scheduled meeting
today with City of Tukwila staff. Our intention was to explain the implications on your project of
the new Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO) that the Council adopted last night.
The Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment performed in November 1995
identified the large wetland on the property as falling into Tukwila's Type 2 Classification. The
new SAO contains slightly different criteria, and given the length of time that has passed you
should ask your consultant to update the Assessment and confirm the wetland type under the new
Code. If, as is likely, it is a Type 2 wetland under the new SAO the buffer will increase from 50 to
80 feet. Please see the attached diagram to see where the increased buffer will fall on lots 2, 3, 4,
and 6.
The advice of our City Attorney is that while the infrastructure required in the Preliminary
Approval letter (roads, utilities and storm drainage) is vested under the old ordinance requirements,
building permit applications for houses on the lots would be required to conform to the codes in
effect at the time they were declared complete. In other words, you would be required to meet the
buffer and setback requirements of the new SAO.
Since the new buffer and building setback covers most of the developable area on lots 3, 4 and 6
there would not be enough area on each lot to construct the proposed houses. One option would be
to apply for a reasonable use exception under TMC 18.45.180 B. This would involve a public
hearing in front of the Planning Commission and possibly additional conditions on the
development.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
Sincerely,
Nora Gierloff
Planning Supervisor
The other option that we wanted to present and discuss with you was the possibility of replacing
your boundary line adjustment (BLA) application with a short plat. Unlike a BLA, the lots created
through a short plat are vested under Washington State law to the regulations in effect at the time
the short plat application is complete. If you were able to submit complete lot consolidation and
short plat applications before the effective date of the new SAO (by 5:00 PM, December 21 you
could vest under the old SAO and retain your prior approval. These applications are available on-
line at www.ci.tukwila.wa.us.
I hope that you understand your options and are conveying this information to your client. Until
you are willing to talk with us we are unable to provide any additional assistance. Please let me
know how you plan on addressing this issue.
cc: Joanna Spencer, Public Works
Jim Morrow, Public Works
Jack Pace, DCD
Shelley Kerslake, City Attorney
(PA VED)
4524
4525
20.0'
HAMMERHEAD &
ACCESS ROAD
20.O'
HAMMERHEAD &
ACCESS ROAD
4526
20.0' INGRESS, EGRESS
& UTLLITY EASEMENT
LOT 4
20.0'
EGRESS t
UTILITY EASEMENT
LOT 6 &
SEWER EASEMD1T 5S d
WATER
EASEMENT; \
10.0'
WATER EASEMENT
10
VED
Engineering Planning Surveying
Ponha legon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc.
750 S.ih Sired Seulh airwi,ne. WA 91033 0..99t9fpngn
PH: (42S) n
e) e-2012 r- 100- 9.5 -e.00 /fl (.25) e27-.n..
TKIN OF RE
TE MIST
TUKWILA F
R.S. F
DATE: September 20, 2004
PROJECT NAME: Foster Ridge BLA
PLAN CHECK NO.: PW03 -106
Q:\FOST_RDGPW03- 106.DOC
PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS
Plan Reviewer: Contact Nora Gierloff at (206) 431 -3670 if you have any questions
regarding the following comments.
Please revise your drawings to address the conditions in the Notice of Decision
preliminary approval letter. Specifically:
1. The property owners will need to sign, notarize and record the revised geotechnical
covenant as a condition of the PW Type C infrastructure construction permit. The
permit will not be finaled until the covenant has been recorded.
2. Add a note to the drawings that there must be an on -site inspector representing the
geotechnical engineers during the construction of foundations, retaining walls,
water, sewer, and surface water utilities, and driveways. The on -site inspector
shall verify in writing, on a daily basis, with the reports sent to the City's
Department of Public Works, that all construction work has been performed in
accordance with approved plans and specifications, permit requirements, and that
the construction work complies with all of the geotechnical's recommendations.
3. The wetland mitigation/buffer enhancement plan prepared by Sheldon & Associates
along Lot 2 must be included in the PW permit submittal and installed prior to final
approval.
4. The type, quantity and size of plantings along the north side of the detention vault
must be shown on the land altering permit and installed prior to fmal approval.
5. Submit a tree permit showing all regulated trees to be removed by species and
diameter and the location and species of replacement trees per the table in the Tree
Ordinance. The PW permit must identify all trees to be retained within the clearing
limits and they must be flagged and have tree protection measures in place prior to
the start of work.
6. The edges of the wetland buffer easements on lots 2, 3, 4 and 6 shall be delineated
with a split rail fence and signage per TMC 18.45.060 6.
5. Legal description of the wetland buffer easement across lots 3, 4 and 6.
This BLA approval decision is appealable to the Hearing Examiner. One administrative appeal of
the decision on the BLA is permitted. Any person wishing to challenge either the conditions
which were imposed by the MDNS decision or the failure of the Department to impose additional
conditions in the MDNS may raise such issues as part of the appeal . If no valid appeals are filed
within the time limit the decision of the Department will be final.
In order to appeal the decision a written notice of appeal must be filed with the Department of
Community Development within 21 days of the issuance of the Notice of Decision (8/20/04).
The requirements for such appeals are set forth in Tukwila Municipal Code 18.116.
Appeal materials shall include:
1. The name of the appealing party.
2. Final Approval
APPEALS
2. The address and phone number of the appealing party; and if the appealing party is a
corporation, association or other group, the address and phone number of a contact person
authorized to receive notices on the appealing party's behalf.
3. A statement identifying the decision being appealed and the alleged errors in the
decision. The Notice of Appeal shall state specific errors of fact or errors in application of
the law in the decision being appealed; the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant,
and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be limited to matters or issues raised in
the Notice of Appeal.
Any appeal shall be conducted as an open record hearing before the Hearing Examiner. The
Hearing Examiner's decision on the appeal is the City's final decision. A party who is not
satisfied with the outcome of the administrative appeal process may file an appeal in King County
Superior Court from the Hearing Examiner's decision pursuant to the procedures and time
limitations set forth in RCW 36.70C. An appeal challenging a DNS, an MDNS or an EIS may be
included in such an appeal.
The next step is to install the required site improvements, comply with the conditions of
approval and submit the necessary documents (survey, legal descriptions, and other required
paper work). After the documents have been found to be in order, and the all of the
requirements of the BLA have been met, the Chair of the Short Subdivision Committee
signs your paperwork which constitutes a grant of final approval. No permits for the
construction of houses on the site will be granted prior to the recording of the BLA.
L97 -0026 Page 4
Expiration
3. Recording
Sincerely,
Steve Lancaster
Chair, Short Subdivision Committee
All taxes and fees assessed against the property must be current prior to final approval.
Please check with the King County Assessor's Office and the City of Tukwila Finance
Department prior to submitting final mylars.
The final approved documents must be filed with the King County Department of Records by July
27, 2005, one year from the date of this preliminary approval or the application will expire. The
City may grant a single six month extension if requested in writing prior to the expiration date.
The signature of the Chairman of the Short Subdivision Committee certifies that your
application is ready for recording. It is your responsibility to record the City approved
documents with the King County Department of Records. You will need to pay the
recording fees and submit your approved original drawings to King County, see the
Recording Procedures handout. The BLA is not complete until the recording occurs and
copies of the recorded documents are provided to the Department of Community
Development.
After recording, the County returns the recorded original to the City of Tukwila within 4 -6
weeks, at which time your BLA is considered complete. You can shorten this processing
time by hand - delivering a copy of the recorded document to the project planner.
cc: Jim Morrow, Public Works Director (please initial your approval)
Nick Olivas, Fire Chief (please initial your approval)
King County Assessor, Accounting Division
Department of Ecology, SEPA Division
William Looney
Benito Cervantes
Jon Beahm
Cyril Mork
L97 -0026 Page 5
Dept. Of Community Development
City of Tukwila
AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION
I, S am 6 f dc HEREBY DECLARE THAT :
Notice of Public Hearing
Notice of Public Meeting
Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt
Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt
Planning Commission Agenda Pkt
Short Subdivision Agenda
Shoreline Mgmt Permit
FAX To Seattle Times
Classifieds
Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds
PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111
Determination of Non - Significance
Mitigated Determination of Non -
Significance
Determination of Significance & Scoping
Notice
Notice of Action
Official Notice
Notice of Application
Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt
Permit
Other
Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this
year 200L(
P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM
Ci
day o
Project Name: l—os '+-� J� x
Project Number: I 'T 7- 2O/3
Mailer's Signature: �' 2 f -
Person requesting mailing:
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
CITY OF TUKWILA
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) ADDENDUM
MCP
Jack P.4 Deputy Director for the City of Tukwila, Washington
6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 (206) 431 -3670
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Steve Lancaster, Director
Description of Original Proposal:
The original project involved a replat of a 2.9 acre site zoned for single family residential
use from 18 lots to 12 lots. The reduction in number of lots was due to the presence of a wetland
and unbuildable slopes on site. An administrative planned residential development process would
be used to reduce lot sizes and setbacks in exchange for setting aside the sensitive areas of the site
through an open space tract and native growth protection areas.
The original MDNS was issued with the condition that the project be subject to a
geotechnical peer review and comply with all of the findings of that review.
Description of Addendum:
The project has been revised to reduce the number of buildable lots from 12 to 6 due to
geotechnical and stormwater constraints on the site. The remainder of the site will be an
unbuildable sensitive area tract. The 6 lots will be clustered at the southwest corner of the site
and access will be provided from existing street ends at S. 139 and S. 140 Streets.
Proponent: John B. Friel P.O. Box 27 Everett, WA 98206
Location of Proposal: Northeast corner of the intersection of South 140th Street and 46th Avenue
Lead Agency: City Of Tukwila
File Number: E97 -0013
The City has determined that the addendum does not have a probable significant adverse impact
on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW
43.21 c.030 (2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist
and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on
request. The original DNS was issued March 5, 1999. This addendum is adopted on June 18,
2004.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
{
r
LDCAL DLSCR1PTION3:
LUSTING:
A ►041104 OF 0341:0001T LOT 1. leV1I01 IS. 10404141 23 NORTH, RAMC 4 MT. SCI.,
N 5040 COUNTY. MN51410100 ODOM= AS £01.000
LOIS 17 10 27, MOA171C. K005 1 410 SOTS 1 1O 7. IMAMS. 1SO05 S.
1117J-101 5 01101 10 ►011 TAL AC001 0010 TO 1110 Le01001100 FLAT T/47EM
T0001101 VAN MOANS SIRRTS /00111110.
N aCADAAI
aA,mo
•
117 •v _
r ... V441 4.f .j y y.
S. 14(P ST. k (AeF op I E f7DT a.7:; irro2 :4r; ,.
ROAD
AIM ALA:
5012 1 10 0 110 TRICE 0 OF 11011110.40 (SK ADJUSVOITAtOT C04011011101
AS ►05 111[ NOM OF %WU.
10004105 UM ASO 511014 70 IAf010(0 AS rot 011. wont K F10L
8510 AS AMFRerm Of 11t CITY Cr 5J551A
WV 1144 111041111.5 4n Nlwn 0 04 010•Yy Mee Sn•4 bp wt. 0 444 101 1004
. \
■
i
l \ i '
,/ \
8
INS
7
7
S0. 137171 ST
x "
t
SO. 1se;H sr.
SO 140TH s
•OWNER /APPLACANT:
R. 3. "054.0 :" CECER'a$i?t
1OY. :A53
14. YCR.. *WO
fl L• ! C.A5C) :x4••.:000
SCALI r - soon'
VICINITY NAP
*MD 1223
KCS5 VA3. '123::
MEW
P.14
L0).4C:A:i3'
PROJECT SURVEYOR:
SARM3T CY.YELY:Nv .f 3:lf :E.A.".3k :ECF5
i20 E <*Jf'' SbS^:G SWAT :.*.MEE: ? :d3
fEiif:A.i. 04d, *
TEL ¢ (2(4) %A)7k -c2Os
FOSTER RIDGE
(AKA ISLAM ADDITION)
CITY OF TUKWILA
FASTER RIDGE SITE
BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT (BLA) DA7
AKA SW $33k: 525. :9$ iif ( ?. :12 :x:;
Nr :11.010 AMA:
TOM WE .041. AFE+C . 11.:07 5£
•':A:. (N4.0 SAACl. AKA )40.4 52.1.V 6 5£
TON *:, Wit OF Yle EA ti:.3:10 s :fit,3•i: S.F.
U137 V :
WNE » ;LW. )4:Nt*1:AA LO7 51.E » 95:0 Sr PEA :3S 6£. :2/ 4,
.LL0W..L01: U 51.32 LEE .s,FE » 0.$Z $•
:A CI° * *0:0' -Of' -WA: $733110 w 0 1:f
E y 3 3 . 3 * P . 4 3 . 1 0 4 OF :PPS w 13
PN6<OSEG NUM:Cr? C4 001 :L 3,1•:3 3
WNW:4 1.0: Y35t: :f M w AYE33A i3 VE :01:4
ir:AL OF3ifi S.ACt. ME.* M 9;,570 .x
VIA:.:iFE3( i:"A AML. E'E?f# :SEO 7r:N C:£ Siff:
ft£5X :5 5.1
0: Vitt. MV.A. FSK? PM) 2 20,410 3.
CONTACT PERSON
f3101 O. £iii: (sifk'E''LM)
.f30% ^,.0N, '3: :4 3P%(RNEE:R
P.0. E3i3< 2%
CVERVT. WA. > ?0733 ?)
YR. R *4;IY) 7Y5• 3&
BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAN
(LOT CONSOLIDATION)
CITY OF TUKWILA
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
PROJECT INFORMATION
Richard Pedersen has filed applications for development of a 6 lot planned residential
development and boundary line adjustment to be located at the northeast comer of South
140th Street and 46th Avenue South.
Permits applied for include:
L04 -033 Boundary Line Adjustment
L04 -032 Administrative Planned Residential Development
Other known required permits include: Tree Permit
Studies required with the applications include: Geotechnical Report
Wetland Delineation
A SEPA MDNS was issued 3/5/1999 and an addendum was issued 6/18/2004.
FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW
The project files are available at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request
them at the counter at the Department of Community Development (DCD), located at
6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100.
Project Files include:
Application Filed: June 1, 2004
Notice of Completeness Issued: June 7, 2004
Notice of Application Issued: June 22, 2004
L04 -033 Boundary Line Adjustment
L04 -032 Administrative Planned Residential Development
E97 -0013 Environmental Review
OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
Your written comments on the project are requested. They must be delivered to DCD
at the address above or postmarked no later than 5:00 P.M., July 6, 2004.
APPEALS
You may request a copy of any decision and your appeal rights by calling DCD at (206)
431 -3670. The boundary line adjustment, planned residential development and SEPA
threshold determination are appealable to the Hearing Examiner.
For further information on this proposal, contact Nora Gierloff at (206) 431 -3670 or visit
our offices at 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite #100, Monday - Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00
p.m.
June 8, 2004
John B. Friel
P.O. Box 27
Everett, WA 98206
Sloe
City of Tuki,,'ila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION
RE: L04 -033 Boundary Line Adjustment
L04 -032 Administrative Planned Residential Development
E97 -0013 Environmental Review
Dear Mr. Friel:
Your application for a boundary line adjustment and planned residential development located at
South 139th Street and 46th Avenue South has been found to be complete on June 7, 2004 for the
purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements.
The next step is for you to install the notice board on the site within 14 days of the date of this
letter. You received information on how to install the sign with your application packet. If you
need another set of those instructions, please call me. Once you have notified me that the notice
board has been installed I will post it with a laminated copy of the Notice of Application and the
comment period will start.
This notice of complete application applies only to the permits identified above. It is your
responsibility to apply for and obtain all necessary permits issued by other agencies.
This determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that
you submit additional plans or information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to
ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process.
Sincerely
Nora Gierloff
Planning Supervisor
cc: Joanna Spencer, Public Works
Don Tomaso, Fire Department
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Engineering
Planning
Surveying
Ms. Nora Gierloff
Planning Division
City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, WA 98188
Subject: Foster Ridge Boundary Line Adjustment Civil Plans — Tukwila, WA
Response to City of Tukwila Planning & Public Works Department Comments
Permit No. PW03 - 106
Dear Ms. Gierloff:
May 25, 2004
Please find a brief response to the comments issued by City of Tukwila Planning and Public Works
Department dated November 18, 2003 and February 2, 2004 respectively. Each numbered item
below corresponds to the respective comment provided by the Planning and Public Works
Department as applicable. The comments have been addressed by PACE as follows:
Planning Division Comments (November 18, 2003):
1. Trees to be removed on 20% or greater slopes or within the wetland buffer have been
identified on the Site Plan (see Sheet C2).
2. Tree replacement calculations shall be provided on separate exhibit to be approved by
City of Tukwila.
3. Final planting plan for replacement trees shall be shown on separate exhibit to be
approved by City of Tukwila.
Clearing limits have been revised to reduce the number of trees that have to be removed to
incorporate the flow spreader in the storm design.
Public Works Department Comments (February 2, 2004):
1. An NPDES permit will not be required for the project since the total area to be cleared is
0.80- acres.
2. The storm drainage design has been modified to connect to an existing 12" storm
drainage pipe located between Lots 10 and 11 (13749 and 13747 Macadam Road). All
runoff that is collected from onsite and offsite areas will discharge into said 12" storm
pipe.
3. The design has been revised to conform to City requirements by replacing rockery walls
greater than 4 - ft. in height with modular block walls to be designed by Geotechnical
Kirkland
750 Sixth Street South • Kirkland, WA 98033
P. 425.827.2014 • F. 425.827.5043
Seattle
1601 Second Avenue, Suite 1000 • Seattle WA 98101 -3511
P. 206.441.1855 • F. 206.448.7167
RECEIVE
JUN 01 2004
utVELOPMENT
Ms. Nora Gierloff
Foster Ridge BLA
PW03 -106
May 25, 2004
Page 2 of 2
Sae
Engineer at time of construction. The rockery wall detail has been replaced with the
approved City of Tukwila detail (RS -05) shown on Sheet C10.
4. Top and bottom elevations of walls /rockeries are called out on Grading Plan (see Sheet
C4). Connections for wall and rockeries have been provided and are shown on Storm
Plan (Sheet C5).
5. Curtain drains and level spreader remain part of design. The curtain drain's function is to
minimize saturation of soils by intercepting and collecting subsurface water. The level
spreader is designed to prevent concentrated water from flowing down the slope.
6. The wet season timeline has been noted on the Erosion Control Plan (Sheet C3).
7. Plans have been updated to reflect the locations of driveways at the end of South 140
Street. The Storm Drainage Plan (Sheet C5) identifies how runoff will be managed.
Driveway and access road slopes are kept at less than 15 %.
8. Plans have been updated to show existing #4525 driveway, rockery, drainage under
driveway and the end of pavement in South 139` Street.
9. The water quality /detention vault remains partially above ground. The Storm Drainage
Plan (Sheet C5) has been revised to include planting in front of the vault to block the
view from Macadam Road South as discussed with Jim Morrow at a March 25„ 2004
meeting.
10. Crushed Surface Base Course (CSBC) has been called out in details No. 2 and No. 3 on
Sheet C10.
12. A follow -up meeting was held March 25, 2004.
16. Geotechnical reports applicable to this project have been identified on the Grading Plan
(Sheet C4).
17. The Composite Utility Plan (Sheet C11) shows existing as well as proposed water, sewer
and storm utilities. Sheet C11 notes that the fmal location of private utilities shall be
located by the utility companies. Any attempt to . guess at the fmal location of these
utilities at this point in the design would be unproductive and ineffective.
Please call Phil Cheesman or myself if you have any questions or require additional information
or e me at petern paceengrs.com.
Cc: John B. Friel, P.E., JBMF Consulting Engineer
P:\P98 \98673\Doc \052504 Response Letter.doc 2
Sincerely,
Penhallegon Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Engineering • Planning • Surveying
PENHALLEGON ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING ENGINE RS, INC
z //4
Peter Paulsen
Senior Engineer
April 21, 2004
Project No. KE96296A
JBMF Consulting Engineer
P.O. Box 27
Everett, Washington 98206
Dear John:
V fir•
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Attention: Mr. John Friel, P.E.
Subject: Geotechnical Plan Review
Foster Ridge Subdivision
Tukwila, Washington
As requested, Associated Earth Sciences Inc., (AESI) has completed a geotechnical plan review for the
above project. The plans were reviewed with respect to a geotechnical study completed by AESI titled
"Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards, and Geotechnical Engineering Report, Foster Ridge, 46
Avenue South at South 139 Street, Tukwila, Washington ", dated February 13, 1997, revised '
November 13, 1998, and follow -up meetings /reviews with JBMF Consulting Engineer, Penhallegon
Associates Consulting Engineers (PACE), and the City of Tukwila.
The reviewed plans (Permit Review Drawings - April 2003) were prepared by PACE and consisted of
the following sheets: C1 (dated April 2003), C;2, C3, C4, C5, and C8 (all dated April 2004), C9 (dated
July 2003), and C10 (dated April 2004).
Following are our comments and recommendations regarding the proposed plans for the project.
Sheet C5
The note for the drain connection from behind the wall to the 6" PVC should say "wall drain ", not
"rockery drain ".
There does not appear to be a wall drain or footing drain for the water quality/detention vault. These
drains should be shown.
Ninety (90) lineal feet (LF) of 6" curtain drain was added along the southwest side of the project. We
are uncertain as to the need for this drain but have no objection to it.
The modular block wall along the west side of the property will require geogrids that extend onto the
adjoining property. A temporary construction easement would be required for this type of construction.
It may be necessary to use an Ultra Block wall in this location as a temporary construction easement
cannot be obtained.
A note should be added for the 93 LF of 12" ,HDPE that will be the main storm drain line over the
slope along the property line between Lots 10 and 11. The note should state the following:
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 • Kirkland, WA 98033 • Phone 425 827 -7701 • Fax 425.827-5424
"Burial of the pipe must be accomplished either by hand or with minimal -sized equipment that will
cause the least disturbance to the slope area. To the extent possible, the pipe should be threaded
between and around trees instead of removing the trees. All disturbed areas must be immediately
stabilized for erosion protection ".
Sheet C9
A global change is necessary to show all details, and notes, as referring to page C5, not C6. This
includes the notes for the curtain drain detail and the curtain drain -storm drain common trench detail.
Sheet C10
Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 should refer to page C4, not C5.
Section 7 should refer to page C5, not C6.
Wall and footing drains should be shown for the combined detention/WQ vault.
Should you have any questions regarding this plan review, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Sincerely,'
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Kirkland, Washington
Gary A. F wers, P.G., P.E.G.
Principal 'i Geologist
cc: Phil Cheesman
PACE
750 Sixth Street South
Kirkland, Washington 98033
GAF/Id
KE96296A8
Projects \1996296\KE\WP - W2K
2
Bruce L. Blyton, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards,
and Geotechnical Engineering Report
FOSTER RIDGE
Tukwila, Washington
Prepared for
JBMF Consulting Engineer
Project No. KE96296A
February 13, 1997
Revised November 13, 1998
November 13, 1998
Project No. KE96296A
JBMF Consulting Engineer
PO Box 27
Everett, Washington 98206
Attention: Johii B. Friel
GAF/mb
KE96296A4
11/1/98 mb- W97
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
Sincerely,
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Kirkland, Washington
Subject: Revised Subsurface Exploration, Geologic Hazards and
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Foster Ridge
46th Avenue South at South 139th Street
Tukwila, Washington
We are pleased to present nine copies of the above - referenced revised report. This report
summarizes the results of our recent and previous subsurface explorations, geologic hazards,
' and geotechnical engineering _studies and offers recommendations for the preliminary design
and development of the proposed project. We are also hand - delivering one copy to
Penhallegan Engineering.
If you should have any questions, or if we can be of additional help to you, please do not
hesitate to call.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 • Kirkland, WA 98033 • Phone 425 827 -7701 • Fax 425 827 -5424
lbw
IS
ire
February 13, 1997
Revised November 13, 1998
Project No. KE96296A
I. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our previous and recent subsurface exploration, geologic
hazards, and geotechnical engineering studies for the proposed 12 building lot residential
subdivision. This current report has been revised to reflect changes in the site plan and
delineation of the top of slope in the vicinity of Lots 6, 7, and 8. The proposed lot locations
and approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this study are presented on the
Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 1. In the event that any changes in the nature, design, or
location of the structures or lot/street layout are planned, the conclusions and recommendations
contained in this report should be reviewed and modified, or verified, as necessary.
1.1 Purpose and Scope
The purpose of this study was to provide subsurface soil and shallow ground water data to be
utilized in the design and development of the above - mentioned residential project. Our recent
field study included the excavation of nine exploration pits and performing geologic studies to
assess the type, thickness, distribution, and physical properties of the shallow subsurface
sediments. We also reviewed the previous field study and exploration logs. Geotechnical
engineering studies were also conducted to evaluate seismic and erosion hazards and
mitigations, the type(s) of suitable foundations, allowable foundation soil bearing pressure,
anticipated foundation settlement, floor support, lateral wall pressures, and drainage
considerations. This report summarizes our recent field work and offers development
recommendations based on our present understanding of the project.
.. 1.2 Authorization
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION, GEOLOGIC HAZARDS, AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
FOSTER RIDGE
46TH AVENUE SOUTH AT SOUTH 139TH STREET
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
Written authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Mr. John B. Friel of JBMF
Consulting Engineer. Our study was accomplished in general accordance with our scope of
work letter dated November 25, 1996. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of
JBMF Consulting Engineer, and their agents, for specific application to this project. Within
the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been performed in accordance
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices in effect in
this area at the time our report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is
made. It must be understood that no recommendations or engineering design can yield a
guarantee of stable slopes. Our observations, fmdings, and conclusions are a means to identify
and reduce the inherent risks to the owner.
2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION
This report was completed with an understanding of the project based on a site survey plan
with survey and topographic information provided by Barrett Consulting Group and proposed
building lot locations presented by JBMF Consulting Engineer, and dated July 1998. Present
plans call for two -story over daylight basement residential structures utilizing conventional
wood -frame construction with slab -on -grade floors in the lower level. Finish grade elevations
were not available at the time of this report, but it is anticipated that in order to accommodate
the daylight basements that cuts on the upslope side of the structures will not exceed 10 feet,
and will generally be less.
The property was situated on the east side of 46th Avenue South between South 139th and
South 140th Streets upslope and to the west of Interstate 5 in Tukwila, Washington. The
parcel was located on north to northeast facing slopes with gradients ranging from about 10 to
80 percent. Based on topographic information shown on the site plan, total elevation change
across the site was on the order of 70 feet.
An area of standing surface water was noted within Tract 99, which has been identified on the
site plan as wetland and open space. Surface water flowed from the wetland area downslope
and through the eastern half of Lot 3. The flow rate was estimated at roughly 5 gallons per
minute. Our recent field work was performed during a period of wet weather.
Vegetation on the site primarily consisted of deciduous trees with a heavy undergrowth of
berry vines, ivy, and other ground cover. An old retaining wall, approximately 40 feet long
and 6 feet tall, was located at the south end of Lot 8 and Tract 99. Also, based on site
reconnaissance and information presented in our previous report, it was evident that past
grading or filling has occurred on portions of the property. An old dirt access road extended
from the present terminus of South 139 Street to the northern end of Lot 8.
The toe of the steep slope east of Lot 7 (off -site) was undercut approximately 15 feet, and the
near vertical cut was not retained. A single - family residence, with garage and driveway, was
located at the toe of the slope.
3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Our field studies included excavating a series of exploration pits and performing a geologic
hazard reconnaissance to gain information about the site. The various types of sediments, as
2
le
well as the depths where characteristics of the sediments changed, are indicated on the
exploration logs presented in the Appendix. The depths indicated on the logs where conditions
changed may represent gradational variations between sediment types in the field. Our
explorations were approximately located in the field by estimating locations from known site
features shown on a topographic survey presented on a conceptual grading plan prepared by
PAC -TECH Engineering, Inc., identified as "Plan C" and dated 2/5/91, and on a site plan
, without topographical information prepared by Barrett Consulting Group dated August 1996.
The most recent site plan upon which this report revision is based was prepared by JMBF
Consulting Engineer dated July 1998.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on visual
reconnaissance and the nine recent and seven previous exploration pits. The number, location,
and depth of the explorations were completed within site and budgetary constraints. Because
of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions
between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions
may sometimes be present due to the random nature of deposition and the alteration of
topography by past grading and /or filling. The nature and extent of any variations between the
field explorations may not become fully evident until construction. If variations are observed
at that time, it may be necessary to re evaluate specific recommendations in this report and
make appropriate changes.
L
3.1 Exploration Pits
The seven previous explorations, EP -1 through EP -7, were excavated with a rubber - tired,
tractor- mounted backhoe and the recent explorations, EP -8 through EP -16, were excavated
with a track- mounted excavator. The pits permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface
conditions. Materials encountered in the exploration pits were studied and classified in the
field by an engineer from our firm. All exploration pits were backfilled immediately after
examination and logging. Selected samples were then transported to our laboratory for further
visual classification and testing, as necessary.
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions at the project site were inferred from the field explorations accomplished
for this study, visual reconnaissance of the site, and review of applicable geologic literature.
As shown on the field logs, the exploration holes generally encountered fill and
weathered /disturbed materials overlying glacially consolidated till, silt, and sand. Four units
were distinguished based on age and /or mode of deposition. These units are described below
from youngest (uppermost) to the oldest (lowermost), and are illustrated on the two schematic
geologic cross sections (Figures 2, 3, and 4).
3
leo
Unit 2 materials were encountered in all of the exploration pits except EP -3, EP -9, and EP -12
+ni and generally consisted of soft to stiff, moist to wet, mottled gray to brown, sandy silt to silty,
fme sand with scattered gravels, and generally ranged in thickness from about 1 to 4 feet. Unit
2 materials were unsorted and unconsolidated, and generally appeared weathered and
disturbed. These materials are interpreted to be colluvium, which is gravity transported
material derived from upslope areas. These materials are also considered unsuitable for
structural support.
Unit 3 - Pre - Vashon Lodgement Till ( ?)
Unit 3 sediments were encountered in all of the exploration pits except EP -1, EP -8, EP -9, and
EP -13 and generally consisted of dense to very dense, moist, mottled brown, silty, fine sand
matrix with an unsorted mixture of gravels. In EP -10, the lodgement till was highly weathered
and was judged to be in a medium dense condition. The thickness of Unit 3 sediments ranged
from about 1 foot in EP -7 to over 11 feet in EP -14, and were encountered as shallow as 3 feet
+�. in EP -2, but in excess of 10 feet in EP-4. Unit 3 sediments have been tentatively interpreted to
be pre - Vashon age lodgement till deposits, and appear to conformably overlie Unit 4 deposits.
These sediments were deposited at the sole of the advancing ice sheet which resulted in a
Ito material possessing relatively high strength, low compressibility, and low permeability
characteristics. Unit 3 sediments are considered suitable for structural support.
Unit 4 - Diamictic Silt
Unit 4 sediments were encountered in all of the exploration pits except EP -14 and EP -15 at
depths ranging from less than 4 feet to over 18 feet below the existing ground surface. Where
encountered, Unit 4 deposits extended beyond the termination depth of all of the exploration
boo pits. Unit 4 sediments generally consisted of hard, wet, blue -gray silt containing dropstones
with interbeds of micaceous, fme sand and were locally diamictic (material containing an
unsorted mixture of silt, clay, sand, and gravel). The fine - grained nature of Unit 4 and the
1.4 presence of dropstones, localized diamictic zones, • and the gradational contact with the
overlying till suggest that these sediments were deposited in a glaciolacustrine environment
r
4.1 Stratigraphy
Unit 1 - Fill
Fill (material not naturally placed) was encountered in EP -1, EP-4, EP -5, EP -9, EP -11, EP-
12, and EP -16 and generally consisted of loose, moist to wet, brown, silty, fme sand or soft to
medium stiff, wet, brown, sandy silt. The fill materials were either placed directly over an old
topsoil horizon or mixed within and in some cases included root debris. These fill materials
vary in both quality and depth across the site, attaining a thickness of about 8 feet in EP-4.
The quality and compaction of the fill materials was judged to be poor and is therefore
unsuitable for structural support.
Unit 2 - Weathered/Disturbed Zone
4
IMP
which formed as the advancing pre - Vashon ice sheet dammed northerly flowing drainages.
Unit 4 sediments are considered suitable for structural support.
4.2 Hydrology
Ground water was encountered in all of our exploration pits except EP -9, EP -10, and EP-13.
The type of ground water encountered on the site consisted of a "perched" water table which
forms during wet periods of the year atop the till and silt sediments (Units 3 and 4). Perched
water occurs when surface water infiltrates down through relatively permeable soils such as
Units 1 and 2 and becomes trapped or "perched" atop a comparatively impermeable barrier
such as the till and silt. An example of this occurs in the vicinity of Tract 99 and the proposed
extension of South 139th Street.
Seepage may also occur at random depths and locations in the non - uniform fill materials
encountered on the site. It should be noted that fluctuations in the level of the ground water
may occur due to the time of the year and variations in rainfall.
UM
February 13, 1997
Revised November 13, 1998
Project No. KE96296A
II. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND MITIGATIONS
bei
The following discussion of potential geologic hazards is based on the geologic, slope, and
;y,,, ground /surface water conditions as observed and discussed herein. The discussion will be
limited to seismic, landslide or mass - wasting, and erosion. It should be noted that during our
two episodes of subsurface exploration, there was no access to the steep slope area of Lot 8.
As such, the geotechnical design recommendations for Lot 8, including setback requirements,
may be amended in the future if a site - specific geotechnical study is performed.
5.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION
Earthquakes occur in the Puget Lowland with great regularity. The vast majority of these
events are small and are usually not felt by people. However, large earthquakes do occur as
evidenced by the 1949, 7.2 magnitude event and the 1965, 6.5 magnitude event. The 1949
earthquake appears to have been the largest in this area during recorded history. More
recently, the Puget Lowland experienced a moderate 5.4 magnitude event in the spring of
1996. Evaluation of earthquake return rates indicates that an earthquake of the magnitude
between 5.5 and 6.0 likely will occur within the next 8 to 12 years. A magnitude 7.2
earthquake is considered to be a 100 -year event by King County.
The subject property is bounded by two significant fault zones. Approximately 7.5 miles to
the north is the west trending Seattle fault. About 8.4 miles to the southwest is the north-
northwest trending Tacoma fault. The Seattle and Tacoma fault zones are interpreted to be
thrust faults with steep dips (60° to 70 °) near the surface which flatten to 17° to 25° at depth.
The Seattle and Tacoma faults are part of a series of surface manifestations of a north - directed
thrust sheet underlying the Puget Sound region. A recurrence interval for movement along
these two faults has not been conclusively determined but is estimated to be in the range of
thousands of years (Pratt, 1995). The most recent movement is interpreted to have occurred
over 1,000 years ago.
Generally, there are four types of potential geologic hazards associated with large seismic
events: 1) surficial ground rupture; 2) seismically induced landslides; 3) liquefaction; and 4)
ground motion. The potential for each of these hazards to adversely impact the proposed
project is discussed below.
•
6
boo
Imo
irr
lbw
Based on the site stratigraphy and visual reconnaissance of the site, it is our opinion that any
sir earthquake damage to proposed structures, when founded on, and keyed into, a suitable
bearing strata, as recommended in the Design Recommendations section of this report, would
be caused by the intensity and acceleration associated with the event and not any of the above
impacts. Structural design of the buildings should follow the latest UBC standards and take
into consideration stress from seismically induced earth shaking.
lur
6.0 LANDSLIDE HAZARDS AND MITIGATION
r
5.1 Surficial Ground Rupture
Generally, the largest earthquakes which have occurred in the Puget Sound /Seattle area are
sub - crustal events with epicenters ranging from 50 to 70 kilometers in depth. Therefore, it is
our opinion, based on existing geologic data, that the risk of surface rupture impacting the
proposed project is low.
5.2 Seismically Induced Landslides
The fill material and the weathered /disturbed zone (Units 1 and 2), are considered to have a
moderate potential for seismically induced failure due to their loose condition, high moisture
content, high percentage of fine- grained material, and location on steep slopes. The steep
slopes on the southeast corner of Lot 6 and on the east side of Lots 6 and 7 are interpreted to
have a high potential for seismic induced movement due to the presence of medium dense
sediments, fill /disturbed soils, and evidence of past movement. Because of the potential risk of
landslides occurring in these sediments, earthwork and construction procedures and setbacks,
as described in the Design Recommendations section of this report, must be implemented in the
development of the site. Landslide hazard mitigation, as presented in section 6.1, Mitigation,
must also be implemented. Following completion of the development according to the
recommendations included herein, and others that may be presented in future studies and at the
time of construction, the potential for failure can be substantially mitigated.
5.3 Liquefaction
The encountered bearing soils (Units 3 and 4) have a low potential for liquefaction due to the
consolidated nature of the dense lodgement till and hard diamictic silt. Units 1 and 2 will be
substantially removed and /or mitigated during construction such that they will present little to
no liquefaction potential.
5.4 Ground Motion
The potential landslide or mass- wasting risk can be divided into two depth categories; shallow
and deep. The potential shallow landslide risk would involve Units 1 and 2, and is considered
to be moderate due to the presence of near - surface ground water and the unconsolidated nature
of the materials. However, the steep slope areas of Lots 7 and 8 and the southeast corner of
Lot 6 are considered to have a high risk of shallow landslides.
7
1. Surface drainage and collected ground water should be controlled and directed
away from or to the bottom of sloping areas. All storm water from
impermeable surfaces should be collected and tightlined into suitable storm
water drainage systems.
2. At no time should fill be placed on or above steep slopes. Grading on or around
slopes should be reviewed by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) prior to
design completion. Uncontrolled fill near or over tops of slopes may promote
landslides or debris flows.
3. The toes of steep slopes should not be undercut, unless a suitable retaining
structure is constructed.
The potential deep landslide risk would involve Units 3 and 4, and is generally considered to
be low primarily due to the consolidated nature of the lodgement till and diamictic silt units.
However, the steep downward slope located on the east side of Lot 7, the southeast corner of
Lot 6, and possibly the east side of Lot 8 has a high risk of slope movement. This is due to the
medium dense condition of sediments observed in EP -9, the observation of bowed and downed
trees on the slope, evidence of past movement in the vicinity of Lot 7, and the steep cut at the
base of the slope near Lots 6 and 7. Therefore, a minimum building setback of 25 feet from
the top of this slope as delineated on Figure 1 should be followed to reduce the risk of potential
structural damage should future movement occur. Footings for this lot should also be
embedded in dense /very stiff natural sediments as recommended in Section 11.0, Foundations.
Other recommendations for slope grading, drainage and vegetation, as described in this report,
also apply.
6.1 Mitigation
It must be understood that our recommendations are offered to reduce the risk of slope
movement and to mitigate the risk of damage to the homes if slope movement should occur.
Our recommendations do not eliminate the risk of future movement. With the owner's
understanding and acceptance of the inherent risks associated with development on slopes, we
recommend the following mitigation measures.
7.0 EROSION HAZARDS AND MITIGATION
The encountered surficial sediments, as well as sediments at depth, possess a high potential for
erosion, even on gentle to moderate sloping areas, when subjected to concentrated flows. To
mitigate the erosion hazard potential and off -site sediment transport, we would recommend the
following:
1. All storm water from impermeable surfaces, including roadways and roofs,
should be tightlined into approved storm water facilities. Uncontrolled
8
INN the site sediments.
Iwo
Ire
Iry
imp
Ira
discharge from the impermeable surfaces should not be allowed to flow across
2. Temporary sediment catchment facilities should be constructed around all catch
basins to intercept sediment eroded during the construction phases of the
proposed project.
3. Temporary check dams should be used along storm water drainages. Silt fences
meeting King County standards should be placed along the lower elevations of
disturbed areas.
4. Soils which are to be reused around the site should be stored in such a manner
as to reduce erosion. Protective measures may include, but are not necessarily
limited to, covering with plastic sheeting, the use of low stockpiles in flat areas,
or the use of hay bales /silt fences.
5. Large -scale clearing should be avoided and as much of the natural vegetation on
the slopes as is possible should be left intact. Construction should proceed
during drier periods of the year and areas stripped of natural vegetation during
construction should be replanted as soon as possible or otherwise protected.
6. If construction occurs after November 1 and before April 1, exposed ground
should be covered with mulch and additional temporary drainage control may be
recommended, as necessary.
9
February 13, 1997
Revised November 13, 1998
Project No. KE96296A
III. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
8.0 INTRODUCTION
Our exploration indicates that, from a geotechnical standpoint, the parcel is suitable for the
proposed development provided the risks discussed are accepted and the recommendations
contained herein are properly followed. The existing fill soils, and the materials in the
weathered /disturbed zone as described herein, are not considered suitable for foundation
support. The depth to bearing strata in our exploration pits varied from about 3 feet to over
10 -1/2 feet below the existing ground surface but may be even deeper in some areas. It is
anticipated that proposed excavations for daylight basements will remove much of the
unsuitable soil from the building footprints. Therefore, conventional spread footings keyed
into, and bearing on, firm, unyielding, natural sediments, or properly placed structural fill,
will be suitable for foundation support of the residences. If basement structures are not
utilized, or where basement excavations do not penetrate to bearing soil, it will likely be
necessary to deepen foundations to suitable bearing soil. Lot 7, and possibly Lot 8 may
require deep foundation systems.
Since steep slopes and muddy soil conditions prevented excavator access to Lot 8, the depth to
bearing strata and setback requirements is unsure for this lot. Additional explorations, prior to
or during clearing for Lot 8, should be preformed to further evaluate geotechnical design
parameters.
9.0 SITE PREPARATION
Old foundations that may be encountered on the site, which are under building areas or not
part of future plans, should be removed. Any buried utilities should be removed or relocated if
they are under building areas. The resulting depressions should be backfilled with structural
fill as discussed under the Structural Fill section.
Site preparation of planned building and road /parking areas should include removal of all trees,
brush, debris, and any other deleterious material. Additionally, the upper organic topsoil
should be removed and the remaining roots grubbed. Areas where loose, surficial soils exist
due to grubbing operations should be considered as fill to the depth of disturbance and treated
as subsequently recommended for structural fill placement.
Existing fill and soft silts should be stripped down to the underlying medium dense or medium
stiff, natural soils. Since the density of the soil is variable, random soft pockets may exist and
the depth and extent of stripping can best be determined in the field by the geotechnical
10
engineer or engineering geologist. When overexcavation and stripping is completed, we
recommend that road and parking areas be proofrolled with a fully loaded, tandem axle dump
truck to identify any remaining soft spots. Soft areas should be further overexcavated and
backfilled with approved structural fill.
In some roadway or driveway areas, such as near exploration pit EP-4, the fill and soft
sediment thickness may be too thick to economically remove and replace. Provided the
owner /developer understands and accepts the risk associated with having unconsolidated fill
and natural sediments underlying these areas of the development, an alternative methodology
may be utilized. This would involve overexcavating a minimum of two (2) feet of the
unsuitable soils, placing a high strength, woven geotextile fabric such as AMOCO 2002 or
approved equivalent, and backfilling with approved structural fill. The geotextile fabric should
be placed as per manufacturer's recommendations. The structural fill should be placed in
accordance with the recommendations presented in the Structural Fill section of this report.
Prior to paving, all roadways should be proofrolled as described above to identify any soft or
yielding areas. The geotechnical engineer or his representative should be present during the
proofrolling. All unsuitable areas should be further overexcavated and bacicfilled with
structural fill.
This methodology will substantially reduce settlement and improve the usable lifespan of the
asphalt or concrete pavement surfaces but will not eliminate problem areas. As such, periodic
maintenance should be planned for these areas.
The on -site soils contain a high percentage of fme-grained material which makes them
extremely moisture - sensitive and subject to disturbance when wet. The contractor must use
care during site preparation and excavation operations so that the underlying soils are not
softened. If disturbance occurs, the softened soils should be removed and the area brought to
grade with structural fill. Consideration should be given to protecting access and staging areas
with an appropriate section of crushed rock or Asphalt Treated Base (ATB).
If crushed rock is considered for the access and staging areas, it should be underlain by
engineering stabilization fabric to reduce the potential of fme-grained materials pumping up
through the rock and turning the area to mud. The fabric will also aid in supporting
construction equipment, thus reducing the amount of crushed rock required. We recommend
that at least 10 inches of rock be placed over the fabric; however, due to the variable nature of
the near - surface soils and differences in wheel loads, this thickness may have to be adjusted by
the contractor in the field.
10.0 STRUCTURAL FILL
Grading plans have not been finalized at this time; however, it is anticipated that some
structural fill will be necessary to establish desired grades. All references to structural fill in
this report refer to subgrade preparation, fill type, placement and compaction of materials as
discussed in this section.
11
If fill is to be placed on slopes steeper than 5H:1 V (Horizontal: Vertical), the base of the fill
should be tied to firm, stable subsoil by appropriate keying and benching which would be
established in the field to suit the particular soil conditions at the time of grading. The keyway
will act to embed the toe of the new fill into the hillside. Generally, the keyway for hillside
fills should be at least 8 feet wide and cut into the lower, dense or stiff, natural sediments.
Level benches would then be cut horizontally across the hill, following the contours of the
slope. No specific width is required for the benches, although they are usually a few feet
wider than the dozer being used to cut them. All fills proposed over a slope should be
reviewed by our office prior to construction.
After overexcavation/stripping has been performed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical
engineer /engineering geologist, the exposed ground surface should be recompacted to at least
90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. If
the subgrade contains too much moisture, adequate recompaction may be difficult or
impossible to obtain and should probably not be attempted. In lieu of recompaction, the area
to receive fill should be blanketed with washed rock or quarry spalls to act as a capillary break
between the new fill and the wet subgrade. Where the exposed ground remains soft and
further overexcavation is impractical, placement of an engineering stabilization fabric may be
necessary to prevent contamination of the free - draining layer by silt migration from below.
After recompaction of the exposed ground is tested and approved, or a free - draining rock
course is laid, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as
non - organic soil, acceptable to the geotechnical engineer, placed in maximum 8 -inch loose lifts
with each lift being compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum
density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. In the case of roadway and utility trench filling,
the backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with current municipal codes and
standards. The top of the compacted fill should extend horizontally outward a minimum
distance of 3 feet beyond the location of the perimeter footings or roadway edge before sloping
down at an inclination no steeper than 2H:1V.
The contractor should note that any proposed fill soils must be evaluated by AESI prior to their
use in fills. This would require that we have a sample of the material 48 hours in advance to
perform a Proctor test and determine its field compaction standard. Soils in which the amount
of fine- grained material (smaller than No. 200 sieve) is greater than approximately 5 percent
(measured on the minus No. 4 sieve size) should be considered moisture - sensitive. Use of
moisture - sensitive soil in structural fills should be limited to favorable dry weather and dry
subgrade conditions. The on -site soils contained significant amounts of silt, are considered to
be extremely moisture - sensitive, and were well above their optimum moisture content at the
time of our field exploration. Even during summer months, it is likely that the on -site soils
would be too wet to compact for structural fill. In addition, construction equipment traversing
the site when on -site soils are wet can cause considerable disturbance. If proper compaction
cannot be obtained, a select import material consisting of a clean, free - draining gravel and /or
ire sand should be used. Free - draining soil is defined as soil containing less than 5 percent
passing the No. 200 sieve, based on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction.
12
A representative from our firm should inspect the stripped subgrade and be present during
placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in-
place density tests. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as filling
progresses and any problem areas may be corrected at that time. It is important to understand
that taking random compaction tests on a part basis will not assure uniformity or
acceptable performance of a fill. As such, we are available to aid the owner in developing a
suitable monitoring and testing program.
11.0 FOUNDATIONS
Spread footings may be used for building support for Lots 1 through 5, 9 through 12, and
possibly Lots 6, 7, and 8 when founded on or embedded in dense natural soils of Units 3 or 4,
or structural fill placed as previously discussed. We recommend that an allowable bearing
pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be utilized for foundation design purposes,
including both dead and live loads. An increase of one -third may be used for short-term wind
or seismic loading. For Lots 1 through 5, and Lots 6 through 8, if spread footings are
determined to be suitable, the perimeter footings must be embedded a minimum of 18 inches
into the dense bearing soils. All perimeter footings should be buried at least 18 inches into the
surrounding soil for frost protection; interior footings require only 12 inches burial. To limit
settlements, all footings should have a minimum width of 14 inches for one -story structures
with 2 inches of width added for each additional story.
For Lots 6, 7, and 8, a 25 -foot building setback measured from the outside footing edge to the
top of the steep slope is recommended from the top of slope line shown on Figure 1. If it is
not feasible to excavate deep enough to embed the foundations into the dense bearing soils and
achieve the setback recommended above, a deep foundation may be required . Drilled concrete
piers or auger cast -in -place piles may be used in this case. We recommend that 18 -inch
diameter piers /piles with a minimum 12 feet of embedment into the medium dense sands be
utilized. When suitably reinforced, the piers /piles will be capable of supporting loads on the
order of 15 tons per pile. Allowable design loads may be increased by one -third for short term
wind or seismic loading. Anticipated settlement of approved, pier /pile supported structures
'r should be less than 1 inch.
11.1 Pile /Pier Inspections
bow
The actual total length of each pile may be adjusted in the field based on required capacity and
ty. conditions encountered during drilling. Since completion of the pile takes place below ground,
the judgment and experience of the geotechnical engineer or his field representative must be
used as a basis for determining the required penetration and acceptability of each pile.
Consequently, use of the presented pile capacities in the design requires that all piles be
inspected by a qualified geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist from our firm who can
interpret and collect the installation data and examine the contractor's operations. AESI,
acting as the owner's field representative, would determine the required lengths of the piles
and keep records of pertinent installation data. A final summary report would then be
distributed following completion of pile installation.
13
Anticipated settlement of footings founded on medium dense natural sediments or approved
structural fill should be on the order of 1 inch. However, disturbed soil not removed from
footing excavations prior to footing placement could result in increased settlements. All
footing areas must be inspected by AESI prior to placing concrete to verify that the design
bearing capacity of the soils has been attained and that construction conforms with the
recommendations contained in this report. Such inspections may also be required by the
governing municipality. Perimeter footing drains should be provided as discussed under the
Isffit
section on Drainage Considerations.
It should be noted that the area bounded by lines extending downward at 1H:1 V from any
footing must not intersect another footing or intersect a filled area which has not been
compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM:D 1557. In addition, a 1.5H:1V line extending
down from any footing must not daylight because sloughing or raveling may eventually
undermine the footing. Thus, footings should not be placed near the edge of steps or cuts in
the bearing soils.
12.0 FLOOR SUPPORT
It is our understanding that a crawl space type construction may be used for portions of homes
built on slopes. Construction of the crawl space should include covering the soil below the
floor system with a moisture barrier to reduce dampness.
It is our understanding that within basement or garage areas the floors will be slab -on- grade.
Slabs may be cast over medium dense /medium stiff natural ground or approved structural fill.
Where moisture intrusion through the slab is to be controlled, the slab subgrade should be
covered with 4 inches of pea gravel to act as a capillary break. The pea gravel should then be
covered by a plastic moisture barrier. A 2 -inch layer of sand may then be placed atop the
moisture barrier to aid in the curing of concrete and to help protect the plastic.
13.0 LATERAL WALL PRESSURES
All backfill behind walls or around foundation units should be placed as per our
recommendations for structural fill and as described in this section of the report. Horizontally
backfilled walls which are free to yield laterally at least 0.1 percent of their height, may be
designed using an equivalent fluid equal to 40 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Fully restrained,
horizontally backfilled rigid walls which cannot yield should be designed for an equivalent
fluid of 60 pcf. Surcharges from sloping ground, adjacent footings, heavy construction
.wo equipment, floor leads, or sloping ground must be added to the above values. Slopes above
retaining walls shall be graded to no steeper than 3H:1V.
The lateral pressures presented above are based on the conditions of a uniform, horizontal
backfill consisting of imported sand and gravel compacted to 90 percent of ASTM:D 1557 with a
blanket drain of washed drain rock immediately adjacent to the wall. In lieu of placing a blanket
14
ra
drain, a select import of free - draining sand and gravel may be used to backfill the wall. Free -
draining soil is defined as soil containing less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve, based on
the minus No. 4 sieve fraction. A sieve analysis of proposed wall backfill is necessary to
determine whether or not proposed fills are free draining.
A higher degree of compaction (above 90 percent) is not recommended for the wall backfill as
this will increase the pressure acting on the wall. A lower compaction may result in settlement
behind the wall. As such, testing of the in -place density of the wall backfill is recommended.
14.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS
As indicated previously, both shallow perched water and ground water within the sand beds of
Unit 4 will likely be encountered during construction. Traffic across the on -site soils, when
they are damp or wet, will result in disturbance of the otherwise firm stratum. Therefore,
prior to site work and construction, the contractor should be prepared to provide drainage as
necessary. This will likely be required even during the summer months.
All retaining and perimeter footing walls should be provided with a drain at the footing
elevation. Drains should consist of rigid, perforated, PVC pipe surrounded by washed pea
gravel. The level of the perforations in the pipe should be set approximately 2 inches below
the bottom of the footing and the drains should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow
gravity discharge away from the building. In addition, if select, free - draining backfill is not
used, retaining walls should be lined with a minimum 12 -inch thick washed gravel blanket
provided over the full- height of the wall and which ties into the footing drain. Roof and
surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system but should be handled by a
separate, rigid, tightline drain. In planning, exterior grades adjacent to walls should be sloped
downward away from the structure to achieve surface drainage.
Depending on site and ground water conditions at the time of construction, it may be necessary
to install an interceptor drain along the upper elevations of some of the lots prior to beginning
site work. At a minimum, it is recommended that interceptor drains and possibly yard drains
should be installed on the upper sides of Lots 8, 9, and 10. The interceptor drain should
consist of an 18 -inch wide trench which is excavated a minimum of 1 foot into the lower,
dense, relatively impermeable soils. A rigid, perforated, PVC pipe should be placed near the
bottom of the trench, embedded in washed drain rock. In addition, the pipe should have
sufficient slope to drain by gravity, and the water should be directed into approved storm
drainage facilities.
Since drainage issues are a major concern on this site, it may be necessary to add drainage
provisions under the roadway in order to provide a long -term, usable roadway and to mitigate
water flow from the upper portion of the property to the lower portion. We recommend that
contingencies be allowed for these potential drainage improvements. However, a final
determination as to the actual need for the drainage measures will be made at the time of
construction.
15
15.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
At the time of this report, building locations and elevations, site grading, structural plans, and
construction methods have not been finalized. Therefore, the recommendations presented
herein are preliminary. We are available to provide additional geotechnical consultation as the
project design develops and possibly changes from that upon which this report is based. We
recommend that AESI perform a geotechnical review of the plans prior to final design
completion. In this way, our earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly
interpreted and implemented in the design.
We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during
construction. The integrity of the foundation depends on proper site preparation and
construction procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field
in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent.
We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations
will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions, or
require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC.
Kirkland, Washington
Joseph B. Clare, E.I.T.
Staff Geotechnical Engineer
Jac/1d/mb
KE96296A4
11/1/98 mb - W97
16
ExPIRES 9 /3/0(..) 1
Bruce L. Blyton, P.E.
Associate Engineer
11
Pratt, T.L., 1995, The Puget Lowland Thrust Sheet: Presentation to the October meeting of
the Northwest Geological Society, Seattle, Washington.
JBC/Id/mb
KE96296A4
11/1/98 mb - W97
REFERENCE
17
7f!Atyo.
ORIvEWAY ACCESS
FOR LOTS 9 & 10 ONLY
6
FROIA SO. 140TH STREET.
—
5. litoTH
i
'4, \... .-- 1 - : .,,,..---. 5 57.4•415 —', •
- -- " e- Sli33X__.4.2r-.
OIN I
LEGEND
A A' Cross section
o l/H 1/-26
/
r
-------r--. ‘.- l , — ---- ,_
_ -,-„,... ,
1.94
/ // / .
- s
/
/
;1 \o`1 /
■
•••• -•• • ,.— v \
EP-2 , \.•
—■ • •• • •
• •._•- 17_ '""
—•••
111 Approximate location of exploration
pit excavated 1996
Z4
CI Approximate location of exploration
pit excavated 1991
M ACADAtt i ROAD
(PAVED)
/
\■111.
\\\ r i
FOSTER RIDGE
DATE 7/98
0
'
c,6
••• ■ -,...„‘‘.\\\.\\ I I ,. / ‘
'
•k • ‘
N• \?i\ , 0 \
........174 '. :\
;. ,' • ' t •‘... L•-•-• ' .** 140 ,..." %.
- .....E.1.5
-- 1,"4.1414"■r, 4.. 111■Qpin .:::.:=-_
• - -....ak 7 .s . ***
`..,,
100
SCALE IN FEET
NORTH
200
imo
A REFERENCE: JOHN B. FRIEL, JBMF CONSULTING ENGINEER, JULY 1998.
-
*T
ei SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN FIGURE 1
602 J r ASSOCIATED
EARTH
si
SCIENCES, INC TUKWILA, WASHINGTON PROJ. NO. KE96296A
i
SOUTH
A
250~
200 -
W
z
z
0
W
J
w .150
100-0-
FILL
EP -7
LEGEND
' ._ `T2
ov".
UNIT 1 - Fill
UNIT 2 - Weathered /Disturbed Zone
UNIT 3 - Pre - Vashon Till
UNIT 4 - Pre - Vashon Silt
EP -5
UN /T 1
P at
�a►c
UN /T 3
UNIT4
25
50
APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET
HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL
FIGURE 2
SCHEMATIC GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION
EP -1
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO. G96296A
DECEMBER 1996
NORTH
A
a
ASSOCIATED
ACM EARTH
SCIENCES, INC
WEST
B
250 -
100 -
EP -5
--- ____ -- UNIT 1 - FILL
-
--- - - - - - - - - D191T_
---_----_ _ UNIT 3
UNIT 4
LEGEND
UNIT 1 - Fill
UNIT 2 - Weathered /Disturbed Zone
UNIT 3 - Pre - Vashon Till
UNIT 4 - Pre - Vashon Silt
EP -4
25
SCALE IN FEET
UNIT 1 - FILL
UNIL
UNIT 4 - ?
•50
FIGURE . 3
SCHEMATIC GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION
UNIT 1 _FILL
EP -9
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO. G96296A
DECEMBER 1996
EAST
B '
ASSOCIATED
jai EARTH
SCIENCES, INC
250
- 200
m
m
D I
0
Z
TI
m
- 150
`100
SOUTHWEST
C
,225 -
200 -
150 -
125 - c'
EP -15
- U_NIT2
UNIT 3 •
LEGEND
UNIT 2 -- - -
UNIT 3 -
UNIT 4
EP -3
UNIT 1 - Fill
UNIT 2 - Weathered /Disturbed Zone
UNIT 3 - Pre - Vashon till
UNIT 4 - Pre - Vashon Silt
EP -8
0MT 4
O 25
SCALE IN FEET
Lot 6
EP -9
? _UNIT 1
-
UN/T4
50•
FIGURE 4
SCHEMATIC GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION
NORTHEAST
c i
- 225
- 200
- 175
150
125
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
PROJECT NO. G96296A
JANUARY 1997
1111111 ASSOCIATED
EARTH
SCIENCES, INC
NUMBER EP -1.
0
5
15
MOO
10—
NUMBER EP -
0
5
10
15 —
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarly representative of other times and locations. We wil not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of Information presented on this log.
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
G96296A
JANUARY 1997
AIASSI
ABBOCIATED
EARTH
BCIENCEB, INC
Loose, wet, dark brown, silty, fine sand with occasional gravel, scattered
roots. (Fill) Overlies approximately 1' thick red -brown soil horizon.
(Unit 1)
Medium stiff to stiff, wet, mottled grey, sandy silt to silty, fine sand,
occasional gravel. Weathered/ disturbed zone. Minor to moderate water
i t
seepage at approximately 5'. (Unit 2) ! 1
Very stiff becoming hard, moist to wet, grey, sandy silt to silty,
fine sand. Grades to hard, wet, blue -grey silt with trace to some
clay, occasional dropstones. Some brecciated /slickensided surfaces.
Diamictic lenses and interbeds of fine sand from 12' -14'. (Unit 4)
with gravel and cobbles, unsorted. (Lodgement Till - Unit 3)
BOH @ 14'
Note: Minor to moderate seepage at approximately 5'.
No caving.
NUMBER EP -1.
0
5
15
MOO
10—
NUMBER EP -
0
5
10
15 —
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarly representative of other times and locations. We wil not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of Information presented on this log.
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
G96296A
JANUARY 1997
AIASSI
ABBOCIATED
EARTH
BCIENCEB, INC
Topsoil.
Loose to medium dense, wet, mottled brown, silty, fine sand with gravel,
unsorted. Weathered /disturbed zone. (Unit 2) f
Dense becoming very dense, moist, mottled brown, silty, fine sand matrix
with gravel and cobbles, unsorted. (Lodgement Till - Unit 3)
Hard, moist, blue -grey, silt, diamictic upper 1'. 2'+ boulder at
approximately 7'. (Unit 4)
BOH. 0 12'
Note: Minor seepage at approximately 2' -3'.
No caving.
NUMBER EP -1.
0
5
15
MOO
10—
NUMBER EP -
0
5
10
15 —
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarly representative of other times and locations. We wil not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of Information presented on this log.
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
G96296A
JANUARY 1997
AIASSI
ABBOCIATED
EARTH
BCIENCEB, INC
lor
low
rw
is
lbw
16.
NUMBER EP -3
0
5
10—
15
NUMBER
0
5 —
1 0
15
EP -4
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the tine and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
irsterpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment They are not necessariy representative of other times and locations. We wil not
accept responsibiEty for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
G96296A
JANUARY 1997
/IASI
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
SCIENCES, INC
Soft to medium stiff, wet, brown, sandy silt to silty, fine sand,
some root debris. (Fill - Unit 1) Overlies approximately 1'
thick topsoil horizon.
Topsoil. r
Dense becoming very dense, moist, mottled brown, silty, fine sand matrix
with gravel and cobbles, unsorted. (Lodgement Till - Unit 3)
Dense becoming very dense, moist, mottled brown, silty, fine sand matrix
with gravel and cobbles, unsorted. (Lodgement Till - Unit 3)
Hard, moist to wet, blue -grey, silt with interbeds of fine sand.
Very stiff to hard, wet, blue -grey silt with fine sand interbeds. Minor
seepage at approximately 8'. (Unit 4)
Some brecciated, slickensided surfaces. Moderate water flow from
fine sand. Dense at approximately 14'. (Unit 4)
BOH a 15'
Note: Minor seepage at approximately 8'; no caving.
BOH @ 14'
Note: Moderate water flow at approximately 14'.
No caving.
lor
low
rw
is
lbw
16.
NUMBER EP -3
0
5
10—
15
NUMBER
0
5 —
1 0
15
EP -4
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the tine and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
irsterpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment They are not necessariy representative of other times and locations. We wil not
accept responsibiEty for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
G96296A
JANUARY 1997
/IASI
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
SCIENCES, INC
Soft to medium stiff, wet, brown, sandy silt to silty, fine sand,
some root debris. (Fill - Unit 1) Overlies approximately 1'
thick topsoil horizon.
Soft to medium stiff, saturated, mottled, blue -grey, sandy silt to silty,
fine sand, occasional gravel, unsorted. Weathered /disturbed zone.
Water seepage at approximately 8'. (Unit 2)
Dense becoming very dense, moist, mottled brown, silty, fine sand matrix
with gravel and cobbles, unsorted. (Lodgement Till - Unit 3)
Very stiff to hard, wet, blue -grey silt with fine sand interbeds. Minor
seepage at approximately 8'. (Unit 4)
BOH a 15'
Note: Minor seepage at approximately 8'; no caving.
lor
low
rw
is
lbw
16.
NUMBER EP -3
0
5
10—
15
NUMBER
0
5 —
1 0
15
EP -4
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the tine and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
irsterpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment They are not necessariy representative of other times and locations. We wil not
accept responsibiEty for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
G96296A
JANUARY 1997
/IASI
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
SCIENCES, INC
0
15
NUMBER EP -
5
10
NUMBER EP -
0
5
10
15
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessariy representative of other times and locations. We via not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
G96296A
JANUARY 1997
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
SCIENCES, INC
Soft to medium stiff, wet, brown, sandy silt to silty, fine sand,
some root debris. (Fill - Unit 1) Overlies approximately 1'
thick topsoil horizon.
Medium stiff, moist to wet, mottled brown, sandy silt to silty, fine
sand, scattered gravel. Weathered /disturbed zone. (Unit 2)
Medium stiff, moist to wet, mottled brown, sandy silt to silty, fine
sand, scattered gravel. Weathered /disturbed zone. (Unit 2)
!-
Hard, wet, blue -grey, silt with fine sand interbeds and diamictic
lenses. Gravel zone at approximately 12' with moderate water flow.
(Unit 4)
Dense becoming very dense, moist, mottled brown, silty, fine sand matrix
with gravel and cobbles, unsorted. (Lodgement Till - Unit 3)
BOH h 15'
Note: Moderate water flow at approximately 12'; no caving.
Hard, moist to wet, blue -grey, silt with fine sand interbeds. (Unit 4)
BOH 0 14'
Note: Minor to moderate water seepage at approximately 5'.
No caving.
0
15
NUMBER EP -
5
10
NUMBER EP -
0
5
10
15
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessariy representative of other times and locations. We via not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
G96296A
JANUARY 1997
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
SCIENCES, INC
Topsoil.
Medium stiff, moist to wet, mottled brown, sandy silt to silty, fine
sand, scattered gravel. Weathered /disturbed zone. (Unit 2)
Dense becoming very dense, moist, mottled brown, silty, fine sand matrix
with gravel and cobbles, unsorted. (Lodgement Till - Unit 3)
Hard, wet, blue -grey, silt with fine sand interbeds and diamictic
lenses. Gravel zone at approximately 12' with moderate water flow.
(Unit 4)
BOH h 15'
Note: Moderate water flow at approximately 12'; no caving.
0
15
NUMBER EP -
5
10
NUMBER EP -
0
5
10
15
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessariy representative of other times and locations. We via not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
G96296A
JANUARY 1997
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
SCIENCES, INC
Iwo
11r
NUMBER EP -7
0
0
5
10
15
5
10
15
NUMBER
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
OININ
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
G96296A
JANUARY 1997
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
SCIENCES, INC
Topsoil.
Medium stiff, moist to wet, mottled brown, sandy silt to silty, fine
sand, scattered gravel. Weathered /disturbed zone. (Unit 2)
I Dense becoming very dense, moist, mottled brown, silty, fine sand matrix r wth gravel and cobbles, unsorted. (Lodgement Till - Unit 3)
Dense, wet, brown becoming blue -grey, fine sand, micaceous, overlying
hard, moist to wet, blue -grey, silt, diamictic. Water seepage in
sand lense. (Unit 4)
BOH la 11'
Note: Moderate water seepage at approximately 6'.
No caving.
Hole terminated due to boulder zone at 11'.
Iwo
11r
NUMBER EP -7
0
0
5
10
15
5
10
15
NUMBER
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION
OININ
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
FOSTER RIDGE
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
G96296A
JANUARY 1997
ASSOCIATED
EARTH
SCIENCES, INC
lbw
l■
Imo
Iv
10
it
15
ri
Int
10
15
Yaw
tor
0
5
0
5
Number EP -8
Number EP -9
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: 206 - 827 -7701
Fax: 206 - 827 -5424
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
Forest duff.
1
1 Soft, moist, brown grading to gray, fine, sandy SILT. (UNIT 2)
Stiff grading to very dense, moist, gray, silty, fine SAND with some fine to medium sand lenses;
weathered 1 -1/2' to 5'. (UNIT 4)
BOH @ 14'
Note: Slight seepage at 5'; no caving.
- Forest duff.
1
Soft, moist, brown, fine, sandy SILT; many roots to 1/4: diameter. (Fill - UNIT 1)
Medium dense, moist, brown, silty, fine SAND with some medium sand zones. (UNIT 4)
BOH @ 15'
Note: No seepage; no caving. Pit located at top of slope; slope has bowed trees.
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observation at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
Reviewed By f
Foster Ridge
Tukwila, Washington
Project No. G96296A
December 1996
.1 Forest duff. r
. Loose /soft, moist to wet, brown, silty, fine SAND to fine, sandy SILT. (UNIT 2)
Medium dense, moist, brown with mottling, silty, fine SAND (Weathered Till); below 5' lenses of coarse
sand and gravel; occasional boulders to 18" diameter. (UNIT 3)
Dense, damp to moist with depth, light brown, silty, fine SAND. (UNIT 4)
BOH @ 15'
Note: No seepage; no caving.
-1 Forest duff. r
Loose /soft, wet, dark brown grading to brown, silty, fine SAND to fine, sandy SILT. (UNIT 1 /UNIT 2)
Medium dense becoming dense with depth, moist to wet, brown grading to gray, silty, fine SAND with some
coarse sand, trace gravel. (UNIT 3)
Dense, wet, gray, silty, fine SAND, trace gravel and dropstones. (UNIT 4)
BOH @ 18' Note: Medium seepage at 5'; slight caving due to seepage.
10
r..
av 15
fro
rr
tre
Ir
w.
Yr
0
0
5 _
5
10
ok 15
Number EP -10
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
Number EP -11
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observation at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
`.r interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: 206- 827 -7701
Fax: 206 - 827 -5424
Reviewed By 1=2
Foster Ridge
Tukwila, Washington
Project No. G96296A
December 1996
_7 Forest duff. r
r
Soft, moist to wet, dark brown, silty, fine SAND, trace gravel; occasional dropstones to 9" diameter.
(Fill - UNIT 1)
Iwo
tow 10
15
" 15
rr
bir
0
5
10
Number EP -12
Number EP -13
Forest duff.
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
Soft, moist to wet, dark brown grading to Tight brown, silty, fine SAND. (UNIT 2)
Very dense, moist, light brown, silty, fine SAND with some dropstones. (UNIT 4)
Grades to very hard, moist to wet, gray, silty, fine SAND to fine sandy SILT; some slickenside surfaces.
(UNIT 4)
BOH @ 18' Note: No seepage; no caving.
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observation at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
too interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: 206- 827 -7701
Fax: 206- 827 -5424
Reviewed By [ZOIJ
Foster Ridge
Tukwila, Washington
Project No. G96296A
December 1996
Imo
Iwo
Yir 10
ry 15
4
10
v
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observation at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not
lbw
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
Iwo
0
5
0
5
15
Number EP -14
Number EP -15
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
1 Forest duff.
r
Loose becoming dense, moist, dark brown grading to light brown, silty, fine SAND. (UNIT 2)
Very dense, moist, Tight brown, silty, fine SAND; brecciated. (UNIT 3)
@ 8' to 9' Tense of coarse sand and gravel.
@ 12' to 12 -1/2' Tense of very dense, moist, gray, silty, fine sand.
BOH @ 15'
Note: Seepage at 1', 4', and 8'; no caving.
1 Forest duff.
Loose, moist to wet, dark brown grading to light brown, silty, fine SAND. (UNIT 2)
Dense to very dense, moist, light brown, silty, fine SAND. (UNIT 3)
@ 12' to 13' Tense of medium to coarse sand with silt.
BOH @ 15'
Note: Moderate to rapid seepage at 12'; no caving.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: 206- 827 -7701
Fax: 206 - 827 -5424
Reviewed By
Foster Ridge
Tukwila, Washington
Project No. G96296A
December 1996
7 Forest duff.
r
Soft/loose becoming dense, moist to wet, dark brown grading to Tight brown, mottled, silty, fine SAND to
fine sandy SILT. (UNIT 1 /UNIT 2)
Dense to very dense, moist, light brown, silty, fine SAND with some gravel with depth. (UNIT 3)
@ 11' to 12' tense of brown medium sand.
Very dense, moist to wet, brown, silty, fine SAND. (UNIT 4)
BOH @ 16'
Note: Slight seepage at 11' to 12'; no caving.
boo
0
lbw
5
..15
fat
". 15
ow
10 _
5 —
di
it 10
Number EP -16
Number
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.
911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: 206- 827 -7701
Fax: 206 - 827 -5424
EXPLORATION PIT LOG
Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observation at the time and location of this exploratory hole, modified by geologic
interpretation, engineering analysis, and judgment. They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations. We will not
accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log.
Reviewed By
Foster Ridge
Tukwila, Washington
Project No. G96296A
December 1996
EXCEPTIONS:
'-IICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMP/
' 3400 COLOMBIA CENTER, 701 5TE AVE
SEATTLE, WA 98104
SEE SCHEDULE B ATTACHED
CHARGE: $200.00
TAX: 17.6 0
Records examined to April 26, 2004
By
SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE
Certificate for Filing Proposed Short Plat
SEE SCHEDULE A (NEXT PAGE)
at 8:00 A.M.
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
HARRIS /EISENBREY
Title Officer
(206)628 -5623
Order No.: 1134229
In the matter of the short plat submitted for your approval, this Company has examined the records of the
County Auditor and County Clerk of KING County, Washington, and the records of the Clerk of the
United States Courts holding terms in said County, and from such examination hereby certifies that the title to
the following described land situate in said KING County, to -wit:
VESTED IN:
RICHARD S. PEDERSEN AND DONNA M. PEDERSEN, HUSBAND AND WIFE
SHPLATA /12- 5 -90 /EK
gICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMP/
SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE
SCHEDULE A
(Continued)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Order No.: 1134229
THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST,
WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1;
THENCE SOUTH 89 °56'42.5" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT, 270
FEET;
THENCE NORTH 57 °41'12.5" EAST 362.11 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY
MARGIN OF COUNTY ROAD (MACADAM ROAD SOUTH);
THENCE CONTINUING NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY MARGINAL LINE OF SAID
ROAD 12 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 57 °41'12.5" WEST 100.81 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 31 °08'30" WEST 156.39 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 84 ° 28' WEST 244.53 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 35 °34' WEST 140.46 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 54° WEST 65.07 FEET TO INTERSECT A LINE 30 FEET EAST OF AND PARALLEL
TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1;
THENCE SOUTH 89 ° 19'15" WEST TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
(BEING KNOWN AS LOTS 17 THROUGH 27, BLOCK 1 AND LOTS 1 THROUGH 7, BLOCK 2,
HELLWIG'S ADDITION TO FOSTER, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF, TOGETHER
WITH VACATED STREETS ADJOINING)
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
GENERAL EXCEPTIONS:
V
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE
SCHEDULE B
This certificate does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following exceptions:
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
Order No.: 1134229
A. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records
or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires for
value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment.
B. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records.
C. Encroachments, overlaps, boundary line disputes, and any other matters which would be disclosed by an
accurate survey and inspection of the premises.
D. Easements or claims of easements not shown by the public records.
E. Any lien, or right to lien, for contributions to employee benefit funds, or for state workers' compensation, or
for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, all as imposed by law, and not shown by
the public records.
F. Liens under the Workmen's Compensation Act not shown by the public records.
G. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity
or garbage removal.
H. General taxes not now payable; matters relating to special assessments and special levies, if any, preceding or in
the same becoming a lien.
I. Reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof;
Indian tribal codes or regulations, Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including easements or equitable servitudes.
J. Water rights, claims, or title to water.
K. THIS REPORT IS ISSUED AND ACCEPTED UPON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LIABILITY
OF THE COMPANY SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS($1000.00).
SHPIATB /031 694 /soc
GRANTEE:
PURPOSE:
AREA AFFECTED:
RECORDED:
RECORDING NUMBER:
GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES:
C HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMP)
SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE
SCHEDULE B
(Continued)
EXCEPTIONS
A 1. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF:
2. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES FOR ALL LOTS IN SAID PREMISES OF
THE UNRECORDED PLAT, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF FIRST HALF UNPAID
ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER 1 OF THE TAX YEAR
(AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES):
YEAR: 2003
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: SEE BELOW
LEVY CODE: 2413
ASSESSED VALUE -LAND: $ 186,000.00 (AGGREGATE)
ASSESSED VALUE- IMPROVEMENTS: $ 0.00
BILLED: $2,260.35 (AGGREGATE)
PAID: $1,277.64 (AGGREGATE)
UNPAID: $1,277.46 (AGGREGATE)
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBERS:
BLOCK 1:
LOT 17 -- 322920 - 0090 -06; LOT 18 -- 322920 - 0110 -02;
LOT 19 -- 322920 - 0120 -00; LOT 20 -- 322920 - 0130 -08;
LOT 21 -- 322920 - 0140 -06; LOT 22 -- 322920 - 0150 -03;
LOT 23 -- 322920 - 0160 -01; LOT 24 -- 322920 - 0170 -09;
LOT 25 -- 322920 - 0180 -07; LOT 26 -- 322920 - 0190 -05;
LOT 27 -- 322920 - 0200 -03;
BLOCK 2:
LOT 1 -- 322920 - 0100 -04; LOT 2 -- 322920 - 0210 -01;
LOT 3 -- 322920 - 0220 -09; LOT 4 -- 322920 - 0230 -07;
LOT 5 -- 322920 - 0240 -05; LOT 6 -- 322920 - 0250 -02;
LOT 7 -- 322920 - 0260 -00
Order No.: 1134229
EACH LOT IS TOGETHER WITH PORTION OF VACATED STREET ADJOINING
c 3. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES FOR ALL LOTS IN SAID PREMISES OF
THE UNRECORDED PLAT, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF FIRST HALF UNPAID
ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER 1 OF THE TAX YEAR
(AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES):
YEAR: 2004
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
VAL VUE SEWER DISTRICT
SEWER PIPELINE AND LINES AND ALL
NECESSARY CONNECTIONS AND APPURTENANCES
THERETO
A WESTERLY PORTION OF SAID PREMISES
MAY 16, 1978
7805161076
GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES:
GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES:
HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMP)
SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE
SCHEDULE B
(Continued)
EXCEPTIONS
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: SEE BELOW
LEVY CODE: 2413
ASSESSED VALUE -LAND: $ 186,000.00 (AGGREGATE)
ASSESSED VALUE- IMPROVEMENTS: $ 0.00
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBERS:
BLOCK 1:
LOT 17 -- 322920 - 0090 -06; LOT 18 -- 322920 - 0110 -02;
LOT 19 -- 322920 - 0120 -00; LOT 20 -- 322920 - 0130 -08;
LOT 21 -- 322920 - 0140 -06; LOT 22 -- 322920- 0150 -03;
LOT 23 -- 322920- 0160 -01; LOT 24 -- 322920- 0170 -09;
LOT 25 -- 322920 - 0180 -07; LOT 26 -- 322920 - 0190 -05;
LOT 27 -- 322920 - 0200 -03;
BLOCK 2:
LOT 1 -- 322920 - 0100 -04; LOT 2 -- 322920 - 0210 -01;
LOT 3 -- 322920 - 0220 -09; LOT 4 -- 322920 - 0230 -07;
LOT 5 -- 322920 - 0240 -05; LOT 6 -- 322920 - 0250 -02;
LOT 7 -- 322920 - 0260 -00
EACH LOT IS TOGETHER WITH PORTION OF VACATED STREET ADJOINING
4. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF
FIRST HALF UNPAID ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER
1 OF THE TAX YEAR (AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES):
YEAR 2001
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 322920- 0010 -03
LEVY CODE: 2413
ASSESSED VALUE -LAND: $ 17,500.00
ASSESSED VALUE- IMPROVEMENTS: $
BILLED: $ 251.91
PAID: $ 0.00
UNPAID: $ 251.91
AFFECTS: LOT 1 OF BLOCK 1 OF THE UNRECORDED PLAT, TOGETHER WITH A PORTION
OF VACATED ALLEY ADJOINING.
THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONTAINED ON THE KING COUNTY TAX ROLLS UNDER THIS
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER INCLUDED AN EASTERLY PORTION OF SAID PREMISES, BEING A
STRIP OF LAND APPROXIAMTELY 12' BY 100.81'.
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
BILLED: $2,613.63 (AGGREGATE)
PAID: $ 0.00
UNPAID: $2,613.63 (AGGREGATE)
Order No.: 1134229
SHPIATB3/ 12- 12 -90 /EK
w
GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES:
GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES:
C HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMP/
SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE
SCHEDULE B
(Continued)
EXCEPTIONS
NOTE: IF SAID DELINQUENCIES ARE NOT PAID PRIOR TO MAY 1ST ON THE THIRD
YEAR FOLLOWING THE TAX YEAR THEN AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT MAY BE DUE TO
REMOVE SAID TAXES FROM FORECLOSURE.
5. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF
FIRST HALF UNPAID ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER
1 OF THE TAX YEAR (AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES):
YEAR: 2002
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 322920- 0010 -03
LEVY CODE: 2413
ASSESSED VALUE -LAND: $ 24,000.00
ASSESSED VALUE- IMPROVEMENTS: $ 0.00
BILLED: $ 325.75
PAID: $ 0.00
UNPAID: $ 325.75
AFFECTS: LOT 1 OF BLOCK 1 OF THE UNRECORDED PLAT, TOGETHER WITH A PORTION
OF VACATED ALLEY ADJOINING STREET ADJOINING
THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONTAINED ON THE KING COUNTY TAX ROLLS UNDER THIS
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER INCLUDES AN EASTERLY PORTION OF SAID PREMISES, BEING A
STRIP OF LAND APPROXIAMTELY 12' BY 100.81'.
6. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF
FIRST HALF UNPAID ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER
1 OF THE TAX YEAR (AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES):
YEAR: 2003
TAX ACCOUNT 322920- 0010 -03
LEVY CODE: 2413
ASSESSED VALUE -LAND: $ 25,000.00
ASSESSED VALUE- IMPROVEMENTS: $ 0.00
BILLED: $ 334.20
PAID: $ 0.00
UNPAID: $ 334.20
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
Order No.: 1134229
AFFECTS: LOT 1 OF BLOCK 1 OF THE UNRECORDED PLAT, TOGETHER WITH A PORTION
OF VACATED ALLEY ADJOINING ADJOINING
THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONTAINED ON THE KING COUNTY TAX ROLLS UNDER THIS
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER INCLUDES AN EASTERLY PORTION OF SAID PREMISES, BEING A
STRIP OF LAND APPROXIAMTELY 12' BY 100.81'.
S H P [ AT 83 / 12 -12 -90 / EK
GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES:
HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMP]
C
SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE
SCHEDULE B
(Continued)
EXCEPTIONS
• 7. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF
FIRST HALF UNPAID ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER
1 OF THE TAX YEAR (AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES):
YEAR 2004
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 322920 - 0010 -03
LEVY CODE: 2413
ASSESSED VALUE -LAND: $ 26,000.00
ASSESSED VALUE- IMPROVEMENTS: $ 0.00
BILLED: $ 355.49
PAID: $ 0.00
UNPAID: $ 355.49
Order No.: 1134229
NOTE: IF THE TAX AMOUNT IS NOT EVENLY DIVISIBLE INTO TWO PAYMENTS, KING
COUNTY WILL REQUIRE THE HALF PAYMENT BE ROUNDED UP TO THE NEXT CENT.
FAILURE TO ROUND UP THE HALF PAYMENT MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF THE TAX
PAYMENT BY THE COUNTY.
AFFECTS: LOT 1 OF BLOCK 1 OF THE UNRECORDED PLAT, TOGETHER WITH A PORTION
OF VACATED ALLEY ADJOINING ADJOINING
THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONTAINED ON THE KING COUNTY TAX ROLLS UNDER THIS
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER INCLUDES AN EASTERLY PORTION OF SAID PREMISES, BEING A
STRIP OF LAND APPROXIAMTELY 12' BY 100.81'.
x 8. LIABILITY TO ASSESSMENTS FOR GENERAL TAXES FOR CURRENT AND /OR PRIOR
YEARS. SAID PROPERTY IS NOT PRESENTLY CARRIED OR BEING TAXED ON THE
GENERAL TAX ROLLS.
✓ AFFECTS: THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF SAID PREMISES (FORMERLY KNOWN AS S. 140TH
ST) .
WE NOTE THE,KING COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S MAP DOES NOT SHOW THIS 30 FEET AS
BEING CONNECTED TO THE LOTS IN BLOCK 2 OF SAID UNRECORDED PLAT. NOR DO
THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ON THE KING COUNTY TAX ROLL APPEAR TO INCLUDE SAID
30 FEET.
• 9. RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST OF AIA INTERNATIONAL VENTURES, PRESUMED BY THE
KING COUNTY TAX ROLLS TO HAVE AN INTEREST IN SAID PREMISES.
nr AFFECTS: AN EASTERLY PORTION OF SAID PREMISES (APPROXIMATELY 12' BY
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
SH PIATB3/ 12- 12 -90 /EK
L
C HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPJ,;
100.81')ADJOING LOT 1 BLOCK 1.
RECORDED:
RECORDING NUMBER:
GRANTOR:
SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE
SCHEDULE B
(Continued)
EXCEPTIONS
Order No.: 1134229
x 10. RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST OF MOHAMMAD A. KHAN, A SINGLE MAN, GRANTEE ON
THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED INSTRUMENT:
OCTOBER 19, 2001
20011019002259
AIA INTERNATIONAL VENTURES, INC., A
WASHINGTON CORPORATION
ON THE DATE OF SAID INSTRUMENT THE GRANTOR HELD NO RECORD INTEREST IN
SAID PROPERTY AND HAS SINCE ACQUIRED NO RECORD INTEREST.
AFFECTS: AFFECTS: LOT 1 OF BLOCK 1 OF THE UNRECORDED PLAT, TOGETHER WITH
A PORTION OF VACATED ALLEY ADJOINING ADJOINING
THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONTAINED ON THE KING COUNTY TAX ROLLS UNDER THIS
TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER INCLUDES AN EASTERLY PORTION OF SAID PREMISES, BEING A
STRIP OF LAND APPROXIAMTELY 12' BY 100.81'.
WE NOTE THE DEED INTO DARREL D. CLARK FOR LOT 1, BLOCK 1, OF THE
UNRECORDED PLAT OF HELLWIG'S ADDITION, RECORDED APRIL 6, 1942 UNDER
RECORDING NUMBER 3231844, DOES NOT INCLUDE THE VACATED ALLEY /STREET
ADJOINING. HOWEVER WHEN THE ESTATE OF MABLE CLARK, DECEASED, CONVEYED
SAID PREMISES BY STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER
2001201000799, SAID DEED INCLUDED TOGETHER WITH VACATED ALLEY ADJOINING,
AND WHICH WAS FURTHER CONVEYED TO MOHAMMAD A. KHAN, BY DEED RECORDED
UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20011019002259, AS NOTED IN PARAGRAPH 10 ABOVE.
P 11. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF:
GRANTOR:
TRUSTEE:
BENEFICIARY:
AMOUNT:
DATED:
RECORDED:
RECORDING NUMBER:
LOAN NUMBER:
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
MOHAMMAD A. KHAN, A SINGLE MAN
NOT AVAILABLE
NATIONAL CITY MORTGAGE CO.
$ 202,500.00
OCTOBER 17, 2001
OCTOBER 19, 2001
20011019002260
NOT DISCLOSED
THE AMOUNT NOW SECURED BY SAID DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS UPON WHICH THE
SAME CAN BE DISCHARGED OR ASSUMED SHOULD BE ASCERTAINED FROM THE HOLDER
OF THE INDEBTEDNESS SECURED.
SHPIATB3/ 12- 12 -90 /EK
0
GRANTOR:
TRUSTEE:
BENEFICIARY:
AMOUNT:
DATED:
RECORDED:
RECORDING NUMBER:
LOAN NUMBER:
HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMP/
SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE
SCHEDULE B
(Continued)
EXCEPTIONS
AFFECTS: AN EASTERLY PORTION OF SAID PREMISES (APPROXIMATELY 12' BY
100.81') AND OTHER PROPERTY.
12. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF:
Order No.: 1134229
ROBERT G. MCCAUSLAND AND ANGELA K.
MCCAUSLAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE
LAWYERS TITLE COMPANY
EDMUND DAVIS AND GLADYS E. DAVIS,
HUSBAND AND WIFE, WHO ACQUIRED TITLE AS
GLADYS E. LINDE, AS HER SEPARATE ESTATE
$ 44,800.00
4 17, 1991
APRIL 23, 1991
9104230495
THE AMOUNT NOW SECURED BY SAID DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS UPON WHICH THE
SAME CAN BE DISCHARGED OR ASSUMED SHOULD BE ASCERTAINED FROM THE HOLDER
OF THE INDEBTEDNESS SECURED.
s 13. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IN THIS COMMITMENT IS BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED
WITH THE APPLICATION AND THE PUBLIC RECORDS AS DEFINED IN THE POLICY TO
ISSUE. THE PARTIES TO THE FORTHCOMING TRANSACTION MUST NOTIFY THE TITLE
INSURANCE COMPANY PRIOR TO CLOSING IF THE DESCRIPTION DOES NOT CONFORM TO
THEIR EXPECTATIONS.
NOTE 1:
THE FOLLOWING MAY BE USED AS AN ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON THE
DOCUMENTS TO BE RECORDED TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF RCW 64.04.
SAID ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A COMPLETE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION WHICH MUST ALSO APPEAR IN THE BODY OF THE DOCUMENT:
LOTS 17 -27, BLOCK 1, LOTS 1 -7, BLOCK 2, HELLWIGS ADDITION TO FOSTER
UNRECORDED.
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
SHPLATB3/12-12-90/EK
CHICAGO TITL INSURANCE COMPANY
701 FIFTH AVENUE, #3400, SEATTLE, WA 98104
PHONE: (206)628 -5600
FAX: (206)623 -7463
IMPORTANT: This is not a Survey. It is furnished as a convenience to locate the land indicated hereon with
reference to streets and other land. No liability is assumed by reason of reliance hereon.
r, -» ......
0, 0 3
q
.1) w f
~o Lot 2 A ) 0w °
k y y
4 ^ o• 4.
AC) ® w .
Q _ pa: (sr) _
Ms
•
MAP /RDA /0999
VIEW OF FOSTER RIDGE SITE, UPSLOPE
FROM AREA NEAR LOT 5 OF HELLWIG ADD.
VIEW OF-;FOSTER RIDGE UPSLOPE
FROM . OFFSITE ;AREA ALONG MACADAM
"v ivre ( i4- )
VIEW LOOKING SOUTHWESTERLY @ FOSTER RIDGE SITE
UPSLOPE FROM AREA NEAR LOT 10 HELLWIG ADDITION
TO LEFT VIEW OF ABOVE AREA FROM SAME LOCATION
•
0
boMM� 2004
REVISED WETLAND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLAN
Foster Ridge Property
Tukwila, Washington
Prepared for:
Richard Pedersen
Parkside Management
P.O. Box 1518
Marysville, WA 98270
Prepared by:
Sheldon & Associates, Inc.
5031 University Way NE
Seattle, WA 98105
(206) 522 -1214
June 11, 2003
Introduction
Foster Ridge is a proposed residential development to be located on 2.92 acres at South
139 Street and 46 Avenue South (Figure 1 - Vicinity Map). The current proposal is for
6 lots to be located in the southwest portion of the property (Figure 2 — Site Map). All
lots would lie to the west of Wetland 1. Lot 2, as shown on current plans, would
encroach into the 50 -foot buffer around this Type 2 wetland.
The City of Tukwila has requested that the Conceptual Wetland Buffer Enhancement
Plan (Sheldon & Associates 1997) be modified to reflect the new 6 -lot layout and to
propose mitigation for the buffer reduction along the south side of Lot 2 from 50 to 25
feet. The length of the buffer area that will be reduced by 25 feet is approximately 100
feet. The previous buffer .enhancement plan called for planting in all of the buffer around
Wetland 1. Because of the change in lot layout, mitigation is now only required for the
buffer encroachment along Lot 3 (City of Tukwila letter to John Friel, dated October 18,
2002). This report includes information on existing conditions in the buffer, details on
proposed site preparation, planting plan, performance standards, maintenance plan, and
monitoring plan.
Existing Conditions
Two wetlands are located on the site as described in the Wetland Delineation and
Functional Values Assessment (Sheldon & Associates 1995). Wetland 2 is located
mostly offsite. Wetland 1 is mostly onsite. This is a Type 2 wetland with a 50 -foot
buffer. The buffer adjacent to Lot 2 is dominated primarily by Himalayan blackberry
(Rubus procerus) with a patchy canopy of small red alder (Alnus rubra) and black
cottonwood (Populus balsamifera). The average tree stem diameter in the area is about 7
inches and canopy cover ranges from 20 to 60 percent. There is a large opening in the
canopy in the buffer where the Himalayan blackberry reaches up to 90 percent cover.
Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) and creeping nightshade (Solanum dulcamara)
are the other invasive species that are present in the buffer, although these currently have
negligible cover. Himalayan blackberry and reed canarygrass are also present in the
wetland adjacent to this portion of the buffer.
Buffer Enhancement Plan Overview
The buffer enhancement plan will apply to the hatched area shown on Figure 2 and
labeled as "Wetland Buffer Planting Area ". This area is 25 feet wide and about 100 feet
long, totaling about 2,500 square feet. Figure 3 (3 pages) shows the buffer enhancement
plant. The primary goal is for this plan to result in an enhanced wetland buffer with
improved functions, vegetated with native plants appropriate to the surrounding upland
and wetland vegetation.
This goal will be met by implementation of the following objectives:
1. Remove and control invasive Himalayan blackberry with a combination of mowing,
spot application of herbicide, and hand - grubbing.
Pedersen/Foster Ridge Wetland Bu Enhancement Plan Sheldon & Associates, Inc.
Project #03 -772 1 June 11, 2003
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
2. Install plants at high densities to establish vegetative coverage as quickly as possible.
3. Apply sheet mulch as well as organic /chip mulch.
4. Perform site maintenance by regularly removing re sprouting Himalayan blackberry
and other invasive weedy species within planting area.
5. Maintain clear zone that is free of Himalayan blackberry in 5' wide perimeter strip
around planted area to minimize re- invasion of planting area from outside.
6. Provide supplemental watering if needed in first two years.
7. Perform site monitoring as specified in this plan and submit monitoring reports to
client and designated City of Tukwila staff.
Site Preparation
Site preparation is specified on Sheet 3 of the Planting Plan at the end of this report.
Portions of this text are duplicated here.
Clearing Invasive Plants
Himalayan blackberry is a prevalent and problematic species at the site. Removal and
control of this species will require ongoing and regular maintenance throughout the three
year maintenance and monitoring period for this project to be successful and meet
performance standards.
Initial removal of Himalayan blackberry should be done as follows. Mow all blackberry in
planting area to the ground in early -mid summer. Preserve all native shrubs within planting
area (limited to half dozen individuals + willow thicket). Do not damage any existing native
trees with mowing equipment. After 3 -4 weeks or when re- sprouting of blackberry occurs,
cut sprouts to 3 -6" above ground and dab cut end with glyphosate herbicide. Cut ends should
be dabbed within 1 -2 hours of cutting. Herbicide used must be approved for use around
aquatic areas — e.g. Rodeo. Herbicide application should ideally be done in late summer
(August) when plants are drawing carbohydrate reserves into the root systems.
Planting
Planting should not be done at the site until at least 6 weeks after herbicide application. Ideal
planting time is late fall (Oct -Nov), when plants are dormant. This will minimize transplant
shock and the need for immediate watering. Plants must be of local origin (genotype from
western Washington lowland elevation). It is intended that plants be installed in dense
clusters rather than evenly spaced across the entire planting area. This should help new ,
plantings establish dominance, by creating shade /cover to outcompete invasives as quickly as
possible. Planting schemes for each of the two specific micro -site conditions are illustrated
at the end of this report (Sheets 1 and 2). A complete plant list is given in Table 1.
Pedersen/Foster Ridge Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan Sheldon & Associates, Inc.
Project #03 -772 2 June 11, 2003
octenuric name 1 Common Name J Qty ■ Size 1 Spacing
Trees
Pseudotsuga menziesii
Douglas fir
12
1 2 gal
6 -12' o.c.
Thuja plicate
western red cedar
18
2 gal
6 -12' o.c.
Tsuga heterophylla
western hemlock
12
2 gal
6 -12' o.c
subtotal
42
Shrubs
Crataegus douglasii
Douglas hawthome
20
2 gal
3 - 6' o.c
Oemlaria cerasiformis
Indian plum
20
2 gal
3 -6' o.c
Rosa nutkana
Nootka rose
75
1 gal
2 -3' o.c.
Rubus parviflrous
thimbleberry
20
s as CU CO CU
a
n-NNNN-
2 -3' o.c.
Rubus spectabilis
salmonberry
40
3-4' o.c
Salix scouleriana _
Scouler willow
20
3 -6' o.c
Sambucus racemosa
red elderberry
15
4 -6' o.c.
Symphoricarpos albus
snowberry
75
2 -3' o.c.
subtotal
285
_
Total # of plants
327
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
V"
Table 1. Plant List for Buffer Enhancement.
Plants should be installed in plant pits at least twice the diameter of the plant container /root
ball. The bottom of the planting hole should be scarified. Plant pits should be backfilled
with native soil and watered in at the time of planting. Plants should be installed at the same
soil depth as they were planted in the pots. Each plant will be planted with one 21 gram slow
release fertilizer tablet (Agriform 20 -10 -5 or equivalent — available from Forestry Suppliers
Inc.). Each plant will be marked with brightly colored plastic flagging.
After plant installation, each plant should be sheet - mulched with a double layer of
commercial grade cardboard (e.g appliance boxes). Sheet mulch squares should be
approximately 3' x 3' for each plant, and should cover the soil directly over the installed
plant. After cardboard has been laid down, the entire planting area will be mulched with
mixed arborist chips to a depth of 4 ". This is done to retain soil moisture, add organic
material to soil matrix over time, and to combat weeds. Chip mulch should be kept from
touching the trunks of installed plants (e.g. keep 1" around entire circumference of trunk
clear of chips). Bark mulch or cedar chips are not acceptable substitutions for specified
mulch. Total quantity of chips required to mulch planting area to a depth of 4" = 28 cu. yds.
(assumes 2500 sq. ft. planting area — adjust amount as needed for differing area).
Maintenance
Due to site conditions (partial shade, soil moisture) and extensive mulching,
supplemental watering is not anticipated to be necessary. However, site conditions
should be monitored carefully in the first year, and a plan or strategy for temporary
irrigation should be made at the time of planting in case it is necessary. Supplemental
watering is generally 1" of water weekly during the first growing season, tapering to %2"
weekly the second year.
Pedersen/Foster Ridge Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan Sheldon & Associates, Inc.
Project #03 -772 3 June 11, 2003
Sloe
The landscape contractor will be responsible for guaranteeing installed plants for one
year after initial planting. During the warranty period, the contractor will be required (by
contract) to provide maintenance for the project. - Maintenance in the first year will
include weeding, replacement of dead or dying plants, watering as needed, trash removal,
and re- application of chip mulch to maintain a depth of at least 4" in the first year after
installation. Maintenance needs in subsequent years will depend on site conditions, but
will involve regular weed control and chip mulch re- application at a minimum.
Maintenance Schedul
Performance Standards
Measurable performance standards are necessary to assess the achievement of success or
failure of a project. Performance standards for this project are as follows:
1. Aerial coverage
Planted material Invasive non - native species
Year 1 no standard <10%
Year 2 >50% <10%
Year 3 >75% <10%
Aerial coverage will be measured by visual estimate across the entire site for invasive
species. For planted material, aerial coverage will be measured within representative
plots and extrapolated for the entire site. Desirable native species that volunteer within
the planting area can be included in aerial coverage estimates.
2. Plant Survival of Installed Material
Year 1 100% (guaranteed by contractor)
Year 2' >85%
Year 3 >85%
Plant survival will be calculated in the first year by counting each installed individual. In
subsequent years, survival can be calculated by counting all installed individuals on site
or by counting individuals within plots and extrapolating for the entire site.
3. Plant Species Diversity
Tree layer: 3 native conifer species present and growing in each of three monitoring years
Pedersen/Foster Ridge Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan Sheldon & Associates, Inc.
Project #03 -772 4 June 11. 2003
Action
Year
Weed
Control
Watering
Trash
Mulch
Re- planting
1
April, June,
August
June -Oct as
needed
April, June,
August
summer/fall
as needed
fall
2
April, June,
August
June -Oct as
needed
April, June,
August
summer /fall
as needed
_
3
To be
determined
To be
determined
To be
determined
fall
To be
determined
Sloe
The landscape contractor will be responsible for guaranteeing installed plants for one
year after initial planting. During the warranty period, the contractor will be required (by
contract) to provide maintenance for the project. - Maintenance in the first year will
include weeding, replacement of dead or dying plants, watering as needed, trash removal,
and re- application of chip mulch to maintain a depth of at least 4" in the first year after
installation. Maintenance needs in subsequent years will depend on site conditions, but
will involve regular weed control and chip mulch re- application at a minimum.
Maintenance Schedul
Performance Standards
Measurable performance standards are necessary to assess the achievement of success or
failure of a project. Performance standards for this project are as follows:
1. Aerial coverage
Planted material Invasive non - native species
Year 1 no standard <10%
Year 2 >50% <10%
Year 3 >75% <10%
Aerial coverage will be measured by visual estimate across the entire site for invasive
species. For planted material, aerial coverage will be measured within representative
plots and extrapolated for the entire site. Desirable native species that volunteer within
the planting area can be included in aerial coverage estimates.
2. Plant Survival of Installed Material
Year 1 100% (guaranteed by contractor)
Year 2' >85%
Year 3 >85%
Plant survival will be calculated in the first year by counting each installed individual. In
subsequent years, survival can be calculated by counting all installed individuals on site
or by counting individuals within plots and extrapolating for the entire site.
3. Plant Species Diversity
Tree layer: 3 native conifer species present and growing in each of three monitoring years
Pedersen/Foster Ridge Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan Sheldon & Associates, Inc.
Project #03 -772 4 June 11. 2003
Year
Site
Report
0
Fall (post - construction)
As -built report (fall/winter)
1
April (w /contractor), June (monitoring)
Annual monitoring report (July)
2
April (w /contractor), June (monitoring)
Annual monitoring report (July)
3
June (monitoring)
Final monitoring report (July)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Shrub layer: 3 native shrub species present and growing in each of three monitoring years
in open canopy portion of planting area; 7 native shrub species present and growing in
each of three monitoring years in closed canopy portion of planting area.
Monitoring
Monitoring of the project should be done annually per City of Tukwila code
requirements. Site monitoring should include measurement of all parameters described in
the Performance Standards section of this report. Permanent plots or transects should be
established and monitored each year. Plots or transects should be located to represent
typical site conditions within the project area. Permanent photo - points should also be
established so as to depict the entire project area. Site photos should be taken annually
and submitted with monitoring reports. Site monitoring should be performed by June
30 of each monitoring year, and monitoring reports should be submitted to the client and
designated City of Tukwila staff person within one month of the monitoring site visit.
Subsequent to project installation, a site visit should be made to confirm that the project
was installed according to plan (as -built conditions). It is also strongly recommended
that the monitoring biologist or project designer meet on site with the contractor at the
start of the first year post - construction (March/April) to review weed control and
watering protocols.
ring Schedule
Pedersen/Foster Ridge Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan
Project #03 -772 5
Sheldon & Associates, Inc.
June I1, 2003
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Pedersen/Foster Ridge Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan Sheldon & Associates, Inc.
Project #03 -772 June 10, 2003
139 5T. -. �a
(P Ari)
r
0
I 1
1 1
•
in
g,
I/9
A)
/
■
X 210
_ 1
e
. �, TRACT 9 9\•
r r OPEN SPACE f \ _...-- -‘
\�:��1,. 92.57 /
F. r
...„...,..........-....z: ` =- -. vim ��f •
� - -' =
-
V- - -- --%' o� /-
wETIANOl
1 - S.�F.
\ /
/ 0•
•
r.
C•
30
�� ^ �Wetlarfd Bu
V r
4
•
•
' \ '' s4,
\ ` � \, `` ~.' x
� `J y 'ti e L 11L-4a_ _er
A�ml 5 - --�`
i -- -s -- �`_= =_?'�� (►fit
-� — .
Pedersen/Foster Ridge Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan
Project #03 -772
r
/
/
/
/
/
/•
/
/
1 5
0
r -
\
• \ \ \\ 1\
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
•
Sheldon & Associates, Inc.
June 10, 2003
I � � \\\\tfl u
►�i1IN o
1
1 1,
I � N o
Figure 2 Site Map
Z5'
PLANTING SCHEME FOR CLOSED CANOPY AREA
(Approx. 1800 -2000 sq. ft.)
Zs'
Planting Scheme for entire area
185 shrubs @ average spacing of 3-4' on center
30 trees @ average spacing of 8' on center
Species List for example 625 sg. ft area shown
Shrubs: qty 60 shrubs
Crataegus douglasii— Douglas hawthome
Oemlaria cerasiformis — indian plum
Rosa nutkana — Nootka rose
Rubus spectabilis — salmonberry
Salix scouleriana — Scouler willow
Sambucus racemosa — red elderberry
Symphoricarpos albus — snowberry
Trees: qty 12 trees
Thuja plicate — westem red cedar
Tsuga heterophylla — westem hemlock
10% qty = 6
10% qty = 6
20% qty = 12
20 %qty = 12
10% qty = 6
10% qty = 6
20% qty. = 12
Subtotal = 60
60% qty = 7
40% qty = 5
Subtotal = 12
LEGEND
Closed canopy area constitutes the majority of the buffer that is to be
enhanced. Cluster plantings in groups of same species. Rose and
snowberry are to be planted densely in one or two thickets at 2 -3'
spacing, while larger shrubs, are spaced more widely 3 -6' on center
as shown. Conifers are to be planted in groups with spacing ranging
from 6 -12' on center.
cedar
hemlock
PEDERSEN /FOSTER RIDGE
Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan
Sheet 1 of 3
Project #03 -772
June 2003
0
O
0
willow
salmonberry
elderberry
hawthome
Indian plum
rose /snowberry
Air
Sheldon &
Associates, Inc.
5031 University Way NE 1204 Seattle, WA 98105
Ph 206 -522 -1214 • Fa 206. 5224507
Wetlands Environmental consultants
PLANTING SCHEME FOR OPEN CANOPY AREA
(Approx. 600 sq. ft.)
25
Plantinq Scheme for entire area
100 shrubs @ average spacing of 2 -3' on center
12 trees @ average spacing of 8' on center
Species List for example 625 sq. ft.
Shrubs: qty 100 shrubs
Rosa nutkana — Nootka rose
Rubus parviflorus — thimbleberry
Symphoricarpos albus — snowberry
Trees: qty 12 trees
Pseudotsuga menziesii — Douglas fir
area shown
40% qty. = 40
20% qty. = 20
40% qty. = 40
Subtotal = 100
100% qty. = 12
Subtotal = 12
LEGEND
Open canopy area is located along the north side of the wetland
buffer that is to be enhanced. Rose and snowberry are to be
planted densely across the area, with several patches of
thimbleberry. Douglas fir are to be planted in groups with
spacing ranging from 6 -12' on center.
PEDERSEN /FOSTER RIDGE
Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan
Sheet 2 of 3
Project #03 -772
June 2003
Douglas fir
thimbleberry
rose /snowberry
Sheldon &
Associates, Inc.
5031 University Way NE 9204 Seattle. WA 98105
Ph 206 - 522 - 1214 - Fx 206
Wetland & Environmental consultants
Scientific Name
Common Name
Qty
Size
Spacing
Trees
Pseudotsuga menziesii
Douglas fir
12
2 gal
_
6 -12' o.c.
Thuja plicate
westem red cedar
18
2 gal
6 -12' o.c.
Tsuga heterophylla
westem hemlock
12
2 gal
6 -12' o.c
subtotal
42
Shrubs
Crataegus douglasii
Douglas hawthorne
20
2 gal
3-6' o.c
Oemlaria cerasiformis
indian plum
20
2 gal
3 -6' o.c
Rosa nutkana
Nootka rose
75
1 gal
2 -3' o.c.
Rubus parviflrous
thimbleberry
' 20
1 gal
2 -3' o.c.
Rubus spectabilis
salmonberry
40
2 gal
3-4' o.c
Salix scouleriana
Scouler willow
20
2 gal
3 -6' o.c
Sambucus racemosa
red elderberry
15
2 gal
4 -6' o.c.
Symphoricarpos albus
snowberry
75
1 gal
2 -3' o.c.
subtotal
285
Total # of plants
327
PLANT SCHEDULE FOR WETLAND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT
. Note: Plants must be of local origin (genotype from western Washington lowland elevation).
SITE PREPARATION AND INSTALLATION NOTES
1. Mow all blackberry in planting area to the ground in early -mid summer. Preserve all native shrubs within
planting area (limited to half dozen individuals + willow thicket). Do not damage any existing native trees
with mowing equipment. Dispose of all plant debris off -site.
2. After 3-4 weeks or when re- sprouting of blackberry occurs, cut sprouts to 3 -6" above ground and dab cut
end with glyphosate herbicide. Cut ends should be dabbed within 1 -2 hours of cutting. Herbicide used
must be approved for use around aquatic areas — e.g. Rodeo. Herbicide application should ideally be
done in late summer (August) when plants are drawing carbohydrate reserves into the root systems.
3. Planting should not be done at the site until at least 6 weeks after herbicide application. Ideal planting
time is late fall (Oct -Nov), when plants are dormant. This will minimize transplant shock and the need for
immediate watering.
4. Plants should be installed in plant pits at least twice the diameter of the plant container /root ball. Bottom
of the planting hole should be scarified. Plant pits should be backfilled with native soil and watered in at
the time of planting. Plants should be installed at the same soil depth as they were planted in the pots.
Each plant will be planted with one 21 gram slow release fertilizer tablet (Agriform 20 -10 -5 or equivalent —
available from Forestry Suppliers Inc.). Each plant will be marked with brightly colored plastic flagging.
5. After plant installation, each plant should be sheet - mulched with a double layer of commercial grade
cardboard (e.g appliance boxes). Sheet mulch squares should be approximately 2 -3' x 2 -3' for each
plant, and should cover the soil directly over the installed plant.
6. After cardboard has been laid down, the entire planting area will be mulched with mixed arborist chips to
a depth of 4 ". This is done to retain soil moisture, add organic material to soil matrix over time, and to
combat weeds. Chip mulch should be kept from touching the trunks of installed plants (e.g. keep 1"
around entire circumference of trunk clear of chips). Bark mulch or cedar chips are not acceptable
substitutions for specified mulch. Total quantity of chips required to mulch planting area to a depth of 4" =
28 cu. yds. (assumes 2500 sq. ft. planting area — adjust amount as needed for differing area).
7. Due to site conditions (partial shade, soil moisture) and extensive mulching, supplemental watering is not
anticipated to be necessary. However, site conditions should be monitored carefully in the first year, and
a plan or strategy for temporary irrigation should be made at the time of planting in case it is necessary.
Supplemental watering is generally 1" of water weekly during the first growing season, tapering to W'
weekly the second year.
PEDERSEN /FOSTER RIDGE
Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan
Sheet 3 of 3
Project #03 -772
June 2003
Sheldon &
Associates, Inc.
5031 University Way NE 0204 Seattle, WA 98105
Ph 206 - 522 -1214 - Fx 206 -522 -3507
Wetland & Environmental Consultants
WETLAND DELINEATION AND
FUNCTIONAL VALUES ASSESSMENT
Foster Ridge Property
East of South 139th Street and West of MaCadam Road South
Tukwila, Washington
Prepared for:
JBMF CONSULTING ENGINEERS
P. O. Box 27
Everett, WA 98206
Prepared by:
SHELDON & ASSOCIATES, INC.
5031 University Way NE, #208
Seattle, Washington 98105
206/522.1214
November 16, 1995
WETLAND DELINEATION AND
FUNCTIONAL VALUES ASSESSMENT
Foster Ridge Property
East of South 139th Street and West of MaCadam Road South
Tukwila, Washington
Prepared for:
John Friel
JBMF CONSULTING ENGINEERS
P. 0. Box 27
Everett, WA 98206
Prepared by:
Pesha 0. Klein
SHELDON & ASSOCIATES, INC.
5031 University Way NE, #208
Seattle, Washington 98105
206/522 -1214
November 16, 1995
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figures Page
1 Site Location Map 2
Tables
1 Wetland Plant Indicator Status
JBMP Consulting Engineers/Foster Ridge
Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment
i v
by Sheldon & Associates
November 17,1995
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPENDIX A - DATA SHEETS
APPENDIX B - SURVEYED WETLANDS BOUNDARY MAP
JUMP Consulting Engineers/Foster Ridge
Wetland Delineation and Ftindbnal Values Assessment
Hi
Page
INTRODUCTION 1
METHODOLOGY 1
Review of Existing Information 1
Wetland Definition 1
Evaluation of Field Conditions 3
Wetland Delineation and Classification 3
Vegetation 3
Soils 4
Hydrology 4
Wetland Determination 5
United States Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification 5
Wetland Rating 6
Type 1 6
Type 2 6
Type3 6
Wetland Buffer 6
Wetland Functions and Values 7
Water Quality Improvement 7
Flood /Stormwater Control 7
Groundwater Exchange 8
Natural Biological Support 8
Cultural /Recreational Value 8
FINDINGS 8
General Site Characteristics 8
Wetland Characteristics 9
Wetland 1 9
Wetland 2 10
Wildlife Observed or Expected 11
REGULATORY ISSUES 11
REFERENCES 12
Literature Cited 12
by Sheldon & Associates
November 17,1995
WETLAND DELINEATION AND FUNCTIONAL VALUES ASSESSMENT
INTRODUCTION
Sheldon & Associates conducted a wetland delineation on the proposed plat at the Foster
Ridge Property located east of South 139th Street and west of MaCadam Road South in Tukwila,
Washington (Figure 1 shows the approximate location of the project area). The purpose of this report
is to characterize the wetland, assess functional values, and rate the wetland per the City of Tukwila
Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone (1994).
METHODOLOGY
Review of Existing Information
Existing documents were reviewed to gain specific background knowledge of the site.
Literature reviewed as part of the study included:
• City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone, Chapter 18.45 (1994); and
• City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Overlay Maps, Wetland Inventory (1991).
Wetland Definition
Both the 1987 Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental
Laboratory 1987) and the 1989 Unified Federal Methodology for Identifying and Delineating
Jurisdictional Wetlands (FICWD 1989) define wetlands as follows:
Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally
include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
JBMF Consulting Engineers/Foster Ridge
by Sheldon 6 Associates
Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment 1 November 17,1995
I
11 0
3
0 =48'54'OU
1= 126.58'
R =148.31'
- 17
15
J
()
t
(0
1�f
Source: Site Survey,1995
tiQ) C,:-.. 2
LA
o 0..
Si -1-e,
road
aI ) 3 nmenh
't 1 ^ S 8748'48 E 270.00' "
A
21=46'54'00r e =08'03
L =75.37' L= 18.28'
R =88.31' R= 130.00'
N 8270'06" p
. C / 1 1 i tTU + IPOC
i
a =19'23'4T
L= 44.01'
R= 30.00'
O
A =0305' 23' - r
1=45.78'
R= 849.03'
A =255
L =58.7
R=1 30.
ti
Figure 1. Site Location Map
JBMF Consulting Engineers/Foster Ridge
Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment
2
by Sheldox & AB4oci. c
Novra ber V, 1995
Evaluation of Field Conditions
The wetland determinations were made on site by Pesha Klein of Sheldon & Associates on
November 3, 1995. Wetlands were delineated using the 1989 Unified Federal Methodology for
Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (FICWD 1989) and the Army Corps of Engineers
1987 Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The entire project area was
walked to assess the area for wetlands.
Data was collected on vegetation, soils, and hydrology for each area that appeared to have
wetland characteristics, and a wetland /non - wetland determination was made. If an area was
determined to be wetland, the boundary was flagged with pink and black striped plastic flagging
affixed to vegetation.
The Army Corps of Engineers uses the 1987 Army Corp of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) to identify and delineate wetlands. The City of Tukwila
will require the use of the 1987 Methodology after December 31, 1995 to identify wetlands.
However, the City currently requires the use of the 1989 methodology; therefore, the wetlands on
this site were delineated using both methods. The wetlands on this site meet the wetland criteria for
both the 1987 and 1989 methodologies. and did not require two separate flagged boundaries,
Wetland Delineation and Classification
Both the 1987 and 1989 Federal manuals require examination of three parameters:
vegetation, soils, and hydrology. For an area to be classified as wetland, hydrophytic vegetation,
hydric soils, and wetland hydrology must be exhibited. Each parameter is discussed further in the
sections below. Data were recorded on field data sheets, which are presented in Appendix A. The
flag number for the wetland plot appears in the upper left hand corner of the data sheet and
corresponds to the plot shown on the surveyed wetlands map as the area where the data was
collected.
Vegetation
Hydrophytic vegetation consists of those plant species growing in water, soil, or on a
substrate that at least periodically lacks oxygen. For each plot, percent area coverage was estimated
for each plant species present, and dominant species were determined. Per the 1989 manual, the .
hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met when more than 50 percent of the dominant species are
hydrophytic, based on the wetland plant species indicator status from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service rating (Reed 1988). The wetland plant rating list separates vascular plants into four basic
groups by their wetland indicator status. A plant species indicator status is based on that species
frequency of occurrence in a wetland. The indicator status rating is summarized in Table 1. Plant
species are identified using Flora of the Pacific Northwest (Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973).
JBMF Consulting Engineers /Foster Ridge
Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment
3
by Sheldon & Associates
November 17,1995
Indicator Status
Definition
Obligate Wetland Plants (OBL)
Plants that occur almost always in wetlands:
estimated probability in wetlands greater
than 99% under natural conditions.
Facultative Wetland Plants (FACW)
Plants that have an estimated probability of
67% - 99% to be found in wetlands.
Facultative Plants (FAC)
Plants that are equally likely to occur in
wetlands or nonwetlands: estimated
probability of 34% - 66% to be found in
wetlands.
Facultative Upland Plants (FACU)
Plants that usually occur in nonwetlands,
estimated probability of 1% - 33% to be found
in wetlands.
Obligate Upland (UPL)
Plants that occur almost always in
nonwetlands under natural conditions,
estimated probability greater that 99 %.
Soils
Soils were sampled in each plot and evaluated for hydric indicators using a soil auger. Soils
were sampled to a depth of 18 inches where possible. When using the 1987 methodology, the soil
was observed for hydric soil indicators immediately below the A- horizon or 10 inches whichever was
shallower. When using the 1989 methodology, soils were observed immediately below the A-
horizon (approximately 12 inches) for hydric soil indicators. Hydric indicators for both
methodologies include mottling and /or gleyed soils. Mottles are spots or blotches of contrasting
color occurring within the soil matrix. Gleyed soils are predominantly neutral gray in color. Soil
chroma, or color, was determined using a Munsell color chart (Kollmorgen Corporation 1975). When
using the 1987 Routine methodology for areas equal to or less than 5 acres in size, hydric soils are
assumed to be present in any plant community in which all dominant species have an indicator
status of OBL or, all dominant species have an indicator status of OBL or FACW, and wetland
hydrology is present. Soil characteristics were not compared to Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
descriptions of mapped soils because soils were not mapped for the Tukwila area.
Direct observations of hydrology are often limited during the dry season. However,
indicators may be present throughout the year that confirm the occurrence of saturation or
JBMF Consulting Engineers/Foster Ridge
Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment
Table 1. Wetland Plant Indicator Status
Hydrology
4
by Sheldon & Aseoclwhs
November 17,1995
JBMF Consulting Engineers/Foster Ridge
Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment
Wetland Determination
inundation for periods of time adequate to satisfy criteria designated in FICWD (1989) and the Corps
of Engineers Manual (1987).
Indicators for wetland hydrology using the 1987 methodology include recorded data and
field data such as visual observation of inundation or saturation, watermarks, drift lines, sediment
deposits, and drainage patterns. Independent evidence of wetland hydrology is required with the
1987 method. Indicators for the 1989 methodology include recorded data, aerial photographs, and
field indicators such as visual observation of inundation or saturation, oxidized channels, water
marks, drift lines, visible sediment deposits on substrate and plant surfaces, water - stained leaves,
surface scoured areas, wetland drainage patterns, morphological plant adaptations and hydric soil
characteristics. In cases where both hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils are present, wetland
hydrology is assumed to occur per the Unified Federal Methodology ( FICWD 1989).
Duration of inundation and /or soil saturation for the 1987 method is based on the number
of days at 32 degrees Fahrenheit or above during the growing season. For the Pacific Northwest,
inundation or saturation to the surface for at least 12.5% or more of the growing season in most
years. The growing season in the Tukwila area is 207 days (SCS 1973), therefor the wetlands in this
project must have 26 days of continuous hydrology to meet the criteria for wetland hydrology.
Surface saturation or inundation using the 1989 method is determined on the natural drainage class,
water table, and permeability or inundation /saturation for one week or more during the growing
season.
Sampling results for the three parameters were analyzed to make a wetland determination
for each plot. Based on the results of plot determinations and visual observation of site
characteristics, an overall assessment of the area was conducted, and wetland boundaries were
located. The boundaries were identified by attaching flagging to vegetation at approximately 20 -foot
intervals. For most wetland plots identified, data for a corresponding upland plot was collected to
confirm the edge of the wetland.
The wetlands were surveyed by Barrett Consulting Group survey crew. Refer to Appendix
B for the Wetland Survey Map.
United States Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification
Vegetation communities in the wetland were classified using a system developed by the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service called Classification of Wetlands and Deep Water Habitats
of the United States (Cowardin et al. 1979). This system is hierarchical and structured around
biological, hydrological, and substrate characteristics.
5 by sh ehbn & Associates
November 17,1995
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
The City of Tukwila rates wetlands based on the following rating system:
Those wetlands which meet any of the following criteria:
A) 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,
B) Having 40% to 60% permanent open water in dispersed patches with two or more classes
of vegetation,
C) Equal to or greater than five acres in size and having three or more wetland classes, one
of which may be substituted by permanent open water.
Those wetlands which meet any of the following criteria:
A) Greater than one acre in size,
B) Equal to or less than one acre in size and having three or more wetland classes,
C) Equal to or less than one acre, that have a forested wetland class comprised of at least
20% coverage of total surface area, or
D) The presence of heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees,
E) The presence of native plant associations of infrequent occurrence.
Those wetlands which are equal to or less than one acre in size and that has two or fewer
wetland classes.
Wetland buffers are considered to be one of the richest zones for mammals and birds.
Vegetated upland buffers provide essential life needs for birds and animals that are considered to
be wetland - dependent species (Washington Department of Ecology 1992).
Functions which may be provided by wetland buffers include protecting wetland functional
values, water quality improvement, wildlife habitat, and human impact deterrence. Vegetated
wetland buffers may reduce impacts to water quality by controlling soil erosion, reduce pollutants,
and can reduce water velocities, and may moderate water level fluctuations.
JBMF Consulting Engineers/Foster Ridge
Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment
Wetland Rating
Wetland Buffer
6 b Sheldon & Associates
November 17,1995
buffers:
Type 1 Wetlands
Type 2 Wetlands
Type 3 Wetlands
Flood/Stormwater Control
The City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone (Chapter 18.45.040) requires the following
JBMF consulting Fsgincers/Foster Ridge
Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment
100 -foot wide buffer
50 -foot wide buffer
25 -foot wide buffer
The wetland buffer is measured from the wetland edge as delineated in the field. In addition
to a buffer setback, the City requires a 10 -foot residential building setback measured from the edge
of the buffer.
Wetland Functions and Values
Wetlands have the ability to reduce flooding, purify water, and provide wildlife habitat,
shoreline protection, groundwater exchange, and offer cultural and recreational values. An informal
wetland functional value assessment was conducted for the wetlands in the project area. Each of the
functions described below were rated high, moderate, or low.
A brief summary discussion of functional values for the wetlands are discussed in the
Findings Section of this report.
Water Quality Improvement
Wetlands can improve water quality by filtering out sediments, excess nutrients, and toxic
chemicals. This can occur through settling, which happens when water velocity is slowed in a
wetland, and through uptake of materials by vegetation. A wetland's ability to purify water is based
on a number of factors, including the residence time, and type and density of vegetation. Wetlands
do not function as bottomless sinks for the treatment of degraded surface water or the deposition of
large quantities of sediments. All wetlands have a threshold limit; input exceeding the limit will
result in the collapse of the wetland system.
Wetlands can play an important role in flood reduction because of their ability to slow and
store flood waters. During high rainfall events, water can be stored in wetlands and released slowly
over a few days, thereby reducing the volume of water available at the time of peak flooding. This
is especially important in urbanizing areas. The ability of a particular wetland to reduce flooding
is dependent on a number of factors, including the wetland's position in the watershed, size, shape,
and association with other aquatic systems.
Groundwater Exchange
Wetlands can act as groundwater recharge sites, or groundwater discharge sites.
Groundwater recharge occurs when water from the land surface percolates slowly into the ground
7
by Sheldon &Aasoelales
November 17,1995
to replenish aquifers, which are sometimes used as municipal or private water supplies. Wetlands
may recharge shallow or perched lenses of water which in turn discharge into streams. Groundwater
discharge, which is more common in the Pacific Northwest, occurs when groundwater emerges from
the ground as a seep or a spring, thus helping to maintain stream flows. The permeability of
underlying soils and the location of the water table determine a wetland's groundwater exchange.
Natural Biological Support
A number of wildlife species are dependent upon wetlands for all or part of their life cycle.
The wildlife habitat is dependent, in part, on the structural and species diversity of plant
communities, the proximity of upland habitat, and surrounding land uses. The structural complexity
of a tree canopy layer, shrub layer, and ground layer provide feeding, resting, and nesting habitat
for a wide variety of species.
Cultural/Recreational Value
Wetlands have value as scenic and recreational areas. Recreational opportunities include
hiking, bird watching, or fishing. Some wetlands are important archeological or historical sites,
while others have been utilized for scientific study, education, and the protection of aquatic and
terrestrial habitats.
FINDINGS
General Site Characteristics
The proposed project site is approximately 35 acres and is located east of South 139th Street,
north of South 140th Street, south and west of MaCadam Road South in the City of Tukwila,
Washington.
The site generally slopes south to north and consists of a series of steep slopes interspersed
with level areas. An old road alignment overgrown with vegetation runs west to east bisecting the
property. The south property boundary area is very steep, levels out, then slopes steeply north,
down to the road. Numerous seeps are present. North of the road, the site levels out, and then
slopes south and east off site. Portions of the site appears to have been cleared and graded within
the past five to six years and has revegetated with Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus). Other
areas are an open forest community consisting of red alder (Alnus rubra), black cottonwood (Populus
trichocarpa), and big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) in the canopy. Himalayan blackberry dominates
the understory indicating the site was disturbed. Old apple trees (Malus spp.) occur occasionally and
English ivy (Hedera helix), and escaped ornamental is found growing throughout the site.
The King County Soil Survey did not map soils in the project area. In general, the soils were
disturbed loams and clay loams containing charcoal fragments.
JBMF Consulting Engineers/Foster Ridge
by Sheldon b Associates Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment 8 Associates Noxmber 17,19915
Two wetlands were identified within the project area. Wetland 1, a palustrine forested
wetland is located south of the road in the seep area. The entire wetland is present on site and was
delineated and flagged. Wetland 2 is located on the north property boundary. The majority of the
wetland is located offsite. Only the onsite portion of the wetland was flagged. Neither of the
wetlands on the site were identified by the City of Tukwila Sensitive Overlay Wetland Map (1991).
The wetlands on this site meet the wetland criteria for both the 1987 and 1989 methodologies,
and did not require two separate flagged boundaries.
Wetland 1
Description/Vegetation. The wetland is located south of the road alignment and consists
of an upper and lower region. The upper region is located at the base of the steep slopes of the
southern property boundary where several hillside seeps are present. Water collects in this upper
area and then continues south where it drains down a second steep slope and collects at the base of
the slope where the road is located or in ruts of old tire tracks from heavy equipment. Eventually
the water goes subsurface and continues to drain north. The wetland would be classified by the
Cowardin system (1979) as a palustrine forested wetland because 20% of the wetland is covered by
trees rooted in the wetland. Dominant vegetation in the canopy consists of red alder and black
cotton wood trees. The shrub layer is sparse, dominated by Himalayan blackberry. Pacific willow
(Salix lasiandra), red alder, and black cottonwood occurs occasionally. The herbaceous layer is
densely vegetated, and dominant vegetation consists of creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), tall
mannagrass (Glyceria elata), and stinging nettle (Urtica dioica). Subdominant species include giant
horsetail (Equisetum telmateia), skunk cabbage (Lysichitum americanum), and bindweed (Convolvulus
spp.). One large patch of small -fruit bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus) is present in the lower region of
the wetland.
Soils. Soils in the wetland and the upland were not mapped by SCS. The soil in Wetland 1
are mixed and consist of a variety of soil colors and textures. Charcoal particles were found in many
of the soil samples indicating past disturbances of grading and burning. Soils in the wetland consist
of gray (10YR 5/1) clay loams with dark brown (IOYR 3/3) mottles, dark gray (2.5Y 4/0) clays, or
black (10YR 2/1) silt loams at a depth of 10 to 12 inches. The color of the soil matrix and the mottles
in this wetland indicate that hydric soil conditions are present. Soils in the upland consist of dark
grayish brown (23Y 4/2) clay loams with few, faint mottles, olive brown (2.5Y 4/3) clay loams, and
dark brown (10YR 3/3) loams at a depth of 10 to 12 inches.
Hydrology. Soils were saturated to the surface at the time of the delineation, with standing
water at the base of both slopes at a depth of approximately 4 to 6 inches. Sources of water to this
wetland are hillside seeps and direct precipitation. Soils outside of the wetland were either dry or
somewhat moist but not saturated. At the time of the delineation there was no rainfall for about two
weeks, indicating the source of hydrology are the seeps. Based on the presence of saturation and
inundation at the site in the absence of rainfall, it is assumed that wetland hydrology is satisfied
using the 1987 and the 1989 methodology.
Wetland Characteristics
]BhtiF Consulting Engineers/Foster Ridge by Sheldon & Associates
Wetland Delineation and Fu nctional values Assessment 9 . November 17,1995
Wetland Buffer. The wetland buffer consists of open canopy upland forest as described
under the General Site Characteristics.
Wetland Functional Values. Water quality improvement is probably moderate due to the
dense cover of emergent vegetation and long water retention in the wetland.
Floodflow moderation is likely to be moderate, as water collects in the topographically level
areas and is retained before draining downslope.
Biological support is moderate because the wetland has a tree canopy layer, shrub layer, and
ground layer provide feeding, resting, and nesting habitat for a wide song birds and small mammals.
Buffers are intact and provide good protection to the wetland.
Cultural /Recreation Values are low because this wetland is not accessible to the general
public, and cannot be observed from public access.
Wetland Rating. This wetland would likely rate a Type 2 per the City of Tukwila because
it is equal to or less than one acre, and has a forested wetland class comprised of at least 20%
coverage of total surface area. According to the City of Tukwila, a Type 2 wetland requires a 50 -foot
buffer setback.
Wetland 2
Description/Vegetation. Wetland 2 originates at the northern property boundary at the base
of a steep slope and continues north offsite. The majority of the offsite portion is the backyard of a
residential property. Withbut access to the offsite portion it is not known how large the wetland is
or if wetland is present. An area approximately less than 50 square feet was flagged onsite. The
wetland would be classified by the Cowardin system is a palustrine scrub -shrub system dominated
by Himalayan blackberry. Lady fern (Athyrium felix is present occasionally.
- Soil and Hydrology. The soils in the onsite portion of this wetland are black (10YR 2/1) silt
loams at a depth of 10 to 12 inches. Soils in the upland are dark brown (10YR 3/3) gravelly loams
at a depth of 10 to 12 inches. The source of water to the wetland are flows from a pipe that extends
out of the ground at the base of the steep slope. It is unknown where the source of water originates.
Water flows north out of the pipe offsite. Soils in the wetland were moist and inundated only in the
narrow pathway of the flowing water.
Wetland Buffer. The buffer consists of open upland forest to the south, east and west. A
shed and residential housing are located in the northern buffer area.
Wetland Functional Values. Overall, this is a low value wetland. The wetland is very small,
and water flows offsite with no retention time in the wetland. The water does provide drinking and
bathing water to wildlife.
Wetland Rating. This wetland would likely rate a Type 3 per the City of Tukwila because
it is equal to or less than one acre in size and has two or fewer wetland classes. According to the City
of Tukwila, a Type 3 wetland requires a 25 -foot buffer setback.
JBMF Consulting Engineers/Foster Ridge
Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment
10
by Sheldon & Associates
November 17,1995
Wildlife Observed or Expected
REGULATORY ISSUES
A formal wildlife study was not part of this scope, however, wildlife use of the wetlands in
this project area are limited because of the development in the area. A number of passerine birds
were observed within, above, and adjacent to the wetlands and stream. Small mammals such as
rabbits, moles, opossum, mice, raccoon, and shrews would be expected to use the upland forest
adjacent to the wetland for food, nesting, and cover.
Several federal, state, and local regulations affect the development of wetland areas.
Agencies that have jurisdiction over development impacts associated with onsite wetlands include,
but may not be limited to, the City of Tukwila and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE).
Prior to permitting any activities in wetlands, the City of Tukwila requires wetland
boundaries to be delineated and surveyed by qualified personnel. Wetlands are subject to
verification and approval by the City.
According to the City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone Chapter 18.45.080, no use or
development may occur in a Type 1 or 2 wetland or its buffer except as specifically allowed by
subsections a, b and h. Subsections b and h may apply to your project. Subsection b: Permitted Uses
Subject to Administrative Review includes; permitted construction of new essential streets and roads,
only after administrative review and approval by the Director of the Department of Community
Development (DCD). Subsection h: Permitted Uses Subject to an Exception Approval permits other
uses after receiving a reasonable use exception.
Only Type 3 isolated wetlands can be altered or relocated, and then only with the permission
of the DCD Director. A mitigation or enhancement plan must be developed and must comply with
the standards of compensatory mitigation required by the City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Zone
(1994).
The ACOE administers Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which regulates the discharge of
dredged or fill materials into waters of the United States, including wetlands. For this project, if any
wetland fill is proposed, the Corps would have to be notified so they could verify the wetland edges
and make their jurisdictional determination on which type of permit is required.
JBMF Consulting Engtneers/Foster Ridge
Wetland Delineation and Functional Values Assessment
REFERENCES
Literature Cited
11
by Sheldon & Associates
November 17,1995
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. La Roe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and
deepwater habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife Service,
U.S. Department of the Interior, FWS 1035- 79/81. 103 pp.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual, technical report
Y -87 -1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation (FICWD). 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 USDA Soil
Conservation Service. Washington, D.C. Cooperative technical publication. 76 pp. plus
appendices.
Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington
Press. 730 pp.
Kollmorgen Corporation. 1975. Munsell soil color chart. Macbeth Division of Kollmorgen
Corporation. Baltimore, Maryland.
Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report. 88 (26.9). 89 pp.
Tukwila, City of. 1994. City of Tukwila sensitive areas overlay zone, Chapter 18.45. City of
Tukwila, Washington.
Tukwila, City of. 1991. City of Tukwila sensitive areas overlay maps, Wetland layer. City of
Tukwila, Washington.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil survey, King County
area, Washington.
Washington Department of Ecology. 1992. Wetland buffers: use and effectiveness. Publication #92-
10. Washington State Department of Ecology. Olympia, Washington.
JBMF Consulting Engineers/Foster Ridge by Sheldon 6 Associates
Wetland Delineation and Runctional values Assessment 12
November 17,1995
APPENDIX A
DATA SHEETS
Client: FY t Z�
Field Inve t ator(s):P 1 aux
County tty: 7 kiu, l a�
Plant Community: {7O/p5S
Flag #: 1 3
Methodology Used: tggq- - (qgc/ fi oudr�
Depth
/tY fob-"
Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, % Cover,
t,.Foralzz�drz Pft c,
2. 1 u )U4 trr reirige. 2A C.
3. 51 g fi 4. 6 5 1 r ��Co� Fit C-
5.2trpu6 Interoearou.s 0 5 L
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: /OO %
Is the hydrophic vegetation criterion met? t r.eAt4 'o / o f 4 (15- m sfet°. ro
Rationale: erne - role. or mete )
y oto- ntna:r»f S
SCS Series /Phase: n- o peon
SCS Hydric List?
Is the observed soil a Histosol?
Matrix
/oye 5/,
JnT° rr.
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soils criterion met?
Rationale:
Comments:
t havrea l Pct's d-6 myt
SHELDON & ASSOCIATES
WETLAND DELINEATION DATA II.. 1M
ONSITE DETERMINATION
Project/Site: / € e
VEGETATION
Stratum
J5% T
o% S
15 Z S
1 5`
�5� H
SOILS
Mottle
to y4 y3 I;
HYDROLOGY
Date: I 1/VC/ .
Wetland #: f
Plot #:
Dom t Plant Species. Indcator Status, % Cover, Stratum
6. t ez%l ar & repe S ,FAG(A) f s% H
7. EcbOis -et n fe In- ta,t tQo -1/OiJ c 1 y
8.
9.
10.
G ley
Texture
Is the area inundated? i'i3O Depth of water:
Is the soil saturated? y-2s • Depth to water:
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? ye-g
Rationale: rhzas cvuilimio, be ,' mg? /9K9 wt -c--1/u Is
I rig s /R } da S corIVCAth r�
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the sample plot a wetland? G)-
Rationale for jurisdictional decision: leva-A al -(14 C AA : ./ 4 4 q tue Zo„)
Comments:
Client: Fr t� 1
Field Investigator(s): �' 1C� t✓t
County 7u k wl
Plant Community: t j p t eknz i 04
Flag #:
Methodology Used: osi' E L Q�9 �ia7u tru
Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, % Cover, Stratum
1. R17a6 c -4 — FLi/4i , /00
2.
3.
4.
5.
SCS Series /Phase: t pp
SCS Hydric List?
Is the observed soil a Histosol? --
SHELDON & ASSOCIATES
\.r WETLAND DELINEATION DATA F`►..•tM
ONSITE DETERMINATION
VEGETATION
SOILS
Project/Site: S-ter lq 16114,
Date: I
Wetland #: J
Plot #
Dominant Plant Species, Indcator Status, % Cover, Stratum
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAC: /bt) %
Is the hydrophic vegetation criterion met? ycs
Rationale: g.r...elazr_ -'! $Ct' of C redije4 artz F4c, or wetkr
Depth Matrix Mottle Gley Texture
/ 2 . 5 / 96- a , -few
a(t
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soils criterion met? Jj zes:LI f «
Rationale:
Comments: �� ,� ��
•zeywz -, dote s craf cii141;" -1-
vcr4 4 Cs PtA 44 - i-f t Q HYADtiOLOGY r O,lex o e, 3 'fb �eue (oe •
Is the area inundated? PO Depth of water:
Is the soil saturated? n.) • Depth to water:
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: h 0
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? no
Rationale: (atJCs rnuiteGo tb , at 5 dobtA/Ledt.m_Q �&
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the sample plot a wetland? /tv
Rationale for jurisdictional decision: Dora h' A. g• 6 d clu -- Cu
Comments:
Client: rr / e /
Comments:
Field Inve tigator(s): P I hewn
County -- iuku3t l�
Plant Community: u l a d0 -Gregt
Flag #: /- /O
Methodology Used: I If 4 19 8 9 0 -v z "
SCS Series /Phase: / 164 meref
SCS Hydric List?
Is the observed soil a Histosol?
SHELDON & ASSOCIATES
�,, WETLAND DEUNEATION DATA Ft.. -tIM
ONSITE DETERMINATION
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, % Cover, Stratum
1. / InLts rubs. FAG 60c/0 T
2. fiubus dc (or /001 5
3 . T,li71 ;ea- a- hiehZ t-es / i F /C /5% f/
4. 14e-cl hells( AIL .75 f]
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAC: -S
Is the hydrophic vegetation criterion met? 2.5
Rationale: c z,eei- ?1 i Z 6 ? �, �J - d 6YN�v ia. �� c�
Q ( ° e411`2-1 czu. �.�G o2 t.J4-414-
SOILS
Depth Matrix Mottle Gley
/b - lam" a•5/ LI /3
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soils criterion met? 11
Rationale: bta5 law a,a n t art •na y
Comments:
HYDROLOGY
Is the area inundated? no Depth
Is the soil saturated? n o
•
Depth
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? /ac5 urn not v/i�
Rationale:
Project/Site: R r
Date: I t 13(R 5
Wetland #: /
Plot #: 3
Dominant Plant Species, Indcator Status, % Cover, Stratum
7.
8.
9.
10.
of water:
to water:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the sample plot a wetland? /
Texture
/aar�
Rationale for jurisdictional decision: ckre}5 kta yytR,e,-F 2 a-( *ti Q 7 j cA- A- i-J1.4.4_ o�—
Client: r Y r 6
Field Investigator(s): f • Whin
County 15 Kwr 10. -
Plant Community:rEo
Flag #: /- 9
Methodology Used: ( 6 1$ d t ag-q nR
Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, % Cover, Stratum
1. 4(nas ruOicA F C-
2. tlbus ci F4 godlo .s
3. / avnakicu (v5 (€P-4viS gift w 15% #/
4. /1•edet -•a h•ef r x A)/__ /096 f-f
5. E -i f- e- / &ee,- FA //
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAC: $O %
Is the hydrophic vegetation criterion met? eie5
Rationale: CTV o t , :fym-A. 5 0 0f •&-e- c491K -er ism c -' -e FAC oi wetter
SCS Series /Phase: not lnap
SCS Hydric List? —
Is the observed soil a Histosol?
Other hydric soil indicators: 54- cAra- -1-tori.
Is the hydric soils criterion met? y e 5
Rationale: (%.c)
Comments:
SHELDON & ASSOCIATES
WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FtM
ONSITE DETERMINATION
VEGETATION
SOILS
Project/Site: O5-ley A
Date: I I/ 3/ 9 S�
Wetland #:
Plot #:
Dominant Plant Species. Indicator Status, % Cover, Stratum
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Depth Matrix Mottle Gley Texture
t eiz � , a,5 /q /0
C42
HYDROLOGY
Is the area inundated? h b Depth of water:
Is the soil saturated? yt S Depth to water: 52.0✓-ra r
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? yes
Rationale: 5,,,i Zvn. - u e - days Sa tzvc.aZi44a n
1 'ff? - 7 a ( ell s Safu.led-tArt,eaterel
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the sample plot a wetland? y't°s -
Rationale for jurisdictional decision: - Vh/.a C "2
Comments:
Client: Fr Fe (
SHELDON & ASSOCIATES
,,WETLAND DELINEATION DATA F{M
ONSITE DETERMINATION n
Project/Site: e 5 /er Raj
j Q-
Field Inve i. ator(s): P, k Lout
Count - �k4w ( 7r,,,
Plant Community: ?55
Flag #: 1 -Z7--
Methodology Used: ) 9'1
Other hydric soil indicators: 1
Is the hydric soils criterion met? (1 s
Rationale: jam, c- f4rtm-y10,
Comments:
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, % Cover, Stratum
1. /lupus Frl 1e S
2. S/ t x lQ.° i a y r FAG L✓ 5% 5
3. Ur al(ca. I of n 4c- Zs' - tl
V Con vol los AIL 20%, /
5. & .5c/ r � �l ea FAccJ 5 %. ><il
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAC: 6G
Is the hydrophic vegetation criterion met? 5
Rationale: ��1� 2 v r 1,ar J •
,Y
SCS Series /Phase: r104 t p p e,c4
SCS Hydric List? -
Is the observed soil a Histosol?
SOILS
Depth Matrix Mottle Gley Texture
/o- (2'` lo`/R Z /(
Si 14' lua
HYDROLOGY
Date: /
Wetland #: 1
Plot #: 5
Is the area inundated? y '-es Depth of water: / rr
Is the soil saturated? yes • Depth to water: 10 50r c . L ,
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? rs monad: - ani c p - yzz -712c n, 1q�3 ' a do d s
Rationale: 1989 _ 7- do-7./ ,,
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the sample plot a wetland? ye
Rationale for jurisdictional decision: {vt -eei a (1 lei a
Comments:
Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, % Cover, Stratum
6.
7.
8.
10.
O L F.,4C 01 I.tweth/
Client: Fri e
Field Investigator(s): J? fr— C t F
Count 1 i j Tv k u e (a_-
Plant Community: 0 p l 5 (ti✓u --b
Flag #: ( - Zv
Methodology Used:
Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, % Cover, Stratum Dominant Plant Species, Inccator Status, % Cover, Stratum
1. -46.1 uti ru bra F./4 - Ls 7 6.
2. 414 hi s Spp NC 1.5 S 7.
3 • gi u r/LLS ce-t& 7,4G 2Sco S 8.
4. T l m / a m 11 Asti FAc. Zo/ 1 - 1 9.
5. 10.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 7 %
Is the hydrophic vegetation criterion met? s
Rationale: ( .,- -i 5z5% o -f do ry,;nail s p -eccae
SCS Series /Phase: /to mapped
• SCS Hydric List?
Is the observed soil a Histosol?
SHELDON & ASSOCIATES
WETLAND DELINEATION DATA OtsriM
ONSITE DETERMINATION
VEGETATION
SOILS
Depth Matrix Mottle
Gley Texture
/o —/ Z--" toy( 3/3
/aa
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soils criterion met? rt 0
Rationale: (acts /ay Gh.'orr,a d l
Comments: e ita.►' /
HYDROLOGY
Project/Site:
Date: I1�3745
Wetland #: /
Plot #: ro
FA‹
Is the area inundated? /'to Depth of water:
Is the soil saturated? by • Depth to water:
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? j
Rationale: leu 1 iiI sad u✓tz r
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the sample plot a wetland? K
Rationale for jurisdictional decision: c45e9 /Lo f ht a o
Comments: 3 �c,(i !.
0>- ��ber
Client: Fr i6
Field Investigator(s): (e ch.
County -Cy "l r <i,( (a-
Plant Community: j S
Flag #: c 2 _ 1
Methodology Used: ( 1 C84 fci s�
Rationale: ar ,. ,^ - 1o,
SCS Series /Phase: h o-f bletf P c(
SCS Hydric List?
Is the observed soil a Histosol?
Depth Matrix
f!0-(7, ( OYIZ 2 1/
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soils criterion met? yes'
Rationale: f0 c / rer c
Comments:
SHELDON & ASSOCIATES
WETLAND DELJNEATION DATA F...4M
ONSITE DETERMINATION
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, % Cover, Stratum
1. f �U bus cc 1 &O °lo f.A-G S
2. / dyt/ r u by- cr /iv --For*/ vi a FA L H
3. 2,•
b
4.
5.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or FAC: /CO %
Is the hydrophic vegetation criterion met? ties
✓ 6 % or e dory► rna Seei�e are f 4 a2 Welter"
SOILS
Mottle Gley
HYDROLOGY
Project/Site: FM-ter ai rdlj�
Date: 11
Wetland #: ( 9—
Plot #: L
Dominant Plant Species. Inodcator Status, % Cover, Stratum
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Is the area inundated? ho Depth of water:
Is the soil saturated? ye S • Depth to water: Sur (-e,
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: .'owln(�
[ e
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met?
�'r5 - I Qg } alo O�r�y S 5
Rationale: S 4_(Z,,s- a - 1,,er ` /q sl I dap sa v,a oY.
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the sample plot a wetland? yrcy
Rationale for jurisdictional decision: ry& j f5 all 1/i Kea . C-ri "r -9'u
Comments:
Texture
S; 7+ 'Dan,
Client: Fr (le
SHELDON & ASSOCIATES
WETLAND DELINEATION DATA No„iM
ONSITE DETERMINATION
Field Inv stigator(s): e k Le c �t
County T ktut la-
Plant Community: u ( 4 1 . 4 , 4
Flag #: -
Methodology Used: I a 8 d-- ! Rgq {R U-1I n.¢--
VEGETATION
Project/Site: -(p R (d �j�
Date: I 1 / /q5
Wetland #:
Plot #:
Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, % Cover, Stratum Dominant Plant Species, Indcator Status, % Cover, Stratum
1. / (n us r�ubr`a FAG as ° lo 7 6.
2. fi u b u cite-tor F.�I G /0 -vd /o s 7.
3 . g Sic h0 . mo <fo.v� F-4C u 5 8 -
4. 5. Et k- 5 vw -f - e l maf [Q riV irt) ki 9.
10.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and /or PAC: '7-5%
Is the hydrophic vegetation criterion met?
Rationale: �xr> ,dT 11-242-e4 SU /0-F , S a 1 l iZ FAC_ ar
w
SCS Series /Phase: vi i mar' p
SCS Hydric List?
Is the observed soil a Histosol? —
SOILS
Depth Matrix Mottle Gley Texture
PO IZ l0 y y3 JBQ.„„_.
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soils criterion met? h 0
Rationale: ju r k /ow chromes +
Comments:
HYDROLOGY
Is the area inundated? " Depth of water:
Is the soil saturated? vt0 Depth to water:
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: s1U
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? 1,1466 7 / 7 0 4 4 4 / 4 3 - A , 4- Sct4tAri ; 1.
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the sample plot a wetland? M •
Rationale for jurisdictional decision: Vie$ /LS z 2 3 014..-64.,c et._
Comments:
APPENDIX B
SURVEYED WETLANDS BOUNDARY MAP
•
/1392 WETLAND LOCATION JBMF CONSULTING
11 -30 -95
•
4.
•
F STS'/ R/ 0 rSC.A
Page
WI TLAND _ qRG /N
• - 1 1.74/N -tF4) Y S I/A& v s
43/4/a. err `ON Stilt /N , /yG ,
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING
,..r \
p,. AR41,,''1
' f
I, 1
Q- . F -� - o : y t i
Q. : o t4OTAgy �? 0 / i
i :0 m 0
4 • P UBLIC i
'',WASMN
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS
PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY
CITY OF TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665
E -mail: tukplan@ci.tukwilama.us
ES
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, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real
property, located at
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 Toss 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.
EXECUTED at % fl`/[e."p 7 (city), id4 (state), on < . 7 t' / • 2 1 - A1 7
(Signature)
On this day personally appeared before me ir L p .-t C. QQ J (t S.e N to me known to be the individual who
executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/shF signed the same as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and
purposes mentioned therein.
vY
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFO _ • N THIS DAY OF
Q
Y PUIC in and for the State of Washington
residing at bit ,
My Commission expires on
041)/ 0
EXECUTED at LyrjaP (city),
CITY OF TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665
E - mail: tukplannci.tukwila.wa.us
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS
PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY
STATE OF WASHINGTON
u
COUNTY OF KING
The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows:
I. 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 die City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real
property, located at
for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose.
S. 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.
state), on ../ mile- / , 20X14
(Pc Qx /$'c '
(Address)
4,2 jv I/ l l. 9,7
(Phone ber)
pp
(Signature)
On this day personally appeared before me RC�hoed S. `e�e/7-Se.,a 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. r
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS 1 DAY OF J (Jwt 200Y
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington 0
residing at Dnra
My Commission expires on
II- 1t -oS
FOSTER RIDGE 6 LOT BLA
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LIST
RICHARD S. PEDERSEN - OWNER
LOT #BLK #PLAT
17 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
18 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
19 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
20 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
21 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
22 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
23 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
24 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
25 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
26 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
27 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
1 2 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
2 2 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
3 2 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
4 2 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
5 2 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
6 2 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
7 2 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOSTER UNREC,
TGW POR OF VAC ST ADJ
TAX ACC #
322920 - 0090 -06
322920 - 0110 -02
322920 - 0120 -00
322920 - 0130 -08
322920 - 0140 -06
322920 - 0150 -03
322920 - 0160 -01
322920 - 0170 -09
322920 - 0180 -07
322920 - 0190 -05
322920 - 0200 -03
322920 - 0100 -04
322920 - 0210 -01
322920 - 0220 -09
322920 - 0230 -07
322920 - 0240 -05
322920 - 0250 -02
322920 - 0260 -00
Applicant's Signature
District Representative
ATTACHMENT TO
CERTIFICATE OF WATER AVAILABILITY
KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 125
/ /hi /5. /
Date 3
a►
The following terms and conditions apply to the attached Certificate of Availability
( "Certificate ").
1. This Certificate of Water Availability is valid only for the real property referenced
herein for the sole purpose of submission to the City ot'rtf•(t0:le "City"). This Certificate is
issued at the request of the City, and is not assignable or transferable to any other party. Further,
no third person or party shall have any rights hereunder whether by agency or as a third party
beneficiary or otherwise. .
2. The District makes no representations, express or implied, that the applicant will
be able to obtain the necessary permits, approvals, and authorizations from the City or any other
applicable land use jurisdiction or governmental agency necessary before applicant can utilize
the utility service which is the subject of this Certificate.
3. As of the date of the issuance of this Certificate, the District has water available to
provide utility service to the real property which is the subject of this Certificate, and the utility
systems exist or may be extended by the applicant to provide service to such property. However,
the issuance of this Certificate creates no contractual relationship between the District and the
applicant or the City, and the issuance of this Certificate may not be relied upon and does not
constitute the District's guarantee that water utility service will be available to the real property
at the time the applicant may apply to the District for such service.
4. Application for and the possible provision of District utility service to the real
property which is the subject of this certificate shall be subject to and conditioned upon the
availability of water service to the real property at the time of such application, as well as all
federal, state, and District laws, ordinances, policies and regulations in effect at the time of such
application for utility service, including conservation, water restrictions, and other policies and
regulations then in effect.
Date 345 /D 4
Part A (To Be Completed byApplican r.
Purpose of Certificate:
❑ Building Permit ❑ Preliminary Plat or PUD El Other /04 11 ti ato ;d
❑ Short Subdivision ❑ Rezone
Proposed Use: 6 ho+c
El Residential Single Family ❑ Residential Multi- Family ❑ Commercial ❑ Other
Applicants Name: Tot) I, Fe; -1 Phone: 9 2, s )71 3 F 2
Property Address or Approximate Location: Tax Lot Number.
S )3 9 St' 'i 6 4l 1 it-e S. 3 22/2.0 -- c7O2'o
Legal Description(Attach Map and Legal Description If necessary):
A PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST,
W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOTS 17 TO 27, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 1 AND LOTS 1 TO '7. INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 2,
HELLWIG'S ADDfnON TO FOSTER, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEROF.
P art B (To Be Com leted b Sewer A enc
1. Sewer Service will be provided by side sewer connection only to an existing 6 �� size sewer
a.
() feet from the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed use.
OR ❑ b. Sewer service will require an improvement to the sewer system of:
❑ (1) feet of sewer trunk or lateral to reach the site; and /or
❑ (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. 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 District, or has been granted Boundary
Review Board approval for extension of service outside the District,
OR ❑ b. Annexation or BRB approval will be necessary to provide service.
Service Is to the following: PERMIT: $
4. subject
a. District Connection Charges due prior to connection:
GFC: $ SFC: $ UNIT: $ TOTAL: $
(Subject to Change on January 1st)
King County/METRO Capacity Charge: Currently, $1867.54 /residential equivalent, will be billed directly
by King County after connection to the sewer system. (Subject to change by King Co/Metro without
notice.)
I
b. Easements; ❑ Required May be equi ed,
c. Other. 0114 w> e.7 lit k JG -vYM' vieri 0 f 1 ✓% 1. o c.c. yo-7 ed dh
ERTIFICATE OF SEWER AVAILABILITY /NON AVAILABILIT
By
Certificate of Sewer Availability
14816 Mlll'4ry Road South
P.O. Box50
Tukwila, WA 98168CFj�
Phone: (206) 242- 3236Jj,
Fax: (206) 242 -1527 p 012nn
C
OR ❑ Certificate of Sewer Non - Availability
I • = •y certify that th
ie date of sig
ewer agency information is true. This certification shall be valid for one year
n al4 / eS
Title
/1/0 N
Date
ATTACHMENT TO
VAL VUE SEWER DISTRICT
CERTIFICATE OF SEWER AVAILABILITY/NONAVAILABILITY
The - following terms and conditions apply to the attached Val Vue Sewer District
( "District ") Certificate of Sewer Availability/Non - Availability ( "Certificate ").
1. This Certificate is valid only for the real property referenced herein ( "Property"),
which is in the District's service area, for the sole purpose of submission to the King County
Department of Developme.t and Environmental Services, King County Department of Public
Health, City of Seattle, City of Tukwila, City of Burien and/or City of SeaTac. This Certificate is
between the District and the applicant only, and no third person or party shall have any rights
hereunder whether by agency, third -party beneficiary principles or otherwise.
2. This Certificate creates no contractual relationship between the District and the
applicant and its successors and assigns, and does not constitute and may not be relied upon as
the District's guarantee that sewer service will be available at the time the applicant may apply to
the District for such service. .
3. As of the date of the District's signature on this Certificate, the District represents
that sewer service is available to the Property through sewer systems that exist or that may be
extended by the applicant. The District makes no other representations, express or implied,
including without limitation that the applicant will be able to obtain the necessary permits,
approvals and authorizations from King County, City of Seattle, City of Tukwila, City of Burien,
City of SeaTac or any other governmental agency before the applicant can utilize the sewer
service which is the subject of this Certificate.
4. If the District or the applicant must extend the•D'istriot's sewer system to provide
sewer service to the Property,, the District or applicant may be required to obtain from the
appropriate governmental agency the necessary permits, approvals and authorizations. In
addition, the governmental agency may establish requirements that must be satisfied as a
condition of granting any such permits, approvals or authorizations, which may make impractical
or impossible the provision of sewer services to the Property.
I-
S. Application for and possible provision of sewer service to the Property shall be
subject to and conditioned upon availability of sewer service to the Property at the time of such
application, and compliance with federal, state, local and District laws, ordinances, policies,
and/or regulations in effect at the time of such application.
1 acknowledge that 1 have received the Certificate of Sewer Availability /Non Availability and this
Attachment, and fully understand the terms and conditions herein.
2 /249
Applicant's Signature Date
8953910011270798.011SSY60l1.DOC (1/26/04) -1-
•
•
Name::
Address:
Phone:
CITY OF TUKW!LA
Community Development Department
'Permit Center
6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100
Tukwila, WA 98188
RECEIVED
'JUN 01 2004'
COMMUNITY vT
Permit- Center /Bui'Idi- Division
206 -431 -3670 F
Public Works Department:
206-433-0179
Planning Division:
206 -431 -3670
k 'NVi o r' r rY•a'n *r ( p1 y 'ney rIvi'x"A nr; g 'CT
a1�7. X49 7�i a 0�.1 4n� , di. 7 L t I H .' ,n
em, A.N",P�.. ,('. Cr N.. SRI,;aN , •fi ��•.1 � � N eR iN tw...,��U.'.�,hkc 7G�
t +;
Site address (attach map and Legal description showinLdrant location and size of main):
4' G d 44(fil
'�"r i � � k i "o
di t°'2"�1�'YV�Ai'.'(�Y /'. �'�'. ImR L!'It'�SiP
Address: 76\ 2 y"veket`f, LUG 96706
Phone: 4 25
,L�� t
i.
Owne Agen Signature
1.
2. ❑ No Improvements required.
eleleki
This certificate Is for the purposes of:
Residential Building Permit ❑ Preliminary Plat
Commercial/Industrial Building Permit ❑ Rezone
Estimated number of service connections and water meter size(s):
Vehicular distance from nearest hydrant to the closest point of structure is ? ft.
Area is served by (Water Utility District): i ' i Z
a " untttT q�'11 1 q p'�°�s gy}�7�y�� L�'� hr��4r�r,
su3m! 'n�ti�YJGfsM•,I,M .ii �;l2�;w.Qi'�!4. , S! @..tXlanit� ".Sl:''dIN1�liL'3ir a
The proposed' project is within - (4 l �
3. • The Improvements required to upgrade the water system to bring It Into compliance with the utilities' comprehensive or to
meet the minimum flow requirements of the project before connection and to meet the State cross connection control
requirements:
Kt; C.A YVILLX
,,�� ��'�++7'e L � v ��.V t lop lvS ���6LSG0'✓► C� �
(9 A-v 4—Cc c -� 1 4± 2.2 4 1--F S
(Use separate sheet if more mom is needed)
4. Based upon the improvements listed above, water can be provided and will be available at the site with a flow of 10113
at 20 psi residual for a duration of 2 hours at a velocity of 1 fps as documented by the attached calculations.
5. Water availability:
❑ / Ac ceptable service can be provided to this project
Acceptable service cannot be provided to this project unless the improvements in Item B -2 are met.
System is not capable of providing service to this project.
I hereby certify that the above information Is true and correct.
kki C k e C us./ io –rt,ic pD e -r t Z S
Agency /Phone
CERTIFICATE OF WATER AVAILABILITY
Required only if outside City of Tukwila water district
By
PERMIT NO.:
❑ Short Subdivision
r 0
5J 7 S
Other
3/
Date
(City /County)
gpm
Date
*Apt j'er
This certificate is not valid without Water District No. 125's attachment entitled
"Attachment to Certificate of Water Availability."
IA;
•
CITY FORM NO /. 1972
OLYMPIC PRINTERS, MC.
ADOPTED BY DIVISION OF. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.
Received 'o
Dol ars,
WHITE Finance Dept
CANARY • customer is
PINK • File
APPLICATION
NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: ,2257 r fr ,Pj� BLA /L07
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.
VaCa l- / CPO e/- Af end o f �. ��q' �f 7€ Ave sae, a a
e�r of S /4o m pavemehf', 5c-c- a//ached /is f ofr /v7 and
74X /o f iambef S Gt d / /'a/ On f'ncp
Quarter: 6L / Section: /5 Township: 2.3 Range: 4
(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: John /5. /1"..
Address: ,P, . 50x 27 � �yeGG PSI/c�
Phone: 4 77/ - 3 '9Z FAX: 405 •7v -- 74
Signature:
C:\ Non's Files \Red_Book \APRD APP.DOC,.12 /26/02
CITY eF TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665
E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us
ADMINISTRATIVE
PLANNED
RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT
Date: j //Q4
FOR STAFF USE ONLY Sierra Type: P -PRD
Planner:
File Number:
Application Complete (Date:
)
Project File Number:
Application Incomplete (Date:
)
Other File Numbers:
APPLICATION
NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: ,2257 r fr ,Pj� BLA /L07
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.
VaCa l- / CPO e/- Af end o f �. ��q' �f 7€ Ave sae, a a
e�r of S /4o m pavemehf', 5c-c- a//ached /is f ofr /v7 and
74X /o f iambef S Gt d / /'a/ On f'ncp
Quarter: 6L / Section: /5 Township: 2.3 Range: 4
(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: John /5. /1"..
Address: ,P, . 50x 27 � �yeGG PSI/c�
Phone: 4 77/ - 3 '9Z FAX: 405 •7v -- 74
Signature:
C:\ Non's Files \Red_Book \APRD APP.DOC,.12 /26/02
CITY eF TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665
E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us
ADMINISTRATIVE
PLANNED
RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT
Date: j //Q4
s
LI4L DZSCRIP1101M
i
ItN .i , 1 ,..:. ,,,,•-..\..
‘ : ;.'• ' ..". \
-••••••••••—s•••••• ! ;; ' j ; ; ..... \
\ • . \ \ ' !i) ‘
f . : '.: ..**'.
.':. ..`
\ \ ).•\ , ..."'.' ..
‘..‘
-/ --- /
• •,.,
/ \ \
\-1. 0„ .. • „
7:•-44,:si.,.....Ni ..\\,..... •••:\ :
-:...--....:\;,..\, ..,... /
,...
..., / .;c! f
/
,
, / — • •-• N.", ....,.. \
': ....y, /
• •
. .. e/
• ...::::-.E...,2; \
, • / •:.,
. i ., tt , „„z‘,..7. - --_,....„.s...,....,....,..,......,-.., - *-k..,. .
•
•
- -
s. issrmS
_Ate)
--
-.... . .
•
\
•
: .. ... \
. .
% •
LVISTDX:
A PCRION Of cowomichr LOT 1. SECTOR IL 10NM4P 23 WOK RANGE • EAST, VOL.
IN 13N0 COUNTY, NAMONOTON, ODOM) AS RUMEN
MS 17 10 27. INCILOSNE. BOOK 1 MO LOTS 1 To 7. %m3(. KOOK 2.
Haiwces monies 10 FOVEA ACCONNO 10 1NE LIMECONIED PLAT 71112113‘.
TODEMEN NM VACATE° STREETS AMMO
.41TSR
LOTS 1 TO 11 MD TRACT M DOUNDNIT Ll.( ADJAME)lTAM CONSIOUDAION
AS PER INC RE0303 Of SURLY.
TOCCINER MTN NM SWAM 10 EAM2001111 AS POI 0*. ORANNICA WY PACS
AND AS APPROLED DT INC CITY OF WILL
N • N ^ • N ..... A
kaC4DAM ROAD
NM) I I
$k•
)
....
• • •
4 - , --,.11-.;;:A •
. . .3.. • /
•
/
'
t"•-••••••••••••-' ••■,.. et
\ , • $ $0,y, •
1 10
\
IPRO sirs WISLOPMillt PLAN
ME CM. ONAVANGS PREPARED NY PACS, MEM 1 2NI 11. OMED MAY 2004,
FOR DEVELOPMENT DUNS Of NIMIOM, °RAMAGE. 1.01 500132 AND UTILITY
LOCATIONS. EMENENT 0001110413 TEL DE MOWED FOR LOCATIONS $140101 AFTW1
ONE PUNS NMC MEN AMNON° WI IVO CM OF MONA
DMZ LOCATIONS ME 1111M4 ON CM. RPM NUM
ME WADING fOOTPINITt LOCATIONS MD ELSVAIONS MONA ARE OLINCEPlUAL
Y• is 1* ;
P"; \
•
•
_AIMI
SCAL/0 r-ractr
VICINITY MAP
APRD PLAN & DEVELOPMENT DATA:
.4a:A snx:
wer..ma AREA:
TOTAL WETL.F.ts AREA 11,10? aF
Tf..Aat. S.1) 'SFACF.. AKA PRL. Sa.:113 SF
TO:A: MCA OF Ye::::AN3 ESSF:IR 3S,Siii
Laia
LDP.. .4:a1f.,1c..A1 LOT Sat: . tISLY) SF PER 1k4C 12/4/at
LiNa.a.:01 . 54:45 $F
AKA OF W3T-0C-SAY kia0a 3 01
r.xfsnr44.1 MASSER OF :DM w
PROF‘OSSLI :AMER or SiciLLSNC: L0q0
bahita.al LOT MTH . *s0 100Th
tglig AVSA:
'KN. OPEN SPACE: M R'.1.570
11:11S. :7-401:: gf.A. PSSPC1S0 77.750 or
REOLSKLI 13t71 VALE AREA FaS co.t.: 2Lai . 20.43a S.F.
UTILITIES:
Walt
SINYEI
111:74i0W
PLVE.R ak3
WU:
OWNER/APPLACANT:
R. 3. "NW FE00111301 t
ac://c 1113
f$,ARY3 Wk, *l270
L. (no) ata-LaiNi
l27.1$ (2.:42 a.;)
xti
f 12$
k*C.S0 VAL VIE:
00107
t10:43.53'
PROJECT SURVEYOR
(MO 1 a WSW:MY)
3.0.RFETT CORSLI.nati CSS):S• (EARS+
'2O SUSS 3.1'SF0 STk.S.St 1.5U550Z 2X3
£1:TAXa.. 051 WA-
TEL. f .3.5a-0232
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PRD ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL
FOSTER RIDGE
CAM IMMO AMMON)
CITY OF TUKWILA
CONTACT PERSON
.;01415 S. FFiS.. (StraVOR)
..e.Air co:NS:JUNO :SPX:WM
Pa. 10K V
Ve.RS':Y. Wes, IxtrZrk.5
771- SaLa
9.• \
I : \
•
i
t
: / \
j tei
1
„ •
/ \
i `•-• 1
\"•,..
\
/
/ ?....
i hi i /•, ,
•• h. • : •
/
•
•
co
•
I st
•
• e
•
LSCAL OSSCRIPtIONS:
SKISTINC:
A PUMA OF COVOINIMAT LOT I. Swam IA. 1011145111 23 14011111. RAW • UST. WA.
IN ASO COUNTY. MasINGICS. CASCAISED AS MONS
L0131 17 10 27. INCLUSK .CO( ( 1 AND LOTS 1 10 7. MUSK. @LOOK 1.
14EU-1/101 40011101 TO FOPS% ACCOROINO TO It LINNECONIXO NAT 1/113110F.
TOWNES WM %CATO SIMMS ASJOINI110.
•
•
*SNOW t
S. 14DTH ST. 4 4 (*or ores) `e•
A.
PAP 0;4:0 it...00
wax00
r , . --..........i ,t,.."&„..5,.,,t• ...2eX...\„,/?.'"Isk.AZt....ftfr''-'
414CADA41 ROAD
(s.Aw
•
•
•
1
• ••••\
;Tsj
\
1
s.
•••-' \
.•
AMA MA:
LOTS 1 TO 4 AID MALT 44 Of SOLOAARY UNE AS.USTSANTAOT CONSOUOATION
Al PER SIC NEMO CI SURVEY.
TOWNER NAN AND PACT 10 EASENDITS AA PM O. ISAISIOS SY PACS
ANO AS AM SY ME CITY OF 1UKVAIA
ANL Tree «N.& As anew es OA OreAres Flo Owls by POIX, deNd May 1004
4.1
so. isrrsr se'
POSTER RIDGE Sin
SO. fS9 S SO' 1$6115
Co. NOME?.
BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT (BLA) DA7
MFA. iN• SU: I7.:99 Fir (2.92 K.:
kitertmo AREA:
TOTAL WETLAND w :LAI? SF
rj;•!1,... OPEN SFACE AWA NRCR 92.6*.q.$
TO:A:., AREA 06 W::::g63 EWRER :59,S
LARD VSE:
;DR, 1sc:N3x.R.4 LOT EVE t.Sc4 SR PER ;kkti: ;
ALI464 NRAM1.:k4 AREA 0425
ANA OF gxilir e $1.81.4 0 $,it•
EXIST:A6.1 NCR —
Pcirkosa.; N.JOEtEii A. 9
WIRA:Li r.:0' AVERASS SW
;,09a.CE
IOTA:• OPEN SPACE AREA Sa199
asrx WA� AMA CST 7275% C:F 919:
REOVRED :WEN SPACE. A:W•X * 2C0; 25,6.66t
Portia
SMOOR
AVM
SCA= SO. 1•1411,
SCAM r.soom•
VICINITY MAP
)6791) #12S
KCSC. V.
IASKST
P.SE
OWNER/APPLACANT:
R. 9. 9T03 nomsEN
90X :519
krARYSNOLLE. WA, *CM
(. 69.S.4•646
PROJECT SURVEYOR:
vox, l'OPC•SRM'ItY • (Pc.'61.WARY)
aARREIT r;eouP (Ai rECrt.
720 Os 9.16F9 SYREEI S.RATE: 2.?0
re. 669.. SR90.1
TEL f (20.$) wk.-6202
BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAN
(LOT CONSOLIDATION)
FOSTER RIDGE
OM IMMO AMMON)
CITY OF TUKWILA
CONTACT PERSON
9. FRi$. (SURVEq
COK61.3::$1:40 EititAREER
Ri.3K
EVKRZ•t. W., ReStItS
YEt. i.429) 771- 461,Yi