HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L95-0036 - PARK PLACE - TREE CLEARINGL95 -0036
PARKWAY PLACE
17501
SOUTHCENTER PY
(SEE L95-0016).
c) The building is oriented to the car, with the drive through lane continuing across
the front of the site requiring the pedestrian entering from the highway to cross the
car drive. The building could be oriented to bring the car onsite from the north
entrance, with the drive through located at the rear, allowing cars to then exit to
South 152 or to the highway.
d) The signage colors are garish and do not complement each other. Again, each
franchise is competing for the attention of potential customers by using long
established corporate images and colors. The lighting of the signage at night has a
strident aspect.
We would like to work with you to develop a project that meets both the corporate goals of
each franchise as well as our design guidelines. If you would like to schedule a follow -up
meeting after revising the development concept, please let me know.
c:\mydocs \general \DRC \PRE- 02- 036.doe
>.. „:, x:_ si W« z.,.tu �s,i: :.at6dic 7y ;, ..,u•:M, r.,; rt
y ,a,: _,: tx•:.1aJ3s5ikL°.C.:t%idii:.ta�. . r :,nauiral.a:;l'.:: i .7c..t o'.liu;u.£ .=:, 4116 ..,.' v”
TREE CLEARING
Permit No:
Status:
Pro•iect:
Address:
Location:
Parcel #:
Wetlands:
Contractor:
PW95 -0199
ISSUED
PARK PL RETAIL C
17501 SOUTHCENTER PY
17501 SOUTHCENTER PY, SOUTHSIDE OF SITE
262304 -9067
LAND ALTERING
Issued: 06/16/1995
Approval Letter: 06/15/1995
Expires: 12/13/1995
Watercourse:
26 -1 'Slopes: Y
License No.:
TENANT PARK PLACE RETAIL - :CENTER = ''" Phone. (206)682 -68'68
OWNER SHIDLER /WE'ST IAN '.> ` >>
F` ANCE= y Phone 206 624- 1444
800 5 AV S :TE :350 0, 'SEATTLE, WA 9810'4 "'- ;:,`:,'S s,
APPLICANT BENNION '`Fj! Y` . "' F : . Rhone: (206) 682 -6868
P -3 PARTNERS Lf,: L'',lC ;, 800` 5TH AVE #3 ";•; E,ATTCE , . A 98104
s':ry T ti 5. U 'a '.1 J x t M
*** *********kkk•k•k/q**.:*** kkh,•k; tk*k! *'k , *:it k*11* *kk'A.,** kk 'k I,., *'k•k e,*** * N,k** k******** *kk
Additional Des pt i.oti " , j c,•;,- `t,``'' ,y I.00 '' °i# `q
GRADIN' `c, }ERATRI ,' FOR; •TtEBAG :: AVERIF•ICATtQN3 E T A
AS DE'' • 'BED t`I 8 -gO- EfiGINEERS'\MSj,1 €r DATED 06-111,3-9:P
WHICH PART. F .T HiIS PER
F.iii1:
Grading /Fi p1`,(Yad) -Cu`t:
i
Fermi tir =ieel
„L <
Plan Check l=ee: :••:i)
{Other:
Totalld j; ees
I, ' l:s' j
:'-00. if
.13 -.` M a i... r
`.•• 011+ t h
Account
"'Account
H. /Account
dq
'rot .
43' .s.
No : 0;00''3;22 ,1 D d,,
No: 000A 45'.83l';t
c:
No: 000/ 3L "E:'904'
U e4 1nn ¢t ct
et
* •k •k •k * •k •k •k •k * *' *`•k'* *uk k •k k::k •k k.* •k *,k •k •k * •k;k k. *''k k' k`'k:;k,•k 'k •k •kk •k 'k •k •k •k'k •k •I k •k •k •k k * * 'k k k •k k *•k:k * •k •k •k k •k •k k
I hereby '.cert i<f.y. that. :a`rid',, examined this permit and know he same
to be true; rand correct A,l1,y, *Os''stv'i s i on;s 1ot_ ,' :1aw andr,.ord 1 nances govnern;,i,ng this
work will *0 complie'd with, whether, _.petit i'ed itWe_i.n,, or• not The gr e'rt:t ing' of
f
this permi :t doe.s''n•ot =presume to give authur •i;t.v,to violate,,;'or,.:ca`n`cel the
provisions;rof ap) other state or local l.aw=; -•'re u,1a'tYiig const,r.ucet`1on,ar the
performance" v work. I'' am authorized to .sigri'',to'i= and obtain"`'th;is /Land
Altering per ,ipt. This permit shall become' "null`•and 'iid it the wo`r- -1 is not
commenced wi tlil,''in 180 ;, dayys` -t.rom the date,: of 'i'sssla,rjce ", 'o"r' it the work `'is
suspended or abandone_it'tfor- a' period of 180 days froin ri's:pection.
,i
,
THE APPLICANT
OF WORK ALA.
Signature
*•k•k **•k•kk ***•k*
APPROVED FOR j SUANCE JJ y., ; -... ,,-- ..;; - -,. ,,
Issued By:_ 1 * A • 1 { ,I V Date: fzl%t, L2
Au )oil zed Permit Center 'gnature
*k•k**** * *k * * *•k *•k k *k***•k *•k** * **•k** *•k **• kk• k*** k** *•k*** *k** * * *****•k*** * *** * ****
0'M
r, r
4T ;NOTIFY:'. THE CITY 'IN'SPECTOR' OF COMENCEMENT AD' COMPLETION
HOUR'S IN ADVANCE. FOR AN INSPECTION CALL• .:.433 -0179.
:Date: i2 1_99.S.
•k k * k k * 'k k •k •* •k;k':•k ;*;k. k k k :ai k * k 'k 'k k •k •k` k yk •k k * k ;k 'k'•k:k •A•; * •k •k k •k •k k k •k •k k •k •k k k k * k
It
I hereby certify that the permit holder whose name and address appears on
this record has satisfactorily met the standards and conditions for this
project approved herein.
Final Inspection Approved By:
Inspector Signature
Date:
z
mow•
6
00:
W W.
W 0:
g J.
D. a
Hw
z F-,
z O0
0 0!
0 N'.
0 HW W.
f- V!
O
0 1-
z
CITY OF TUKWILA
Address.: 17501 SOUTHCENTER PY
Suite:
Tenant: PARK PLACE RETAIL CENTER
. Type: PW -L.A
Parcel #: 262304 -9067
*•k'k•k'k** **•k•k *•k•k**•k k *•k *•k•k* **•k
Permit Conditions.:
1 APPLICANT TO OBTAIN THREE- 'R+EMOVAL` :F''ER'M�IR-;FROM DCD BEFORE
THE ISSUANCE OF TH:,._w...v....,:,;.,:;w
OWNER. ASSUMES L I BsFL FOR,, ALL WOR '�{ l'•AR
Permit No: PW9S -0199
Status: ISSUED
Applied: 06/14/1995
Issued: 06/16/1995
•k•k*•k **•k *•k k• k*• k• k• k******• k• k• k• k• k •k•k *•k•k*•k* * **•k* *•k•k****•4*
L .
J.
rA r 7 ,I.;. R IED' t�Ui LN ADVANCE
OF ISSUANCE 0F,BI!>IL'�iING F4E.R•MIT TOR a'TI1E RETAINING= WA'L %L.
BY ISSUANCE ,,QF.1f- I , F?:ERA,I,T� ��� T tE'•�r.C.ITY `z1".0E'S sN.OT GUARANTEE
BUILDING PER I'T IS'��U4N,CEst i + `� r.
.4.•y .�fi
�fl`P
1f'r` '1\
y M ';
Y ! f
w;
• 1.44:4,
\i;CalViir..•:1-111P;4‘‘'''•::::'114":;1
d , ,
PARKWAY PLACE RETAIL CENTER
SENSITIVE AREAS STUDY REPORT
Prepared For:
Park Place Partners
Seattle, Washington
Prepared By:
TALASAEA CONSULTANTS
Woodinville, Washington
November 1994
NOV 1 01994
V LJ'Yr
DEVELOPMENT
...,..;;�e"Y.s ✓:c.:v +r_ ......._: 'a.sy..:a.:+: +:�•yuiiS:Y.iL'i'r ., , i_S`•uav;:G:�:t�::si:i::. ,. ,
.Yt:;:. ,w...r�t.�.:.....y� >•1' :i'.: ti�:o::::f�u�ii..i2i�.:!;;
PARKWAY PLACE RETAIL CENTER
SENSITIVE AREAS STUDY REPORT
Prepared for:
Park Place Partners
800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3700
Seattle, Washington 98104
Prepared by:
Talasaea Consultants
15020 Bear Creek Rd. N.E.
Woodinville, Washington 98072
November 10, 1994
.'_ .t y.: .i;+�.:Si:luii,�itii'.:'....0 "i:'n:1::3..i: w. .,•,,....0 -
Table Of Contents
Page
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 General Property Description 1
3.0 Methodology 1
3.1 Background Data Reviewed 1
3.2 Field Investigation 2
4.0 Results 3
4.1 Analysis of Existing Information 3
4.2 Analysis of Overall Field Conditions 3
5.0 Wetland Functions and Values 4
6.0 Streams 4
7.0 Upland Areas 4
8.0 Wildlife 5
9.0 Proposed Project 5
9.1 Description 5
9.2 Development Impacts On Wetlands /Streams 5
9.3 Mitigation for Tree Removal Impacts 6
References
List Of Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Location Map
Figure 3: National Wetlands Inventory Map
Figure 4: Soils Map
Figure 5: Location of Wetland and Tree Replacement Map
Appendices
Appendix A: Data Sheets
..'u4.Yo�_+._. n.�....uU�IJa�s' ^.�i..� +ti:l�, •.' i'{.+' ��tW.`.. n. � {iN1 %.ra.ruitw:�il::cr.:+.v..xi 1'.n
PARKWAY PLACE RETAIL CENTER
SENSITIVE AREAS STUDY REPORT
1.0 Introduction
This report is the result of a sensitive areas study, including a wetland inventory
and delineation, on a 15 -acre site located in the City of Tukwila, King County,
Washington (Figure 1). The site is proposed for the construction of 155,000 s.f
of commercial retail building space with 700 parking stalls and an internal road
system.
The purpose of this report is to: 1) describe the wetlands identified and
delineated on the property, 2) identify wetland or stream impacts from the
proposed development (if any), 3) characterize the existing vegetation on the
site and 4) determine impacts to native plant communities, particularly trees.
Information in this report will be utilized by the City of Tukwila and any other
concerned agencies to evaluate impacts to wetlands from the proposed project.
2.0 General Property Description and Land Use
The site is located at 17501 Southcenter Parkway in the City of Tukwila, in King
County, Washington (Secs 26 & 35, T23N, R4E, W.M.). It is found west of
Southcenter Parkway, east of Interstate 5, north of SW 43rd Street (and the
existing Levitz Furniture store), and south of the existing Heritage Furniture store
(Figure 2).
The site consists of about 15 acres, 11 acres of which is currently occupied by a
9 -story office building and associated parking and landscaping. The western
portion of the site consists of a 4 -acre forested slope. Surrounding land use
consists of commercial areas to the south, north, and east and forested areas to
the west (between the site and Interstate 5).
3.0 Methodology
The wetland analysis of the subject property involved a two -part effort. The first
part consisted of a preliminary assessment of the site and its immediate
surroundings using published information about local environmental conditions.
This information included: 1) wetland and soil maps from resource agencies, and
2) any relevant studies completed or ongoing in the vicinity of the project site.
The second part involved a field survey in which direct observations and
measurements of soils, hydrology and vegetation were made to determine the
type of wetlands present and the extent of their boundaries (see Sect. 3.2
below).
3.1 Background Data Reviewed
Background information was reviewed prior to field investigations and included
the following:
1
r As �`+�' i.4 rr.�ay.u,. uwnasts;s:,� --- 'tirtlti.i�un.fw +.s,r.✓:awa.�c <:+.'trwtr.` avw.+ �,+.ae:.. v3: �i«:• r.as�1ir.'i.y714fri.':'ww)23YJi2
z:
ILL
6
J0
o0:
CO W
W=
w o
gJ;
�a
_'
z�
z t-i
w w°.
U0
,O N'
w
Z(
ui
o
f'•
BO.THELL
•
ES:MOJNES
FIGURE 1. Vicinity Map
TALASAEA
CONSULTANTS
Resource & ,Environmental Planning
15020 Bear reek Road Northeast
Woodinville, Washington 98027
Bus (206) 861 -7550 Fax (206) 861 -7549
�I.E..
NTS.1 -.
DATE
11/8/94
REVISED
z
11-
�— z
W
6
N W..
W
.W O:
g J'
ct
1— W.
_.
z H;.
U�
O N0
O
W W`
—O
w
z.
H =.
Off'
z
•IIIC' � 4174•
RI VERTOV
CREST
CCR • _
+nnl �
T Inu
R •�
I.M n S 6
<'' PL
144TH T
1415T
2•.i 3
VIRTUT
142ND
146TH
Tdg1 Ham_
5 1515T S
FIE 1S FH1
9n1 ST
� S 150711 ST
\I DY I'S2X0
LIB
147
FS
Sr °O
5 149TH S 'rG
_ T 119m y� S
m
-a IT
S�
111111 F'L .� :ill N IsIST ST S 152ND 5T 23i s,61 h
S 5152X0 PL 11�
'" \ S 153RD ST
519 •: woo Tuauu
TyCFN t. I�H
�_ \T 9lVD
(0604CRE5
RICE
CRE'STYIE'N
PKWY
Crµip i
BAKER BL
a ftactmH
NE10075
STRANDER
9■ Tf?,.
• r1 • N 'hH
/ N EERIE
Q 300
SEATAC,
HARRIOTi a
SCUM ENTER P
26
S 1681
ST I
t
C11pn6
14411 r
172ND
BLVD '<
4300
178TH ST
• t nom
PARKWAY
PIMA
'llt`
cc
Source: The Thomas Guide of King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties, 1994.
N
TALAS AEA
CONSULTANTS
Resource & Environmental Planning
ISM Sir 6. r.6, RII.dNortham
West X9Rtaarr.+.V.sfMn
&as (2011) 4$3111.ni 1201)1I431f
FIGURE 2. Location Map
DESIGN
DRAWN
SO
SCALE
N.T.S.
DATE
11/8/94
REVISED
FIGURE /DWG NO.
/2
Z
Z:
Wc
is
JO.
0 (Y •
U)
U)LLJ.
W ='
,U)
.W O• .
lQ
ca. a
Z�
I-0,
Z
D
;0 U);
W
H
-L6.0;
V.
Zi
W
Z
• National Wetlands Inventory Map (Des Moines, Quad), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 1987
• King County Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey, 1973
• Water Resource Rating and Buffer Recommendations, City of Tukwila, 1990
• Watercourse Rating Data Sheets, City of Tukwila, 1990.
3.2 Field Investigation
A general site reconnaissance was conducted to gain an overall impression of
the existing environment and to determine the general location of wetlands on or
in the immediate vicinity of the site. Observations were made of the general
plant communities, wildlife habitats, and the locations of potential wetland areas.
Present and past land use practices were also noted, as were significant
geological and hydrological features.
Once potential wetland areas were located, the routine on -site determination
method was used to delineate the wetlands using the procedures outlined in
both the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands
(1989) and the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987). The
wetland delineation was completed in November, 1994.
Plant species were identified according to the taxonomy of Hitchcock and
Cronquist (1973), and the wetland status of plant species was assigned
according to the list of plant species that occur in wetlands, published by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service classification system (Reed). The 1993
supplement to List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region
9) was used. Wetland classes were determined on the basis of Cowardin's
system of wetland classification.
Vegetation was considered hydrophytic if greater than 50% of the dominant plant
species had a wetland indicator status of facultative or wetter (i.e., facultative,
facultative wetland, or obligate wetland). Soil on the site was considered hydric
if one or more of the following characteristics were present:
• organic soils or soils with an organic surface layer,
• matrix chroma just below the A- horizon (or 10 inches, whichever is Tess) of 1
or less in unmottled soils, or 2 or Tess if mottles were present, or
• gleying immediately below the A- horizon.
Indicators of wetland hydrology may include, but are not necessarily limited to:
drainage patterns, drift lines, sediment deposition, watermarks, stream gauge
data and flood predictions, historic records, visual observation of saturated soils,
and visual observation of inundation.
An evaluation of the vegetation, soils and hydrology was made at various
locations along the interface of wetland and upland. Wetland boundary points
ky (FSItAn 4 -t ':'` >c :n? o-4!`': ✓C'e{
were then determined from this information. Wetland boundaries were marked
with pink flagging and surveyed.
Appendix A contains data sheets prepared for representative locations along
the upland /wetland boundary. These data sheets document the vegetation,
soils, and hydrology information that aided in the wetland boundary
determination.
4.0 Results
4.1 Analysis of Existing Information
Neither the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps (Figure 3) developed by the
US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), nor the City of Tukwila wetland maps,
indicate the presence of any wetlands on the site. Since these maps are only
general inventories based largely on aerial photographs, and because wetland
areas change over time, actual field investigation was necessary to ensure that
any and all wetlands were identified. The City has, however, mapped a
watercourse which flows from west to east near the northern border of the site.
The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) has mapped the site as consisting almost
entirely of Urban Land (Ur) (Figure 4). The extreme northern portion of the site
is mapped as Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep (AkF) and Woodinville silt
loam (Wo).
4.2 Analysis of Overall Field Conditions
A single wetland area (Wetland A) was identified and delineated on the project
site (Figure 5). This wetland is associated with a ditch adjacent to an old
railroad bed in the southwestern portion of the site. The ditch flows from north to
south and carries runoff and seepage from the hillside to the west. Vegetation in
the ditch is dominated by cattail (Typha /atifolia), watercress (Rorippa
nasturtium- aquaticum), and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor).
The ditch wetland located on the property appears to be associated with off -site
wetlands to the west. This off -site wetland is forested and dominated by a
canopy of black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), Pacific willow (Salix
lasiandra), and red alder (Alnus rubra). Understory vegetation is dominated by
Himalayan blackberry, salmonberry ( Rubus spectabilis), and some red -osier
dogwood (Corpus stolonifera). Herbaceous vegetation at the time of field
investigations (November 4, 1994) consisted largely of giant horsetail
(Equisetum telmateia) and lady fern (Athyrium felix - femina).
Borings taken in the ditch portion of Wetland A revealed gley soils. At the time
of field investigations (November 1994) approximately 2 to 6 inches of water was
flowing in the ditch.
1:d1+F: ' o`..'.i'= Hkti:k "'i•we Gib. " «: ;:ct,.�:.JetiN`-;v:xl'." i',Sn'' ' .;:a
Source: USF &WS National Wetlands Inventory Map, 1987. (Aerial photo flight flown in 1980.)
TALASAEA
CONSULTANTS
Resource & Environmental Planning
13020 Ear Old R..4 No,Mm
� 73
ems MO) HOW. Pn R00)Nt sit
FIGURE 3. National Wetlands Inventory Map
DESIGN
DRAWN
SCALE FlGURE /DWG NO.
1" =1000'
DATE r
11/8/94 l`
REVISED
Z
w'
6
J U'
UO.
to p,
W W
J
0 V..
W O:
co
w
Z�
1- O:
Z !-
M p;
iO
p H`
W UJ'
U
k6 0
Z
0 52
W
OF..
Z
LEGEND
AkF Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep
Wo Woodinville silt loam
Ur Urban land
N
re 2
UO
coo'
r w:
u.
W 0
ga
N 0:
d
1- o.
z
w w;
2
O N'
i w.
O;
•
lid Z..
�
O
Source: Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of King County, November.1973. '
TALAS AEA
CONSULTANTS
Resource & Environmental Planning
IS•la Dist CNA Road Wakes*
Moidomilt, Mo irrr.11073
M (30{) NI.7 X Rei) N1.7149
FIGURE 4. Soils Map
..DRAWN
.cn
Since Wetland A is associated with a larger forested wetland to the west, it
would be rated as a Type II wetland.
5.0 Wetland Functions and Values
Wetlands in general provide many valuable ecological and social functions,
including stormwater storage, water quality protection, groundwater recharge
and discharge, and wildlife habitat. The wetland on the project site is valuable
primarily because it is associated with a larger forested wetland to the west of
the property. This off -site wetland functions most importantly as a groundwater
discharge and wildlife habitat area. Seepage from the hillside to the west is
intercepted by the ditch and flows south along the old railroad bed.
6.0 Streams
Jones & Stokes Associates mapped a watercourse ( #26 -1) as occurring in the
vicinity of the project site during their 1990 field studies for the City of Tukwila.
This watercourse carries runoff from Interstate 5 and flows from west to east
near the site's northern boundary. The watercourse has been rated as a Type 3
stream along its left bank and a Type 2 stream along its right bank. The
proposed development should not impact this watercourse or encroach upon its
buffer (i.e., 35 -foot buffer along its right bank for Type 2 watercourses).
7.0 Upland Areas
Uplands on the 15 -acre site consist of an 11 -acre developed area that includes
an existing 9 -story office building with associated parking and landscaping. The
remaining 4 acres of the site consists largely of a steeply sloped forested hillside
to the west of the developed area. This hillside is part of a large forested slope
that exists between Interstate 5 and development along Southcenter Parkway.
The forested hillside to the west of the site is much more mature than the hillside
on the site. This off -site forested upland is dominated by an uneven -aged (2-4'
dbh) mixed canopy of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesi,) and big -leaf maple.
Understory vegetation in this area includes Indian plum, vine maple (Acer
circinatum), and hazelnut (Corylus cornuta).
The hillside on the site is dominated primarily by a relatively young (4 -6" dbh)
big -leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) and red alder (Alnus rubra) canopy, with
larger (6 -15" dbh) black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) also being common.
That portion of the hillside to be cleared, however, contains few maples and
consists almost entirely of red alder and black cottonwood. Understory
vegetation is dominated by Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis) and saplings of
the canopy trees. Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) is common in the area
to be cleared. Dominant ground cover at the time of field investigations included
sword fern (Polystichum munitum) and trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus).
4
8.0 Wildlife
Although an extensive wildlife study was not performed, observation of wildlife
habitat was performed during the field investigations (November, 1994).
Compared to the off -site hillside to the west, that portion of the forested hillside
to be cleared contains low to moderate value to wildlife. This is due to its
relatively low species and structural diversity and lack of such habitat features
as snags. The hillside as a whole provides habitat for a wide variety of herptiles,
small mammals, and birds, including raptors. Visual observations of the hillside
on the site, however, did not reveal the presence of any raptor nests.
9.0 Proposed Project
9.1 Description
The proposed project consists of the construction of 155,000 s.f. of commercial
retail building space with 700 parking stalls and internal road system.
9.2 Development Impacts on Wetlands /Streams
The proposed project will avoid both the wetland and watercourse found in the
vicinity of the site. Furthermore, a minimum 25 -foot wetland buffer and 35 -foot
watercourse buffer will be provided to the wetland and stream, respectively. The
minimum 25 -foot wetland buffer represents the existing edge of pavement.
Since the proposed project calls for enhancement of the existing buffer with
native plantings, the functional value of the wetland will not be impacted, and
may increase.
9.3 Mitigation for Tree Removal Impacts
Landplan P.S. has developed a Tree Replacement Plan in order to replace the
trees lost to clearing (25,752 s.f.) Under this plan two areas (approx. 23,000 s.f.)
on the site have been identified for possible tree replacement. One a
rectangular area along the site's western boundary (Figure 5) is proposed to
receive 53 1' -2' saplings consisting of a mixture of 2/3 Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga
menziesii) and 1/3 big -leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum).
The second area is in the southernmost portion of the site, within the buffer of
Wetland A, and would contain 29 saplings. Proposed planting in this triangular
area consists of a mixture of Washington or Polack hawthorn (Crataegus
phaenopyrum or douglasii) and willow (Salix spp.). Currently this area is partially
asphalted and would require removal and soil improvement.
The Tree Replacement Plan developed by Landplan P.S. is consistent with the
intent of the City of Tukwila's tree ordinance. Following establishment of the
replacement trees, the ecological benefits that were performed by the trees to be
removed should be similar to those of the newly planted trees. Although the
number of trees that will be planted to replace those lost is consistent with the
tree ordinance, their size has been modified to ensure better plant survivability.
5
uJ
• UO
:CO
U,
N w
• w I: •
J H
•N u.;
w O:
g a
u. Q:
a`
= w'
z
Ua
• :;of-
w
wz
;o
z
70
1
IA
_1.0.46110
..„.„..„,......____.,.
\ \ ''''' "' \ ...\ 3.1..\ . . ..... Ic::::\ ..-•-• .-.;
,,...
.,..■•
........ ■... ,. ..,...• ./ ....
■... 0/ ,,. ./........ ../....... --. ---
....''
..■
.,,.... ..■..
...„., ,/ .,..
..,■... ...,■• ......7
...■ . -I c-- \ ...-..' .
....'.
./ ..,.... ....... ..... ...... , _.,_--
....-
.....
VEUNEMW Well.14-117 ..___ ------ ....--- - - -..--
__.
....- ....- .---
___ .....- _..-
_.... ..- _--
,.-- _..... •
...--
,.._ -....----="----- ---
...._
_..... __
...„,-...._ - ,-
_- ...-
... ...- ..-
___
o
•
35 1-
°SITE PLAN
-
'iatke,C; "1,‘"n( ."KrAVA.tiVtm0-44ititir.rtYrtiavisArth+5-.54tMlisA'stViolvadailetssetAieve7;vgiltireurneilsweAO,
TALASAE.1
CONSULTANTS
Resource & Environmental Planning
15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast
Woodinville, Washington 98027
Bus (206) 861-7350 Fax (206)16145i
R
■
■
■ ■ •
-
7-'1/
- - l - ' I -� rr l i- ■ - i-
_ -
■ - -
/ - — — _ -
-
■ ■ — -
rr
1 !-
55t.t ■ ■■ ■ ' ■
■
■
■ — ■
..--- '
■ ■ -
- �. ■ ■ ■ _ ■
■
— ■
■ ■
■
■ -
-a
•
_
�'�j�'► TALASAEA
CONSULTANTS
Resource & F-nvlronmental Planning
15020 Bear Creek Road Northeast
Woodinville, Washington 98027
Bus (206) 861.7550 Fax (206) 861 7549
2
al or 35' w 188.8r
Ft11UF-E 5. Utanoct or Wenoto n
l'PEm PEPLAGINEttr AFPA
DESIGN
DRAWN
izdieliemitta .ixi4 ml 'm° � '+ "" uis4stiiiPiSi3:itGi
cWc
ce
U0
to 0
U W°
W =
U.
W O
g
J:
LL
Nom`..
Oi.
rZF-.
uj
0 -:
O
w W.
V.
`
• Zt
U -
O ,
Z
References
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Department of the Interior. FWSOBS- 70/31.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual. Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal Manual
for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, and U.S.D.A. Soil Conversation Service, Washington, D.C.
Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest.
University of Washington Press. 730 pp.
Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc., City of Tukwila, Water Resource Rating and
Buffer Recommendations, May 1990.
Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc., City of Tukwila, Watercourse Rating Data
Sheets, October 29, 1990.
Munsell Color. 1988. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp.,
Baltimore, Maryland.
Reed, P.B. Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands:
Northwest (Region 9). USF &WS Biol. Report 88.
Reed, P.B. Jr. 1993. Supplement to: National List of Plant Species that Occur in
Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). USF &WS Biol. Report 88.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. June, 1991. Hydric
Soils of the United States.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, King County Area
Soil Survey. 1973.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985. Users Guide: National Wetlands Inventory
Information and Legend for Map Products.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. National Wetlands Inventory Map, Des
Moines Quadrangle.
6
JU;•
o o
w.
ALL.
• w.o
•
iv; •
iZ 1;
Zo
ILI w
-
• .,0
• •
Il1Z.
• 0
•
vegxtectEeileslIMERMIN
.,,.v....t.�.a
.. uiilii�are''. a: i:Lti:.i:i:.i,tL:'iYii.:c.:wn.. �.•r:+.�
' . , ..e.o.,,�r.cix'.:wwu,
.. i�:L:iiidl�v
a��i:'. t:. tid... G: �dt' S:',: ��::r.'1�.:.Y+_',:ri:ila.'s4rc" :'.
7
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1
•
Date: I -9'4
• ,.•
Field Investocio- .
14140
Projec/Sile• msf- Ali • FLA( E..: State: OA County:
Applicgnt/Owner:?Ag4 94-Ac6 POTIJe-e--5 Plant Community #/Name• TP M •
Note:"If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes K No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes. X No • (I( yes, explain on back) 1)11c4-% Ab-Dge-NiT
•
o gAtt.hb
:le St/4434.1p. . .
Dominant Plant Species
Indicator
Status
1. 1' let,M.A;c 11.
LS' 2. Peri-Wic, ""sur-tio".-1.,A,...„ oak- 12.
Zs' 3. Lem", "A:A.5r 081- 13.
10 4, g(51205 e;scii,r Fitt) • 44.4. 14,
5. 15.
6. 16.
7. 17.
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Oittg
8. 18.
9. 19.
10. •• • 20;
Perceht of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC • '15-1`ft.
• .
.hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes X No
• aiionale: •
. FAc, Sift Fr-P- • • •
• --• * • SOILS
Series/phase
-. Is ifiesoil onihe hydric soils list? Yes • • No •
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes ' No )( Histic epipedon present? Yes'
• Is tfie's6iPMottled? yes ." No )( Gleyed? Yes )C No '
Matrix Color: • hi- 5/ Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No •
Rationale:
Indicator
Status Stratum
:•••••::: • - • •• • •
Subgroup:2
Undetermined '
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes )( No Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? ..Yes 44 No
Depth to free-standingwater in 'pit/soil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
5
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes 1( No
Rationale
. • .
. •
-This data form can be used for thO:Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Commu•••nitY
Assessment Procedure. -
z Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.'
rto4 I i4 rts
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND.RATIONALE
Is the plant community a •Witland? Yes X, No
Rationale foejurisdictional 'decision:
• ALL 73 (3-k-TE.11- at pixel-
B-2
• :
•
. .
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1
Field Invest;gv. r(s): If-AA &id • •
State: WA
:.project/Sile:. fig-r-c-J • PL-AC--6—
AP'pliant./awner: Agl‘: PLAce. Piwi'14 ER5 Plant Community g/Na
Date:
County. II 00
me.
No(e: Ua more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data f
orm or a field notebook.
•
e;
Do"nornpl environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes )k No (If no, explain on back)
Has the ()gelation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes' No • (If yes, explain on back) Col...1,
. • •
3E.>
/o .51-144-' tioriliriant Plant Species
z..ogigkfpe. • •
gk)k)u5
d'Aelcolo r
' VEGETATION
IndicatOr
Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species
fACJ
514gvi3
11.
2. 12.
3. 13.
4. 14.
5. 15.
6. 16.
7. 17.
8 18.
9. 19.
10. 20.•
• Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAG
Is the fiydrophytic vegetation criterion met?. Yes
No
Rationate
"-.
tAJa•-1-1-1e • •
B-2
-...** : : SOILS -'•
- .;•.. :•. • • dries/phiee:- : Subgroup:2
Histic epipedon present? Yes
Yes • No Undetermined
No(
No X
siJWs�iI on-the hydric soils list?
Is the soil a 1-3islosol? Yes
'Mottlp..d? es
Matrix Color: ' r")11■V 7‘171- -
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
F
Indicator
Status Stratum
No
Gleyed? Yes No X
Mottle Colors:
No X
- HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No )( Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? :Yes No )(
Depth to free-standing water in 'pit/soil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
07_ ettkE sktvitoatc,0 0?-
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND,RAT1ONALE
, . .
•• Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No X
Rationale forlurisdictional decision:
Cg t:TE a I rstE-c
•.IFThis data form can be used for the-Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classi6cation according to 'Soil Taxonomy."
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
December 23, 1996
Mr. Roy Bennion
Park Place Partners
800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3700
Seattle, WA 98104-3122
John W. Rants, Mayor
Re: Park Place Wetland Buffer and Tree Replacement Monitoring -
File #L95-0036.
Dear Roy:
Steve Lancaster, Director
I am writing in regards to a letter from Cathcart Landscape Services, Inc. In the letter Rick
Cathcart briefly discussed a site evaluation of the wetland buffer plantings he conducted on
November 4, 1996. This letter was forwarded to me by Diana Painter of our office. I'm not sure
if the letter was an update for you or to serve as a monitoring report. However, I..was on the site
earlier this month and wanted to let you know of my observations.
I agree that the wetland buffer looks good but those deciduous trees and shrubs cannot be
adequately evaluated when they are dormant in November. I recommend the area has a
monitoring site visit during the summer when the plants are growing.
As you know, the performance bonding for sensitive areas includes the Tree Permit plantings on
the forested slope behind the Park Place project. My recent visit included walking the slope area.
Unfortunately one half or more of those seedlings have died. These were mostly evergreen
•conifers. If you have an agreement with Cathcart Landscape Services to replace dead plants
within a year of the installation, I would strongly recommend the work be performed as soon as
possible.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
Mr. Roy Bennion
December 23, 1996
Page 2
My initial inspection back in January 1996 identified problems with the slope tree planting
(1/9/96 Letter to Park Place Partners). These problems were not corrected at that time. I would
like to get this tree planting resolved and will need a mortality count soon so that the actual
number of dead tree seedlings can be seen. I believe the monitoring program schedule was setup
on a quarterly basis for a two -year period. Please let me know how you would like to handle
this situation.
Sincerely,
1
(1
C. Gary SF,liulz
Urban Environmentalist'
cc: Steve Lancaster, DCD. Director
A
NN's111/72r
Since .1985
��- can 3
CATHCART LANDSCAPE SERVICES, INC.
P.O. Box 2428 • Redmond, WA 98073
Phone /Fax (206) 836 -9414
November 4,' 1996
P3 /Parkway, L.L.C.
800 Fifth Ave. Ste. #3700
Seattle, WA .98104
Attn:.'Roy Bennion
Park Place Wetlands Evaluation on November 4, 1996, Weather Conditions:
Cool and Cloudy
Dear 'Roy,
The wetlands has had very.vigorous,growth of the plants that were installed
February /March. 199,6 as' well as the hydroseeding and native growth that con
tinues to thrive in this wetlands buffer It de very apparent that the over -
all health.ofthis areais growing very well in serving the purpose that was
planned.:
No apparent erosion or soil slippage was noted at this time.
R. L. Cathcart
�y:4ti�J�1.l;ai.
iiJ+Li.wAU+[i +.iui`uaw1.4i1
•
5-003
andscape.Architecture
January 30, •1996
City. of Tukwila
Department of Community Development.
6300 Southcenter Blvd:, Suite #100
Tukwila, WA .98188
ATTN:. C. Gary Schultz .
RE: 'Park Place Retail Center #L94 -0084
Wetland Buffer Enhancement & Tree'Permit Work
Dear Gary:
Let this letter serve as a response to your letter dated January 9, 1996, addressed to Mr.: Roy
Bennion, Park Place Partners.' I will comment on each point discussed sequentially paragraph by
paragraph
As; previously discussed with you and Shawn'.Parsons,the gravel material that encroached into the buffer area
has made it unsuitable for the buffer planting. This material was to be removed or re- distributed to the bottom
of the slope. l recommended new fill material be added to the buffer slope to provide an appropriate planting.
medium and reduce the over- steepened slope gradient.
The general contractor has assured me that the gravel material (left over from the paving
operation) has been re-distributed to the bottom ofthe slope. New "on- site ", fill material was
added to the buffer slope to provide amore "gentle" slope. This material is a mixture of .
organic and on -site "B" horizon -type soils:
Additional material has now been placed in the area but it is difficult to determine what happened to the gravel.
I would assume the larger gravel materials is underneath the new fill.. However, the more disturbing condition is ..
that the fill material,. added from site spoils, is mostly sand and gravel with clay and lacks significant organic
Content. Most of the material appears to have been excavated from native soil at a'depth that did not support
trees and shrubs: In my opinion and using industry standards, the fill is not suitable soil for long term,, vigorous
plant growth.
6 :0 0
Main Street
Suite. D,
Edmonds,
: Washington •
:.9 S 0 2 :0
(206) 776 -4932
(Fax) 774 -7803
RECEIVED
FEB .021996.
'•.COMMUNITY
• DEVELOPMENT
z
�z
w
6D
J U•
0
W 0
CO
1-,
N V_.
w o.
�Q
a
=02 a
I- wTI
i'
z
o I-
w w:
DO .
0 I-'
W w
U. O:
Z
ti.l
CO,
Z
Page .2 of 3 - City of Tukwila -Park Place Retail Center #L94-0084
1 -30 -96 - Wetland Buffer Enhancement & Tree Permit Work
At our last site meeting, before the new material was added to the buffer area, a representative from '
W.G. Clark informed Shawn Parsons and myself that he did not consider the soil appropriate for plantings.
Therefore, I asked Shawn to inspect the soil before moving it to verify its quality. Apparently, a close
inspection did not occur. •
The quality of the'existing on -site soils, although not industry standard "topsoil ", is native to
the'site and provides some - organic content.. The wetland plantings are to be "pit" planted with
"5- way" topsoil mix. That is, imported topsoil will be added to the planting hole around each
"plant's Foot ball. Often wetland plantings do not receive such "topsoil" treatment but are
planted "directly into whatever native soils exist. .I .am confident that the selected species will
function well in this location:
The expected success of the buffer enhancement has been compromised. Without removing all of the
unsuitable material that was. placed in the "buffer, the following will be required:,
1).• .As planned, amend all plantings with an adequate amount of organic topsoil.
2) Determination of the amount of the'required mitigation assurance will be based on the'full cost of plant
replacement including the, 2 -year monitoring program.. The "bond "' will be provided as an assurance device
to cover 150 percent of the replacement costs for a duration of 2 years.
Although do not. share your conclusion, Gary, that the expected,success of the buffer
enhancement has been compromised, the owner has assured me that he would be willing to
provide the necessary "bonding" required to assure adequate plant replacement guarantees.
Tree Permit" Planting:
Rick Cathcart . of Cathcart Landscape Services, Inc., informed me on Friday, 1/5/96, that the tree planting was
completed on the hillside. west. of the slope retaining wall. I. inspected the site that afternoon and found
significant deficiencies with the plantings. My observations are as foliows
1).. Only 2 species of trees were planted, Douglas fir and western hemlock. The approved plan called for 4 tree
species including white'pine and big leaf maple.
2). Improper planting techniques were'observed "throughout. Trees were planted 3 or 4 per hole. Many of both'
the fir and hemlock were easily: pulled because they were not planted properly. Some have exposed root
balls because the holes were not dug deep enough. Many of the hemlock were chlorotic and appeared less• •
healthy than average nursery stock.
3) I found some trees,on the ground that were not planted.
As planted, a,responsible survival rate is not expected and the techniques are not acceptable. .This area must be
re- planted with the addition of at least 2 more native tree species. ',Western red cedar could also be used if
.there is a problem obtaining the other 2 species:.
I am in receipt of a letter from Rick Cathcart of Cathcart Landscape Services, Inc., dated
Jan. 17, 1996, he has stated; that three species of trees have been planted Douglas fir,
Western Hemlock and Big -leaf maple. He also states that the Western Hemlock species were
received with multiple stems per one gallon container and were. planted as a singular tree. L
have instructed Rick Cathcart of Cathcart Landscape Services, Inc., to set up a.meeting with
you, Gary, to walk - through and visually review the plantings. He is to provide any. corrective
- measures required.
FEB 021996
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
Page 3 of 3 - City. of Tukwila — Park Place Retail Center #L94-0084
1 -30-96 - Wetland Buffer. Enhancement & Tree Permit Work
I hope this letter has provided some clarification and has minimized some, of your concerns about:
the wetland and tree replacement plantings:
Please contact me at 776 -4932 to discuss, further, if necessary.
Sincerely,
Shawn Parsons, R L A. #307
rincipal/Landscape Architect
Steve Lancaster, City of .Tukwila` "
`'a pauiter; DCD; City of Tukwila '.
:Roy:Bennion, Park Place Partners
Rick Cathcart; Cathcart Landscape. Services „In
RE.CE VED
FEB :02:.1996
COMMUNITY-
DEVELOPMENT
n..., i e..e.7l <..t�,isw.as:c:.::,s::::, ::L:�Y '= '.:..:w.i.�.Y:.:c�;�. -.. �:i; ::::Lii •i:GU .w ,w� .i..:.tvA.lci:af.::
.
w,
UO:
� o
WI
W
gJ
N D.
?.
E- O
U.1~
U 0;.
• w
= UJ
w z:.
• OH
z
Geo OEngineers •
RECF!V ED
CITY OF TUKWILA
JAN 1 2 1996
PERMIT CENTER
Mr. Roy Bennion
800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3700
Seattle, Washington 98104
January 12, 1996
Consulting Engineers
and Gcoscientists
Offices in Washington,
Oregon, and Alaska
Geotechnical Consultation
"Ultrablock" Retaining Wall East of Building A
Park Place Project
17501 Southcenter Parkway
Tukwila, Washington
File No. 3944 - 004 -01 -1130
This letter summarizes our geotechnical consultation related to a retaining wall to be
installed along the east side of building A at the Park Place, project site in Tukwila, Washington.
We have reviewed various concepts for the wall which have been developed by Turner &
Associates in conjunction with Shutler Consulting Engineers, Inc., Bush, Roed & Hitchings, Inc.
and Landplan, P.S. The preferred concept includes a concrete ( "Ultrablock ") wall used to retain
structural fill for the parking area east of building A. The wall will have a length of about 78
feet, and will extend along the southeast property line (near the adjacent furniture store). We
understand that the maximum grade difference between the new parking area and the existing
parking area for the furniture store will be about 6 feet. This grade difference is being confirmed
by Bush, Roed & Hitchings.
Cross section A -A, prepared by Landplan, P.S., shows the proposed "Ultrablock" wall with
a wall height of 4.5 feet and a backslope of about 2H:1V (horizontal to vertical). The total
horizontal distance from the toe of the wall to the edge of the new pavement will be 6 feet. The
wall is shown as two blocks high (each block having a height of 2.5 feet) and a batter of 1H :4V.
The backslope is to be covered with topsoil. We understand that ornamental trees might be
planted at intervals just behind the wall.
Based on our review and experience with various types of retaining walls in this area, we
conclude that the concept shown in Section A -A is generally adequate. We have the following
recommended modifications:
• The backslope behind the wall should be inclined no steeper than 2H:1V.
• The wall face batter could be steepened to 1H:6V, if needed. This would help achieve a
flatter backslope.
GeoEngineers, Inc.
8410 154th Avenue N.E.
Redmond, \VA 98052
Telephone (206) 861 -6000
Fax (206) 861 -6050
ma iws G
U O!
rno
W LL
W 0'.
2
g J`
u.a
- =;
1-O•
z i-
x -
O co
W
tl O
CL1 co,
Z.
z
Mr. Roy Bennion .
January 12, 1996
Page 2
• Any loose or disturbed soils on the slope face along the alignment of the wall which result
from construction should be recompacted; if practical, or removed and replaced with
suitable structural fill soil that is compacted to a firm, unyielding condition. It may be most
effective to remove this material and replace it with compacted drainage material as the
blocks are placed.
• Root balls for the ornamental trees to be planted behind the wall should be placed into flat -
bottomed notches cut into the existing fill slope, rather than placing the topsoil cover
around the root balls on an inclined existing fill surface.
• The perforated pipe shown in Section A -A can be bedded in the same granular soil used as
a base beneath the wall and can be terminated in a french drain sump in the landscape
island located near the east end of the wall. Based on the limited size of the catchment area
behind the wall, the flow of water in the perforated pipe should be relatively low.
6froola.ye k-701-)
We trust that this information meets your present needs. If you have any questions
concerning this letter, please contact us.
•
.
P + F'�
44; PR
1 EXPIRES o — 23— g6 1
.
t:JKT:wd
Document ID: 3944004.BLK
Two copies submitted
cc: Mr. Howard Turner (2 copies)
Turner & Associates
18420 - 24th Pl. NE
Seattle, WA 98115
Jack R. Bennett, Inc.
927 N. Northlake Way, Ste. 330
Seattle, WA 98103
Attn: Mr. Jack Bennett
G e o E n g i n e e r s
Yours very truly,
GeoEngineers, Inc.
?f/tpdf ,La4,
Herbert R. Pschunder, P.E.
Senior Engineer
944 12'
Jack K. Tuttle, P.E.
Principal
Bush, Roed & Hitchings, Inc.
2009 Minor Ave. E.
Seattle, WA 98102 -3513
Attn: Mr. John Anderson
Landplan, P.S.
600 Main St., Suite D
Edmonds, WA 98020
Attn: Mr. Shawn Parsons
File No. 3944 - 004 -01 -1130
Fa lu
ft
Landscape Architecture
e ; " 19"5:5/
City of Tukwila
Department of Community. Development
6300 Southcenter Blvd:, Suite #100
Tukwila, ,WA '.98188
ATTN. • Diana Painter, DCD'Associate Planner
Park Place Landscape Revisions
Dear Diana:
In response to your letter of December 21st, 1995, addressed to LandPlan P. S.,'the followin
comments correspond to the,numbered points in your letter:
Sheet L -1
1 For reasons of pedestrian access and safety and at the request of Winter's Restaurant, sections
of this planter were left: open in that area of side yard
Per previous discussions, only shrubs were planted between Building A and Levitz for
visibility purposes. However, to comply with side yard landscaping requirements, additional
shade trees at ± 30' on center have been added.
2 .. Additional "hardscape ".iinstallation necessitated planter size reduction, columnar trees will be
re- designed into planter to ' enhance buffering: .
Four "replacement" trees have been re- designed into landscape development:. One of the frees
will replace Tree "W" removed erroneously;
Katsura trees have been called out. as 14' -16' both on Sheet L-1 and Sheet L -5.
6 0 0,
Main Street
Suite : D,'
Edmonds,:'
Washington
9 8.0 2.0.
(206) 778 -4832
(Fax) 774 -7803
»....a:a:u`+..c': ,....i... • .• .• -. uL s IutjYJ.v...i.:l.�u .., ...'..,
z •
1
• o:
w
JU
.0 0'
.co. 0
••W
� LL,
w o.
¢
52 a.
w
Z .2 D.
:p
.111 w.
• 2, •
w
—o: •
j Z' •
1
U �.
E_ 1'
z
Page 2 of 3- City of Tukwila - Park Place Landscape Revisions
12-26-95
Linden trees for replacement have been specified in the plant schedule as 4'/" caliper.
. There are, in fact, 11 planters and they have been shown on L-1, L-3 and Coordination
has been conducted between Turner & Associates' drawings SK-78, SK-79, SK-80, and
SK-71.
7 The pruning detail for existing evergreen haS been modified as'requested
•
,• • ' . Proposed tree replacement types have been super-imposed over existing tree symbol for city
•
• • •
Sheet L-2
, .. .
9.' ' The protection barricade detail has been removed..
• • . • 10. The note has been amended to read "maximum 30" depth removed".
. , ' : • : . .
:•'.-:, • : • .. •:. 11. The deciduous tree pruning detail has been removed.
• ''.: 12. See note #7, Sheet 1. .. , , . i - ' • ,. • . -
• ,
..,-: '‘.. :.' .' 13. Wetland planting bond estimate to be adjusted as required dependent upon the extent of work .. • •
• •
`r, : ..:,,I.-'` :`'.,' : •••,' '
completed by first certificate of occupancy request. ' ' . . , • . . ' '. •' . ' ,. ;.. : 1 ‘...
I .
• Meeting "on • " set-up for
•
• 14 Coordination to occur with Gary Schulz of the city of Tukwila. Meeting on site se - p
, • December 27th. to review existing "on-site" Conditions.
-15. Site fiirnishing and amenities.
• Howard Turner has finished his modification exterior architectural details drawings and will be
.•
. ,
submitting his drawings under separate cover.
Litter container-literature enclosed.
.• Benches-- era ure enc ose
Poured-in-place concrete planter-review Howard Turner's architectural drawings.
•z
z
r4
2.
6 D'
00
• CO CV
CO w'
LLI
,
LL.
uj
g 5.
CL) a
II La: •
• LLI
0 .
:L1J
0,
•I-
ILI u)
0
z
age 3 of 3 — City of Tukwila — Park Place Landscape Revisions
2 -26 -95
Hopefully; this will provide the necessary that you require Please forward any,
additional comments, if any, at our earliest: convenience'
T:. Shawn Parsons, R.L.A. #307
Principal/Landscape Arclutect
teve" Lancaster Ci of Tukwila
Gary,: chulz, City of Tukwila
Roy Bennion, Park Place Partners
Howard Turner, Turner & Associates
..::.. s<,. �. n.... zc. ec;: vi.+:.:.:. :;:::,: tr.:": tzw .se•,:;:a..5.:a:.�.c,.�.r:tx;.t
•
263237135
BRH
E. R. H.
F-192 T-485 P-001
BUSH, ROED & HITCHINGS, INC.
JAN 24 '96 14:24
• fi
• ,!„,+
DATE: /
Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COVER SHEET
PAGES: 02-
(Including this Cover Page)
PLEASE DELIVER THIS TRANSMISSION TO:
NAME: Vrn14 PitiArigr4
OFFICE:
1•1.7ii,)
F-1 LCD P
FAXITELECOPY NO • A312- 12)-33 CONFIRMATION NO.:
THIS DOCUMENT IS FROM:
NAME. 14A-- .46-6-04 50iti FP&
SECRETARY: BRH JOB NO.-
ADDITIONAL MESSAGE:
ft-vosv 11)4E4, s// fiX% P41/07cAc6, Pezews)
Taaiy.
IF ANY OF THESE PAGES ARE NOT LEGIBLE, OR IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE
CONTACT OUR OPERATOR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE (206) 323-4144.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE-THIS FACSIMILE MESSAGE AND THE ATTACHMENTS ARE PRIVILEGED
AND CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR CONTAIN PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED
FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE LISTED ABOVE. IF YOU ARE NEITHER THE INTENDED RECIPIENT
NOR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THIS MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED
RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISCLOSURE, COPYING, DISTRIBUTION OR THE
TAKING OF ANY ACTION IN RELIANCE ON THE CONTENTS OF THIS TELECOPIED INFORMATION IS
STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TELECOPY IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY
NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE TO ARRANGE FOR THE IMMEDIATE tURN OF THE CINIINAL
TRANSMISSION TO US.
FAX17713
2009 Minor Avenue East, Seattle, Washington 98102 - Phone 206/323-4144; Fax 206/323-7135
2
ifo.
rye.
CONTRACTOR NOTE:
HANDRAIL AS REQUIRED BY ARCHITECT.
RETAINING WALL AND ROCKERY SHALL BE IN
ACCORDANCE WILL THE RECOMMENDATIONS
OF GEOENGINEERS LETTER DATED 1/11/96.
- _ :,' is' �; �y' y'. �"' S.::: I�".: 5:?^' f:" hi" ?rLu. �i} ieSkia;:,: l�;: }' i. �'.'} v�' d' u' ii; fr. ikP.°«= ':x�:s %i).:;�C'.:' %r'ai% Pik" kt4�d' r. irt: !4e'ti ° *:.s3- 1�:1,•'•i;xtSi;:: aa�- :rS�.`
2063237135
FAX # 35
B. R. H.
Date: 111 5196
To: CITY OF TUKWILA
6300 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA 98188
Attu: DIANE PAINTER
(206) 433 -0179
(206) 4314665- Fax
F -877 T -362 P -001 JAN 15 '96 11:08
BUSH, ROEU & HITCHINGS, INC.
Civic Engineers / Land Surveyors
2009 Minor Avenue East
Seattle, WASHINGTON 98102
(206) 323 -4144 (206) 323 -7135 FAX
PROJECT* 94187.02
Project Name: PARK PLACE
Re: ULTRABLOCK INFO
You should receive 5 papa(s) Including this cover sheet If you did not receive all pages please call (206) 3234144.
WE ARE SENDING YOU ATTACHED THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:
i A- Prints C- Copy of Letter E- Mylar O- Other Ole In below)
t B- Supplemental Service Agracme d D- Description F- Contracts
Type
Copies
Date
No. .
Description
A
1
1115196
4
MANUFACTURER'S INFORMATION,
•
U;
c�O
W
J ; •
• W O`
J
U. a
• .;D
N! •
iO H�
W W •
:II— 0 � . •
•
•
• U N
,z
�. 1. 1- �11iLi�. 1. 1][ Y11iI�L1. 1GFff� ►i�1tA,AFJR1OYid.FiJ�L.SL1llw.. -- - �..� —�..— ....—._...--.. w ...-- ..w.....�.�— ...- ..._...... �..._- . —�... � .
As requested
giExecutlon & return
For Immediate delivery
For your approval
figFor your information
iliFor your use
gReview and comment
For your files
Remarks & Instructions:
Copy To:.
Signed:
Anderson, P.E.
Manager
JAN 16 1996
COM wtEUN ,...,r
DEVPLOPMFNT
2063237135
13. R. H.
F-977 T-362 P-002 JAN 15 '96 11:08
ULTRABLOCK'
Manufacturers of the
LOCK-BLOCK Tm
Retaining Wall System
LOW COST
EASY TO INSTALL
An attractive alternative to a plain concrete wall was provided lor this subdivision in Ferndale. Washington using rock.taceu
blocks. Quick construction time allowed the wall to be built without damage to the house above. The block wall will also support
a new concrete driveway beside the house
to,noraorur,AnIsnorso-
z
z
cr w
< 2
- C)
O 0
(/)
• W
uJI
• u_
Lu 0
cr
<
— 0
LLI
I-0
Z
w
O cr)
0 —
O 1—
L11 w
I—
Lt. -67
O (/)
o
2063237135
E.R.H.
F -877 T -362 P -003 JAN 15 '96 11:10
.Vloaat pow pagan acidlancal sboutiCaw
Soda Masa okay Ina hrn Ina dmaraagatfM•
INSTALLATION TIPS
1. *ways Tait wish a smooth base. joint Ines In the wail can only
be as s t r a i g h t as the base on which thoy are placed. A sck kndi
blink* at granular mated* composted and ralwd or screeded
smooth is normely a sufficient base.
2.1t possible, prepare the antra base banns piecing blocks so that a •
Visual inspection can be made to minimize bumps and hollows.
3411 the ballot is not level or has a slapped bosom surface, place
the bwest Node Meld, talking care to align the front faced the wall.
4. As the surface finish a the blocks t vedebls, the be face of
the Modeshould be turned out.
s JMPORTMiT - Begin phadng {be second layer Mier no more
Olen 5 ore bottom layer blocks have been paced, again
hidnp Aare to Am the tact lose oIthe so& ( remember, there is
eppasdresiely 1/21 a olsaranse In wary dirarrlion In lie et
of
IL Should the desruce become tight for the second row of blocks,
men* piece the need block along Me bosom row, with a alight gap
(ONE, the second and subsequent roar wg than have Wident
clearance. Continue placing subsequent rows, teldr>g care to sign
the tontine.
7- Non rightannglo comer, or Domers where wails have
dt2went batters two achieved mom easily by Wilding di the 2 we
Independently and pouring Me comer sRamerde. Charmer stripe
attached to the Inside of the formwork wS blend the comer in wah
the net or the wall
& W desired, the wall can be curved either vertically, horiaoritely,
or both.
9. For speed & convenience a hack mounted hydraulic.. vaaor
is the best machine to place the Mocks.
10. Pressure washing & aeam the surged, will mitlimbs
algae grevdh and mime new appearance.
11. Some useful toots b have of the lob-site include:
• A transit to lay out a level base. - Shovels and rakes for base
preparation.
■ A Ming jig b hold blocks aim correct batbc
• A broom to dean the keyways before piecing tI►e nerd legit:
• One or more Stool pry bars for jostling the blocks into potion.
,� nwsasrs�
ULTRABLOCK'"
Manufacturers of the
LOCK- BLOCK *'°
Retaining Wall System
1- 800 -377 -3877
rrnrari found
z
• t=-Z'
real.
6o.
00
coo
CO w.
W I
J F-.
CO u_
W 0,
Q
=• a,
W
I- .
. _
z�:
p
zb
LU w
O �
• u.l`.
• f=.
p;
ui z
U co
z
2063237135
B. R. H.
F -877 T -362 P -004 JAN 15 '96 11:11
.. ..
an mei d vary poor aalWaiod
Waling talon infInfest tuto.
be undertaken
engineered
e and issuance
M amen toad for the 011bb Lake
tar boat landing tacit -sras rod retdned �w
Med
by Sege Ugnt aKa
(Hebb dam see in1MCec.da
mount* taw
Hoek racing wan apacAled on Ws development
protectte provide a atabanked look The
caws wee potiret In data wen seam lo
aocenhodete N addition el tote hang.
�7 -3877
OEcavate to suitable sub -prate and prepare
a wef compacted granular base.
•
The grearthe baiter Into the M the higher the wall can be bolt without the
need to Inmate the width of Ilha base or adding reinforcing geo.glid to the
baddf.
WARNI'
No construction shou
without profession.
Specifications for the
of proper p•
2063237135
B. R. H.
• ~�.
F-877 T-362 P -005 JAN 15 '96 11:12
I
Block seeps pros* Irle
petted tranehion between frie
pedestrian wawa, and the
wayon tae nornl slit of
Vancouver hatted
TNs wee aocomodaoed an sere lane ler a Due MO
In Imperial Beach, Cita*. Tee wort wa aecled
�
a nomination tQaltllll
STANDARD LOCK-BLOCK' CONFIGURATION
canon maim'
MUSE MaGM UUE
A mull lneNwall wore construe*
Pe t te as t
29,0 -x 2 9 . 5 ' x 5D', (I50MITI x 7501T1n x 1500nee) IOpoR.4.6' x 2.5' x S
ioeo kg (4320 Ls)
(t2mn). The chrntssd comers pro*.
appr a mast' M IM of * * O l e aka Pm b air
Adandrd7aOardsbelloopat lopcwnolnch0look
29m (75') for wane one nloekredr
MIw ttd &Net 1 foe tees *Most large tendon
UMW: Al fates may main *putt= blsrgtlra
such es honeycomb, dips, see.
Medi Faced: hest granite will fus0e ua iI )eleee.
Nods are maeltaceeta nab forum tondo and swath leeele wN vwy.
6dn threes wil be wood ltr poranieea eoncfsee Welk M MOW.
10 Mods per host Om bra tow), 20 blocks per belt (Orton)
CHAMFERED LOCK- DIRCIeSPECIIICAIOH=
RANTER -�NelF PLANTER � ovum
Oakes
Blocks are normal) avalable for innhedal delivery, however some conh9ltaJcns •
facing can be
a 6
added one surface of the ropes(. Gran* a
commie mug 1r 01t alms
IOMIMBM OBEN COINIOERATIONS FOR
QUALIFIED BANOIRS INCLUDE:
1. Marys we Inn OIMbg pavet or sand mid
prowl I►aetgl t0 Mow Mmug .Mlhae Moll
prounitimIsr median oaar In di nave
Foot threw or Menke Gibs inay bo
2. Coulomb (MAID WSd e$ or RI ssrfl ono* can Do used to
ao0ewele reitilmeo to sMaeRD and asrYrnII
ol the Mods.
9. An** must Include adilooll Mem ,
fleas of *tin NAM
4. Motional molars or penrrnntlads
bout the val.
5, lloort j wady w 0 cons NWdrlo
addaana loads from ONO on wi Mild De
wwidred.
0.n�mame wnrInnv- a.? -+br'�
7. Mewl rrlpranon a sdmraoe Into badOIa.
IL sider mord slob* d aOatom*.
wr ,* w ,
Da
1-500 -2
• • :4t. ,.- ,'aHa'R,7. "Y ✓':t'1r�Yta�trtf�
�shr•MY�Y.m,.,wlt -:n.w +tvM*:a1i•R?K•n. M1'.\'.wr,ruC i'}r; Y'ld
z
X w
2
6U
00,
W W.
N LL
w O
d
= a.
F- _;
z �.
F- O
�p
U
O D
� H
utw •
._
u. O
l..z,
.0.22
0 H
O
z
i
City of Tukwila
John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
January 17, 1995
Mr. Howard Turner
Tumer & Associates
18420 24th Place NE
Seattle, Washington 98155
Revisions to B95 -0110, B95 -0111 &
Retaining wall permit application
Dear Howard:
Revisions to the above building permits are currently being reviewed in the Department of Community
Development. They must also be routed to Public Works and to the Building Department prior to
acceptance.
The retaining wall and drainage must be submitted as a separate permits to the Building and Public
Works Departments. An utility permit will be required for the drainage.
I reviewed the letter from your geotechnical engineer on the wall design and note that the design does
not meet the geotech's recommendations in several areas. It is likely that if you submit the wall as shown,
we will ask that it be re- designed to meet your geotech's recommendations. This will delay the permit
process.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether you will be re- designing the wall for this submission, as
it affects review of the landscaping in this area. As a preliminary comment, the landscaping does not
meet the zoning code's 5'side yard landscaping requirements. Also note that the landscaping proposal
does not reflect what is physically possible, given the design of the wall. These inconsistencies may delay
the review process.
On another subject, the design of the clock for Park Place will be approved administratively. You wiljnot
have to return to the Planning Commission for review of this feature.
Sincerely,
Diana Painter
Associate Planner
cc Roy. Bennion
John Anderson
Shawn Parsons
Steve Lancaster
Joanna Spencer
Duane Griffin
prmit:prkttr55
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206).431-3670 • Fax (206) 4313665
.„1160!!!1_
Since 1985
CATHCART LANDSCAPE SERVICES, INC.
January 17, 1996
P.O. Box 2428 • Redmond, WA 98073
Phone/Fax (206) 836 -9414
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste. #100
Tukwila, WA 98188
Attn: C. Gary Schulz
Re: Park Place Tree Planting
Dear Gary,
In response to your letter dated 1 -9 -96 which we received 1 -15 -96 I was moved
to physically inspect this work myself as I had not been there prior to 1- 15-96.
My inspection revealed the following.
I counted 165 planted trees which;.it appears we owe you 10 more to reach the
plan count of 175 trees.
The species of trees that have been planted are Douglas Fir, Western Hemlock
and Bid Leaf Maple. As you know all of these trees are saplings and this
being true makes it particularly difficuty to define or identify these small
maple saplings that have been planted in the woods.
What appears on initial inspection that 3 -4 plants (Western Hemlock trees)
have been planted together or in a group in one hole. However, these
Western Hemlock were received with multiple stems per one gallon container.
Therefore, they were planted as a singular tree and are only counted as a
singular tree. The remainder of the trees we can plant will probably be
Western Red Cedar for the fourth speces of trees.
Should you be interested in an inspection with me on this please give me
a call.
cc: Steve Lancaster DCD Director
Diana ,Painter, DCD:Associate.Planner`
Duane Griffin, Building Official
Shawn Parsons, LA LandPlan P.S.
_....-.. o. w+ ,xTiT'11Y,4�Yb:,(�eS�i�+.YF�Y?i r kY,AY•iPA _ _ .
JAN 1. ti 1996
CO:l`i:,;4s'i��!
DD PMENT
3U
0 0:
MIL:
W 0:
Ji
d.
F— W;
Z
1- 0'0
Z
n O':
'= W
Oy,
Z
cu
1= f..
;.
Geo4o,Engineers
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWILA
JAN 1 2 1996
PERMIT CENTER
Mr. Roy Bennion
800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3700
Seattle, Washington 98104
January 12, 1996
Consulting Engineers
and Geoscientists
Offices in Washington,
Oregon, and Alaska
Geotechnical Consultation
"Ultrablock" Retaining Wall East of Building A
Park Place Project
17501 Southcenter Parkway
Tukwila, Washington
File No. 3944 -004 -01 -1130
This letter summarizes our geotechnical consultation related to a retaining wall to be
installed along the east side of building A at the Park Place project site in Tukwila, Washington.
We have reviewed various concepts for the wall which have been developed by Turner &
Associates in conjunction with Shutler Consulting Engineers, Inc., Bush, Roed & Hitchings, Inc.
and Landplan, P.S. The preferred concept includes a concrete ("Ultrablock") wall used to retain
structural fill for the parking area east of building A. The wall will have a length of about 78
feet, and will extend along the southeast property line (near the adjacent furniture store). We
understand that the maximum grade difference between the new parking area and the existing
parking area for the furniture store will be about 6 feet. This grade difference is being confirmed
by Bush, Roed & Hitchings.
Cross section A -A, prepared by Landplan, P.S., shows the proposed "Ultrablock" wall with
a wall height of 4.5 feet and a backslope of about 2H:1V (horizontal to vertical). The total
horizontal distance from the toe of the wall to the edge of the new pavement will be 6 feet. The
wall is shown as two blocks high (each block having a height of 2.5 feet) and a batter of 1H:4V.
The backslope is to be covered with topsoil. We understand that ornamental trees might be
planted at intervals just behind the wall.
Based on our review and experience with various types of retaining walls in this area, we
conclude that the concept shown in Section A -A is generally adequate. We have the following
recommended modifications:
• The backslope behind the wall should be inclined no steeper than 2H:1V.
• The wall face batter could be steepened to 1H:6V, if needed. This would help achieve a
flatter backslope.
GeoEngineers, Inc.
8410 154th Avenue N.E.
Redmond, WA 98052
Telephone (206) 861 -6000
Fax (206) 861 -6050
Printed !on ;:recycled, "paper,
4'.I 41OluYl piii�,kGlwl kGa✓ Ssl..�r�
• J
Mr. Roy Bennion .'"Th,
January 12, 1996
Page 2
• Any loose or disturbed soils on the slope face along the alignment of the wall which result
from construction should be recompacted, if practical, or removed and replaced with
suitable structural fill soil that is compacted to a firm, unyielding condition. It may be most
effective to remove this material and replace it with compacted drainage material as the
blocks are placed.
• Root balls for the ornamental trees to be planted behind the wall should be placed into flat -
bottomed notches cut into the existing fill slope, rather than placing the topsoil cover
around the root balls on an inclined existing fill surface.
• The perforated pipe shown in Section A -A can be bedded in the same granular soil used as
a base beneath the wall and can be terminated in a french drain sump in the landscape
island located near the east end of the wall. Based on the limited size of the catchment area
behind the wall, the flow of water in the perforated pipe should be relatively low.
(frOirtai.
•o
We trust that this information meets your present needs.
concerning this letter, please contact us.
,
^ • J: • 21 "1 �itn
\1�� '. 09 A •'' 4"'''
tr rC
EXPIRES d5- 23-96
HRP:JKT:wd
Document ID: 3944004.BLK
Two copies submitted
cc: Mr. Howard Turner (2 copies)
Turner & Associates
18420 - 24th Pl. NE
Seattle, WA 98115
Jack R. Bennett, Inc.
927 N. Northlake Way, Ste. 330
Seattle, WA 98103
Attn: Mr. Jack Bennett
G e o E n g i n e e r s
If you have any questions
Yours very truly,
GeoEngineers, Inc.
Jalmtdr-
Herbert R. Pschunder, P.E.
Senior Engineer
Wok
/3dei
Jack K. Tuttle, P.E.
Principal
Bush, Roed & Hitchings, Inc.
2009 Minor Ave. E.
Seattle, WA 98102 -3513
Attn: Mr. John Anderson
Landplan, P.S.
600 Main St., Suite D
Edmonds, WA 98020
Attn: Mr. Shawn Parsons
W
re 2
:U) W:
W =;
CO
Wo.
W
z�
ti
'WW!
U
u-~O..
•
W Z`
U —1
File No. 3944-004-01-1130
Geo
,•••"`N.
ngineers
Mr. Roy Bennion
800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3700
Seattle, Washington 98104 .
•
January 17, 1996
Consulting Engineers
and Geoacientlats
Offices in Washington,
Oregon, and Alaska
Addendum to Oeotechnical Consultation
"Ultrablock" Retaining Wall East of Building A
Park Place Project
17501 Southcenter Parkway
Tukwila, Washington
File No. 3944-004-01-1130
This letter is an addendum to our letter dated January 12, 1996 in which we summarized
our geotechnical consultation related to an Ultrablock retaining wall to be installed along the east
side of building A at the Park Place project site in Tukwila, Washington.
We have made a further review of the drainage requirements for the wall as shown on the
cross-section prepared by Landplan, P.S. The primary sources of infiltration into the drainage
material behind the block wall will be irrigation water or rainfall. The pavement above the wall
will be sloped to drain away from the wall. As such, the volume of Water collecting in the
drainage material behind the wall will be small and will not, in our opinion, require a tight line
disposal outlet.
We recommend that the following design changes be made to provide for the relief of any
water which may collect behind the wall;
• The block wall should be constructed with the toe set back three inches from the
adjoining property line. In order to accommodate this setback without changing the planned
alipment of the top of the blocks, the batter of the face of the blocks should be steepened
to 1 (horizontal): 6 (vertical). This will not materially affect the stability of the wall.
• The base row of blocks is to be founded on a layer of the same clean, free-draining
granular material placed behind the blocks. The area along the wall alignment should be
excavated to permit placement of a zone of this material to a depth of at least six inches
below the base of the blocks. This zone should also extend to the adjoining property line.
• After the lowest course of blocks has been set, the space between the face of the blocks
and the existing pavement along the wall should be filled with the free-draining granular
GeoEngineets, Inc.
8410 154di Avenue ME,
Redmond, WA 98052
1Wephone (206)861-6000
Fax (206) 861-6050
lir
VenrititTIMINKM47.771r
grivir...fiewilitp#01
71fiffeliTi 4",.; t ; , ;
.."4 1-• 2 9•••• .2a;47::„. • • I ' s' • ••r• " • • r • . • •
Mr. Roy Herndon
January 17, 1996
Page 2
material. This will create a free path for seepage if water should collect in the drainage
zone behind the blocks.
By creating a flow path for seepage in this manner, the level of any saturated backfill'behind the
blocks will be limited to the level of the lower adjoining pavement. Any seepage at the edge of
the pavement will be minor and, during the wet season, likely indistinguishable from rainfall
collecting on the surface. The amount of irrigation water applied during the summer months can
be limited to avoid seepage at the base of the wall.
We trust that this information meets your present noeds. If you have any questions
concerning this letter, please contact us.
KRP:JKT:wd
Document ID; 3944004.82
Yours .very truly,
GeoEngineers, Inc.
Jack K. Tuttle, P.E.
Principal
Two copies submitted
cc: Mr. Howard Turner (2 copies)
Turner & Associates
18420 - 24th Pl. NE
Seattle, WA 98115
Jack R. Bennett, Inc.
927 N. Nortblake Way, Ste. 330
Seattle, WA 98103
Attn: Mr. Jack Bennett
EXPIRES fa
Bush, Roed & Hatchings, Inc.
2009 Minor Ave. E.
Seattle, WA 98102 -3513
Attn: Mr. John Anderson
Landplan, P.S.
600 Main St., Suite D
Edmonds, WA 98020
Atm: Mr. Shawn Parsons
Q e o 8 n g i n a e r 1
File No. 3944-004-01 -1130
TO: Diana Painter (City of Tukwila)
FROM: Ed Mah (David Evans and Associates, Inc.)
DATE: January 9, 1996
SUBJECT: PARK PLACE PROJECT
JAN 0 , 1996
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
�
W,
2
U O
Diana, in case you could not understand my cryptic notes on the retaining wall sections you ,co o
had faxed to me, I have enclosed a list of written comments: ' in w
w =:
J F-',
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS w o
2
1. Provide minimum of 6" of asphalt paving between the backside of extruded curbs ,
and the edge of paving to provide adequate support for the curb when it is impacted co ,
by a car wheel. This is especially important when the ground slopes down and away x W
from the edge of paving because the ground below the paving tends to erode away 'z x!
creating pockets for settlement of the paving itself. On Section A -A, this would z o
mean that the 4' concrete retaining wall may have to be a 5' wall to maintain a • w of
maximum 1H to 1V planted slope. D o`
o
. The asphalt paving surface should drain away from the edge of downward sloped :o
planting areas to prevent runoff from eroding the slopes. x cwi
Lt. E-;
O,�
. Lawn should not be specified on any of the sloped planting area due to inaccessibility
for maintenance. Evergreen groundcovers that would stabilize the slopes and maybe fu
cascade over the walls might be a better choice. i I
z
SECTION AeA
1. Detail does not indicate the size of the tree that is to be planted. Given the limited
area between the wall drainage backfill and the edge of the asphalt paving above, the
landscape architect needs to check that the size tree he is specifying will fit in this
narrow space and that the tree species selected does not have an aggressive root
system. As a side note, my experience has been that the 6" of drainage backfill
specified actually comes to around 12" or more when the Contractor installs it, which
further reduces the area for planting.
It appeared to me that the 6" thick wall is not substantial for the height of the wall.
In checking with one of the engineers here, he said he would recommend an 8" wall
to achieve a minimum 6" of actual supporting wall assuming a minimum of 1 -1/2"
cover of concrete over the steel. A 6" thick wall will theoretically give you a 4"
actual supporting wall.
2/I 'd
•o3 - -7 / / P./ 'weeroo
Cli ww A aL
eZ`` J 7OS S Si.i (HAG WdEt' :20 a 96,60 de re'
d� it a L�_ �.,, �<," :CZ D
Diana Painter (City of Tukwila)
January 9, 1996
Page 2
SECTION B -B
JAN 0 9 1996
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
1. I would recommend that a 1 H to 12 V batter be indicated for the face of the rockery
wall.
. Recommend a minimum distance of 3' between the face of wall and backside of curb
to accommodate a majority of car overhangs.
SECTION C -C
1. Y would recommend that a 1H to 12V batter be indicated for the face of the rockery
wall.
A 2 to 3 man -rock is more like 18" in depth. The drawing scales approximately 12 ".
Recommend a minimum distance of 3' between the face of wall and backside of curb
to accommodate a majority of car overhangs.
u:\winvorAtemplate\des_mem.dot
OOSSti '8 SNUA3 QIAWQ Wdt7P :20 96. 60 Nur
♦ JAN 09 '96 08154AM filal
J
L A ;41 Fr
Post -it Fax Note 7671.
•
Vii. M-flip
1
Paged
At.%:41111111111
%;44takirA
JAN 0 9 1996
C ivliALNT {.
ME' Nrr
1
•1
z /T'd
UNITY
D %ELOPMEND
OOSSd '8 SNdA3 QIAdW WdZt':ZT 96, 60 WI'
z
�Z,
re
6
w.
JU
U 0-
co
W = '.
J 1.-,
N u.
W0.
uQ
=0
�1
z�
z0..
ui
2
n 0
0 Hi
W W
U
IL I-
- 0:
Z'
O I!
TURNER & ASSOCIATES
January 3, 1996
Ms. Diana Painter
Associate Planner
Department of Community Development
City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, WA. 98188
RE. Park Place Retail Center
17858 Southcenter Parkway'
Tukwila, WA
Dear Diana,
18420 24th Place N.E., Seattle, WA 98155 (206) 365 -7431
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWILA
JAN 0 4 1996
PERMIT CENTER
In response to your letter of December 29, see the attached revised architectural drawings rev
1/3/96 and landscape drawings rev 1/2/96:
S. side yard landscaping; Trees are being provided as requested, at 30' on center. A
continuous rockery will be installed at the bottom of the slope for approximately 145', to
provide a more gentle slope for planting. The height of the rockery is to be 2' -5" at it's tallest,
tapering to 2' as it moves east. The top of the rockery will be a minimum of 2' from the edge
of the parking stalls. The adjacent asphalt on the project side as well as on the Levitz side all
slopes away from the rockery, assuring that storm water is not introduced into the rockery
soils. The rockery will receive no surcharge of vehicle weight from the parking lot, as
illustrated with a dashed line and note in sections A -A and B -B on the landscape drawing L -1..
No guardrail is required at the edge of the rockery per Section 1712 of the 91 UBC, which
excepts vertical offsets less than 30 ".
North side yard landscaping; Landscape and irrigation plans have been changed.
Site Fprnishings & amenities; All trash receptacles, bike racks, and benches have been
coordinated between the architectural and landscape drawing. Exterior building lighting and
parking lot lighting tear sheets are being forwarded under separate cover. The fixtures are the
same as the ones shown on the permit drawings, and have been delivered on the site.
Wetland planting & SAO mitigation; The wetland buffer area shall have additional "on-
site" topsoil installed to an approximate minimum depth of 9 ". Soil will meet the existing
asphalt elevation and provide a more uniform slope down to the fabric fencing at the bottom
of the slope. At the southern end of the wed and buffer are, existing alder and underlying
blackberry bushes will be removed. The area will be grubbed out and rough graded to provide
,J U•
UO
rn P
cnw
W=
• N w
w of
J
:
•
I-w
z�!
:w w
• w w
O: •
z.
z. ... .
a more gentle and uniform slope to the fabric fence as well. Moving north along the west
property line„ the steepest area will receive 6" to 12" of on -site soils with the existing quarry
spalls dispersed. More soil will then be added adjacent to the filter fabric to lessen the slope.
The triangular area shall have an existing "ridge" portion flattened to provide a more gentle
and uniform slope. Rough grading with "on- site" soils will provide uniform sloping
throughout. Proposed plantings as shown on drawings shall be adjusted in the field as
necessary to provide the best match between growing media, environment, and plantings.
Total number of plants to remain the same; however, locations may vary.
Monitoring plan; See sheet L4 & 5
Bonds; Work is to begin immediately, but may be affected by weather. City and owner will
re- review level of completion at time of final inspection, and then decide whether to bond or
not.
Screening of loading areas; Landscape and irrigation plans have been changed.
London plane trees; Landscape and irrigation plans have been changed.
Aggregate planters; Landscape and irrigation plans have been changed.
Pruning of evergreen trees at entry; Landscape and irrigation plans have been changed.
Specialty paving; Architectural plans have been changed. See SK 71, 102, 104. The dark
gray /green color is being used.
Additional sidewalk area; Architectural plans have been changed. See SK 71. Landscape
and irrigation plans have been changed as well.
Transom bar detail, C2; Architectural plans have been changed. See SK 71.
Vertical mullions, Cl & C2; Architectural plans have been changed. See SK 71. The
spacing was dictated by Office Max's vestibule. The need for symmetry between C 1 and C2
will require that Borders TI drawings be changed to meet the mullion spacing.
Entry opening size; The change in opening size from 12' to •14' will not change the structure
of the building.
Clock; Architectural plans have been changed. See SK 71. Colored renderings of the clock
will be provided by Tubeart, the manufacturer, under separate cover.
Bike racks; Architectural plans have been changed. See SK 71. Landscape plans have been
changed as well.
ADA requirements; Architectural plans have been changed. See SK 71. 78, 79, 80.
Bollards; TSA has not agreed to reduce the number of bollard in front of their store. See the
attached SK 88 for all on site bollard locations, both stainless steel types in front, and painted
steel types at utility areas.
Storefront entries; At this time, it appears that all but Linen n Things entry will be z
completed. Every effort will be expended to install the tenants door; however, due to long
lead time, it may be necessary to bond around this one. We will keep you informed of our re
progress. If, at the time of the shell final inspection, the door has not been delivered, we
c.)!
propose securing the opening with a good grade of painted plywood.
(.0 tij
Lighting fixtures; Exterior building lighting and parking lot lighting tear sheets are being , 9
;
forwarded under separate cover. The fixtures are the same as the ones shown on the permit
drawings, and have been delivered on the site. 2 :
u. <'
u) D
UL
Sincerely, ' z i
I-- a
zi--.
2 D,
ward R. Turner, MA D Ot • 0 (0
0
0 I-;
111 WI
— cc
•
encl.: SK-71,78,79,80, all revised 1/3/96, Li through L5 revised 1/2/96
cc: Roy Bennion, P3
Shawn Parsons, Landplan
Steve Norman. WGC
City of Tukwila
John W. R. ts, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
December 29, 1995
Mr. Howard Tumer
Turner & Associates
18420 24th Place NE
Seattle, Washington 98155
Mr. T. Shawn Parsons
Landplan PS
600 Main Street, #D
Edmonds, Washington 98020
• Re: sketches.71, 78, 79, 80
L7, L2, L3, L4, L5
The following comments reflect discussions in our meeting of December 27, 1995, comments made on
the mark -ups to the above sketches on December 22, 1995, and comments made in my letter of
December 21, 1995 on requested changes to landscape plans. They represent changes I anticipate in
the final drawings, which will constitute revisions to building permits B95 -0110 and B95 -0111. Please give
me a call if you have any comments or additions.
South side yard landscaping
Deciduous trees will be added. The embankment created by final grading appears to be a real
problem In terms of future planting. It may not even meet UBC code. It also appears to be a problem
in terms of future maintenance and liability. Please advise as to how to solve this problem.
North side yard landscaping
Additional landscaping will be added, so that there is one 6' walkway through the landscaping, at the
appropriate location.
Site furnishings & amenities
Tear sheets for the benches were submitted. The same manufacturer is making the trash receptacle.
We still need to get tear sheets for exterior building lighting and parking lot lighting.
Wetland planting & SAO mitigation
Gary met on -site with landscape architect and others. Steve visited site to inspect wetland area Roy and
Steve discussed changes to wetland planting plan and fill. Gary will follow up with landscape architecture
team.
Monftering plan
Gary made suggested changes to monitering plan language. Shawn will revise.
Bonds
Gary would prefer that wetland planting and tree replacement planting be done, rather than bond for the
whole amount. Roy agreed. Gary and landscape architect and contractor will proceed with work, and
landscape bonds will be amended accordingly.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
The amended amount of the cash assignment for the Linden trees was approved. Cash assignment will
be established prior to issuing C of 0.
Screening of loading areas
Deciduous trees are being added to the side yard at the south end. Shawn has added columnar trees
at the loading dock for Building D.
London Plane trees
Larger caliper trees are going to be added to compensate for the existing London plane in the southwest
comer that was going to be moved, and now has been removed.
Aggregate planters
These planters will be removed from project.
Pruning of evergreen trees at entry
Pruning of these trees will be modified according to site specific conditions.
Specialty paving
Specialty paving will be changed to a large square pattern, so it will be easier to detail and execute.
Finish will be slate texture and dark grey patina, with 'semi - gloss' finish.
Additional sidewalk area
Please respond to suggestion for additional sidewalk area between Building C2 and Building D (Sheet
L5, Sk 71). I think this would be an improvement for pedestrian flow, and would not negatively impact
, planting plan if Katsura tree could be moved over and replace one of the cedars. Please comment.
Transom bar detail, C2
Howard will add an aluminum strip to make C2 look like C1. Modification of original plan is necessary
because different doors have been ordered for different tenants.
Vertical mullions, C1 & C2
A demising wall made it necessary to change the location of vertical window mullions.
Entry opening sizes, C1 &.C2
These minor modifications won't affect the structure of the building.
Clock
Howard will supply a scale drawing and colored rendering of this feature for City review. The clock will
appear on revisions to Sketch 71.
Bike racks
Remove northernmost bike rack when add sidewalk in this location.
ADA requirements
Handicap parking stalls on south side of Building B will be moved to east side of Building B. All handicap
walkways from parking lots will have ramps or depressed paving areas to sidewalk. All ADA features will
meet code requirements.
Bollards
Bollards are ok as proposed. Reduce number of bollards at Building D from six to four if possible. Put
bollards only in front of buildings that need them.
2
t
Storefront entries
Storefront entries must appear finished for final inspection.
lighting fixtures
Supply City with tear sheets for all exterior building lighting and
installed for final inspection.
Please call me as soon as possible if you have any comments or
is different from mine.
Sincerely,
packing lot lighting. These must be
suggestions, or if your understanding
Diana Painter
Associate Planner
cc Roy Bennion
Steve Lancaster
Duane Griffin
Jack Pace
Gary Schulz
3
ILA,
tfaz I 1.41.4740°11.1
1908
`y ' City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor
r
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
December 21, 1995
Mr. Shawn Parsons
Landplan PS
600 Main Street, Suite D
Edmonds, Washington 98020
Re: Park Place landscape plan revisions
Dear Shawn:
I've reviewed the 10 -26 -95 revision submittals for your formal landscape plan for Park Place, and left the
marked -up drawings in a package at the job shack for you. I've issued a letter to Roy, authorizing him
to start work on relocating the Linden trees prior to revisions for the overall landscape plan. Please make
revisions as noted below and on the marked -up drawings, and re- submit as soon as possible. We need
ten copies of all five sheets; four copies for Public Works, two copies for Building, and two copies for DCD.
The following is a list of requested revisions and clarifications. They are requested to fulfill code
requirements, BAR conditions, and modifications to conditions based on previous discussions. If you
recall, the full landscape plan was reviewed before the BAR December 15, 1994. The project was
subsequently reviewed before the BAR, but only specific issue areas were addressed. Certain significant
changes in the landscape plan, such as removal of most of the cedar trees on the southern border and
removal of the northernmost London Plane tree, were made after initial BAR approval and have never
been reviewed by the BAR. Therefore, certain changes are requested to ensure that final landscaping
more closely resembles the plan approved by the BAR.
Sheet L1
1. Side yard landscaping. The code requires five feet of side yard landscaping (TMC 18.52.020).
This is an unusual site due to the shared parking situation. I interpret the side yards to be the
area between Levitz and Building A, and between the Park Place and Winners parking area.
These two strips need to be fully planted.
The plans indicate in notes that ivy is provided next to Levitz, and in the planting plans Pernettya
shrubs are provided. Please provide both. I also suggest that deciduous trees also be added
to the area in which the cedar hedge was removed. This will have the added benefit of providing
additional screening for the loading dock on Building A, which is a requirement.
2. Screening of loading areas. The planting that screens the loading dock at Building D has been
changed from your initial proposal, and appears to be inadequate to screen the loading dock.
I have a note on your 7 -21 -95 submittal that this planting area was to be revised, and this is not
reflected on your current plan. This planting needs to be reinforced for screening purposes.
3. London plane trees. We requested that two or more 3' to 31/2' caliper London plane trees be
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 4313665
• z
U O'
l N
co Ill
w O
D. d'
Z
w=
p;
;O.N
w W;
V ; ■
U. O;
iii Z;
co
OH-
Z
added to the landscape plan to compensate for the London plane tree that was removed. We
asked that these trees not merely be called out as one of the landscape island trees (letter dated
10- 24 -95). I understand, however, that even though one of your 'replacement' trees is in the
place of what would be an ordinary landscape island tree, you feel that the larger caliper
compensates for this.
Call out larger caliper tree on all three 'replacement' trees. Put new London plane tree in
landscape buffer area on L1 sheet as well as wetland buffer planting sheet. Show 'tree W' as
being both pruned and moved in your notes and on the drawing.
4. Katsura trees. Call out Katsura trees as 14' - 16'. This is what we requested in design
conditions, and also what you've provided in plant schedule in L5.
5. Linden tree replacement. The dead Linden tree along the street frontage should be replaced
with a 4 1/2' caliper tree, rather than 3 1/2' as noted. This is based on the fact that we will be
replacing any trees that do not survive along this frontage with 4 1/2' caliper trees.
It may be that all ten of the Lindens will be relocated. See memo dated 12- 19 -95.
6. Aggregate planters. Please show location of all ten aggregate planters, on L1, L3 and L5 as
appropriate. Also, I note that these planters are listed in the site amenities specifications list on
L5. I had understood that these were to be used because they existed. Personally, I don't think
they add much to the landscape scheme, and I am concerned that their placement will impede
pedestrian flow and ADA passage requirements. My preference would be to eliminate these, but
I understand that they've been part of the scheme all along.
Pruning of existing evergreens at entry. I have asked in the past that the existing evergreens
at the main entry to the project not be radically 'pruned up.' On your pruning detail, it shows
what I would consider a moderate pruning, but the note calls out that 25% of the tree will be
removed. This is unacceptable. In addition, it is confusing to have apparently contradictory
information in the notes vs. the drawing. Please modify.
8. Drawing conventions. Please show all trees to be replaced on the landscape plan as new trees,
in addition to calling them out in your table. It makes the drawings easier to read. Thanks.
Sheet L2
9. Protection barricade.. The tree protection barricade detail should be crossed out or removed.
This was never done, and since plans provide a record of the project, it shouldn't be on the
drawing.
10. Relocation of Lindens detail. Add note, 'Reduction of berm height not to exceed 30'.
11. Deciduous tree pruning. Is this detail necessary? You've provided tree specific pruning
diagrams for nearly all trees to be retained, to my knowledge.
Also, the 'typical' pruning concept illustrated in this detail appears to contradict the pruning
concept illustrated on the individual tree diagrams. In the drawings, the vertical growth is cut
back and horizontal branching encouraged. On the tree - specific pruning diagrams, it appears
as though the opposite concept is employed. Please clarify.
12. Evergreen tree pruning. See Note 7 above.
(")
Sheet L4
13. Bond estimate for wetland plantings. It is our preference that the wetland plantings be
completed within the next six weeks, rather than providing a bond for the full amount and
completing wetland plantings at a later date. If this is possible, the bond amount for the plantings
will be reduced.
Sheet L5
14. Retention of plantings in wetland area. All plant materials in the identified wetland buffer have
been removed, in contradiction to goals stated on drawing. The area has been partially filled.
It is difficult to tell, from work done on the site, whether or not you will be able to achieve your
required 25' enhanced wetland buffer with planned curb line and parking area. The enhanced
wetland buffer is a code requirement. Please call Gary Schulz at 431-3662 for further comments
on the wetland planting details.
LLI
°
g 7:1
15. Site furnishings and amenities. Site fumishings and amenities will also appear on the drawing u_
that Howard is preparing on the exterior architectural details and site design that is the (0 -I' • — a
responsibility of the shell architect. w
0
CU up
2 m,
ift'
CU
U..
Z =
111 U)■
1-
Litter containers. I haven't seen the tear sheet for this item. Please provide.
Benches. Please provide tear sheet.
Street planter. See Note 6.
Poured-in-place concrete planters. Note says that these will be designed later. By whom? What
are they going to look like?
Specialty concrete. This may change. See letter dated 12-20-95.
Bond estimates.
The bond estimate for replacing the Lindens is fine. Please check with Gary about the other bond
estimates. Cash assignments must be in place before a Certificate of Occupancy will be issued.
Let me know if you have any questions; 431-3661.
Sincerely,
• Diana Painter
Associate Planner
cc Jack Pace
Steve Lancaster
Gary Schulz
Roy Bennion
Howard Turner
City of Tukwila
John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
December 20, 1995
Mr. Howard Turner
Turner & Associates
18420 24th Place NE
Seattle, Washington 98155
Park Place paving pattern
Dear Howard:
I checked out the stamped concrete paving finishes at the job shack. As far as the finish
goes, I like either of the darker finishes. The lighter finish doesn't seem consistent with
the slate texture, or whatever type of stone they are trying to emulate.
In terms of the tile pattern itself, I prefer the 17" hexagon tile that was specified by the
landscape designer, and reviewed and approved by the Board of Architectural Review,
because the pattern and scale is more in keeping with the overall design of other exterior
details of the project. However, if the geometry of the octagon is more in keeping with
the geometry of the small plaza areas, I can understand how that tile pattern would be
preferable.
More important than the pattern and color, in my mind, is the way the stamped finish is
going to 'meet' the brushed concrete finished areas, in terms of maintenance, safety and
aesthetics. Please provide a sketch of how the stamped areas are going to be finished
in relationship to the poured concrete areas, and I will give you a final response.
Sincerely,
Diana Painter
Associate. Planner
cc Roy Bennion
prmt:prkltr46
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
••• v�:.•.... ••ir;:Y�a':1aw,a;Jayiit;hC•
City of Tukwila
John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
Mr. Howard Tumer
Tumer & Associates
18420 24th Place NE
Seattle, Washington 98155
Re Revisions to B95 -0110, B95.0111 &
Retaining wall permit application
Dear Howard:
Revisions to the above building permits are currently being reviewed in the Department of Community
Development. They must also be routed to Public Works and to the Building Department prior to
acceptance.
The retaining wall and drainage must be submitted as a separate permits to the Building and Public
Works Departments. An utility permit will be required for the drainage.
I reviewed the letter from your geotechnical engineer on the wall design and note that the design does
not meet the geotech's recommendations in several areas. It is likely that if you submit the wall as shown,
we will ask that it be re- designed to meet your geotech's recommendations. This will delay the permit
process.
Please let me know as soon as possible whether you will be re- designing the wall for this submission, as
it affects review of the landscaping in this area As a preliminary comment, the landscaping does not
meet the zoning code's 5'side yard landscaping requirements. Also note that the landscaping proposal
does not reflect what is physically possible, given the design of the wall. These inconsistencies may delay
the review process.
On another subject, the design of the clock for Park Place will be approved administratively. You wil not
have to return to the Planning Commission for review of this feature.
Sincerely,
Diana Painter
Associate Planner
cc Roy Bennion
John Anderson
Shawn Parsons
Steve Lancaster
Joanna Spencer
Duane Griffin
File
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 4313665
4.001Y.,§;':1
City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
Mr. Shawn Parsons
Landplan PS
18420 24th Place NE
Seattle, Washington 98155
Re Park Place, 1 -8 -96 submittal revisions
Dear Shawn:
I have received your revision submittal for sheet L1. As you are probably aware, a detail provided for the
retaining wall on the south side of the site was submitted by Howard on Thursday, January 4, 1966. At this
time, I accepted the overall submittal, but requested alteration of this detail, as it did not meet code
requirements. Howard was briefed on code issues in this area.
Howard indicated to me that the retaining wall in this area was to be a combination of retaining wall and
rockery, depending on site conditions. This would be acceptable. In your revised detail, however, it shows
a six foot rockery, which does not meet code (limit is 4'), it doesn't show adequate room for the tree, it creates
a dangerous situation in that the tree roots can push out the top rocks, and the detail does not provide for
drainage, which is also required.
The detail of the retaining wall and rockery must be approved by the Planning Division, Building Division,
and Public Works. I am returning your sheet L1 to you at this time. No further review of the project will
take place until appropriate revisions are complete, and no permits will be issued.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 431 -3661.
Sincerely,
Diana Painter
Associate Planner
Steve Lancaster
Joanna Spencer
Duane Griffin
Roy Bennion
Howard Turner
prmt:prkftr54
6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
Z!
fr
U
C) O;
'CO
w D'
gJ'
urQ
=d:
alt
W W:.
N€
0
;tu W`
0
w
0 .N
0~
10/10/95 13:56 FAX 206 682 1040
I .
p
S M S 21002
P-3 /PARKWAY, L.L.C.
800 FIFTH AVENUE • SUITE 3700 • SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 981043122 • (206) 682 -6868 • (FAX) 682 -1040
.:41 October 1995,
Ms. Diana Painter, AIC
Associate Planner
City of Tukwila Dept. Of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Blvd. uite 100
Tukwila, Washington 98 09
RE: Cottonwood T e Removal, Park Place Retail Project
VIA FACSIMILE
Dear Diana:
Shawn Parsons of La plan, on our behalf, has requested removal of four to five
cottonwood tress that, in this opinion, are hazardous and are in danger of falling
sometime in the future. We do not wish to remove these trees. The request is made
for safety purposes, not to change our landscaping plan.
He has informed us that his request is rejected unless we provide mitigation under the
tree removal. plan. I am again requesting permission to remove these trees. They are
hazardous trees as defined by the City of Tukwila Ordinance 1715. As such they are
exempt from the tree ordinance, as spelled out in Section VI of Ordinance 1715 and no
tree removal permit is required.
If permission is denied again, we will leave the trees in place, however, please be
advised that we will hold the City of Tukwila responsible should one the cottonwoods
fall causing damage or injury.
Sincerely
P-3 /Parkway, LLC
s elf it/O12GP
Roy T. Bennion
Manager
cc: Shawn Parsons, Landplan
Glen Amster, Lane Powell Spears Lubersky
Jack Pace, City of Tukwila
DA WINWORDWARKPLALITREE3 .00010l1196
10/10/95 13:57 FAX 206 682 1040
' I '
DpIAN
11,.
S S
• .
'1 • • • • .
'Landscape Architecture. . . • . . . . . • •
. . . . • . • •• . ' . . ..
. 4
• I . . • ' • . . ,
. •
•
. . . • •••.. '
• • - : • '•• • ••••
.•
September 27, 1995" _ .:: • :- .: . • 1 . ••• • • ::: ... : -: ... . — ... • • . .
1 . . •• . . .. ... . . , . • %
. . , • • , .
1 .. .• ... : . ::: City of Tukivila .. . • . . ' ' •
. . ... .
, • • • , .
' • •-• . ' ' -
, , • ,' - : • Department of Community Development ... ,: : ,,* . ' ., ...*. .. .... • ...• , :.. ' ', ' . . ,.•
• • . :' -. ' 6300 Sou- thcenter Boulevard Suite #109 '.' ., • ' • '' ." .. ' • '''' ' ' • " ' . ' '''' ••• '
. . . ., . ..
I ,. , , .,.. • ....,...,.! • ... Ttkwila,..WA• 981811 .: . ••• - ' .; .. .... .. ..... . .
• . . . , .. ., . •
1 ' - ' ' • •.' " " , ... , . . • , • , . ... • . : - . : • -
. • - .
. • . •
••••• • • •‘*" ..• . . • • • • ••• ,‘•••• • , : .
• .1
• .•
• • , • • •
. •• . • ' .
•
• A'TTN::. Diana Painter; DCD Associate Planner
• . .
• . .
• •••'• • '' •
• , R E Park Place etail Center f e Removal • • ....• . . • . '". . • • • .., • '.' . • •
Dear ' . • - ' • 1, . . - • : . . •
. „
• , • . • .
you'irfind Iwo (2) sketches the proposed tree removal area behind the newly • ;:••
.. •
!: • •'• retaining wag. • . : . 1. : . •
• • Thaive (5) lietain queStion,inattiret black cottonWOOd (Populp's trialiocarpa) trees,:are
• •
by the.w.all'S construction. ?Four (4) of the trees appear to be within five feet of the Wall; while: g.fift1).. . •
'.•.t7 • t •
• .• ;tree appears to be approximately ten feet from the back of the Wall. They may have sustaio.e0c)4.10 . •
• • c : root daMage;unaVoidable during Wall.construction, that could also ultimately' threaten the'siirViyability •
• • of the tree.' The likelihood of a "blow-down" has been increased because these trees are now . . :- • .
• trees and no longer have the protection of"down-slope" trees. The smaller alder trees ,
, • surrounding the five cottonwood species do pose a threat due to their diminutive size allowing
prevazhng winds to directly impact the cottonwood treas.'. 1 suggest that the five (5) trees in question..
. • ' • . be removed excepting the Stumps which should be left for stability purposes This .a.c.tion should •
bd taken before thp Seasonal rainibegin tO mize erosion:damage and potential .
you have an
. . ,
• ; ,SinCerel
• • •
• • • .
r comments, please don't hesitate•to call me.. ... • . • •
• :
. .
• .• T, •Shawn Persona, A.T.4 #307 • . • • . ,„ .
. • . - . .
• : --•
Principal/Landscape andscape Architect • . • • . • •• ..•.;
. •
. ,. • •• •.:, , • •
•
'•••-• •-•,.•
- • Eitinonds.•.: ••••i•••• •••• • • • • •
. . . .
. . . . . . . .
•
• • ••
....• • ..;
(208) 776-4932 •, ... • L.: • ' • ..•
• • (Fax) 774-7803 .;,.•••• •••• • . %. • : : . ••' • • .• ." !'•:„ . •• • ' • ;
' • z , • • • '
. . . . • ". . • • . •
" ' ' ' • • • '• • • • • ; ' •;•.: . ' • • . • • . • • • • •
••• •
1.1
z
re
D
-J
0 0
0
CO LW
•ui 0
2
:3.
v. a
iu •
z
o
z
WLIJ
2
.0
0 —
UJx
I—
IL I-
• — 0
Z:
.1
J+!
•
P -3 /PARKWAY, L.L.C.
800 FIFTH AVENUE • SUITE 3700 • SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104 -3122 • (206) 682 -6868 • (FAX) 682 -1040
Ms. Diana Painter, AICP
Associate Planner
City of Tukwila Dept. Of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Blvd.. Suite 100
Tukwila, Washington 98109
VIA FACSIMILE
Dear Diana:
This letter is in response to your letter of September 29, 1995 regarding certain
landscape related items and in preparation for a meeting with the appropriate parties at
the City of Tukwila.
1. London plane trees:.
As you have noted the Board of Architectural Review required the "developer to
ensure the survival of the existing London plane trees flanking the secondary
access drive just south of the Azteca restaurant." As we have pointed out in the
past, we believe the above requirement was in error in that the secondary
access drive to the south of Azteca (unlike the other two drives which serve our
property) is not and has not been owned by the developer and the flanking
London plane tress are not on our property. Nevertheless, we have instructed
our contractor to exercise caution when operating in the area of the flanking
trees. These trees are situated in the Azteca landscaping strip adjoining their
building's south side and have not been harmed. Two London plane trees were
located to the west of Azteca. One was removed, according to the approval
plans reviewed by your department because of water line construction through
its location. The other, along our south property line was barricaded. A steel
contractor placed rebar along that tree's north side, and removed the barrier.
We have removed the steel and rebarricaded the tree. The tree is unharmed
and healthy. No ditch has been dug adjoining the tree. No site excavation has
been done near the tree. The "excavation about a foot deep" near the tree you
call out in your letter was merely the removal of the existing extruded curb which
will be replaced as part of the new paving and landscape island design. Again
this tree is not south of Azteca. It was protected because we wanted the tree to
be protected and saved as shown on our plans. It is healthy.
RECEIVED
OCT 0 6 1995
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
October 3, 1995
Page 2
2. Relocation of Linden trees.
When this subject was proposed to the city, it was presented because the
existing berm totally blocks visibility of the parking lot and our retail tenants from
Southcenter Boulevard. The berm runs from 18 to 36 inches higher than the
curb of our redesigned parking lot. The whole purpose of reconfiguring the
berm is to provide visibility from Southcenter Blvd., which is lower than the site.
The visibility is needed for tenant recognition and for security. City of Tukwila
Police will drive Southcenter Parkway. They need to see into the site at night.
We are providing a security circuit for night lighting. If the police cannot see into
the site, they cannot observe problems. Unless we are allowed to reconfigure
as shown on our proposal, which includes reusing and saving the mature trees,
the entire purpose is lost. I understand that you have received but not yet
reviewed the plan submitted by Landplan. We are asking far less than what is
currently allowed other retail tenants in Tukwila. We did not propose removal of
all of the berm, no removal for its entire length.
3. Replacement of Oak Trees at Entrance Drive.
Some of the trees at the entrance drive suffered from lack of water or care in
the past prior to our ownership. Since we acquired the site (April 25, 1995)
these trees have not been impacted by construction activity as you assert in
your letter. There has been no construction activity near the entrance trees.
Our landscape design has suggested replacement of some of these trees
showing dieback even at the time of our purchase.
4. Removal of All Mature Site Landscaping.
The architect, landscape designer and developer requested retention of the
existing parking patterns. We were only allowed to retain the old pattern as part
of "compact parking" near the Azteca restaurant. We then bid an overlay of the
new parking plan required by the City of Tukwila and preserved every tree that
occurred in an area of the new parking landscape areas that were large enough
and not otherwise impacted by required utility trenching. Statements that the
site has been "completely denuded" and that "no visible effort has been made to
retain mature landscaping in the interior of the site" are false. New islands that
overlap existing trees to the north of Winners have been designed and will be
built. The same is true of some preserved trees to the west of Azteca and to the
north by Ethan Allen. We did the best we could while responding to the City
requirements. Please acknowledge our request to use the existing parking
pattern which would have preserved many more mature trees.
Our landscape architect did point out that most of the old island plantings were
London plane trees, in marginal condition and large enough (18 years after
planting) so that they posed a hazard to the paving. The new trees are uniform,
should be healthy and will not damage the lot. Landplan has stated that the
Linden trees along the berm are small enough to move and survive.
5. Tree Planting in Wetland and Sloped Areas
We are happy to discuss this matter with you. We are not aware of any site
construction runoff to the wetland area. Slopes are away from the area. The
RECEIVED
OCT 0 61995
COMMUivi°F Y
DEVELOPMENT
D: IWINWORDIPARKPLACITREE2 .DOCI10/3/95
.1 , ,,..p," .,. « w ~r. ni tn er ,°mgt
z;
re w
0
w w.
JZ�;
w,
wo
= d.
w
o
z t-
w w;
U 0'
o-
0 F-
w
w
O:.
uiz
z
October 3, 1995
Page 3
wall swale which is designed to run off water to surface irrigate the wetland is
not yet operational and does not yet connect to the wetland area.
Please let me know of your schedule and preference for meeting to discuss these
matters. I will try to be available to meet most times.
Sincerely
P -3 /Parkway, LLC
Roy I. Bennion
Manager
Cr AWINWORDWARKPLAC \TREE2.DOCJ10l3/95
RECEIVE')
OCT 0 61995
comiviu m .o.‘/I,.
OEVELOPMENT
TO:'CG1/2',gS
/CAE
FAX #: ZZ-3 -1103 .
Catty 0J I UKWiLd
FROM: )/i 7/-1- ,- 1')/A/7 -- . DATE: /
07v 0A -- � PAGES INCLUDING
/ Y 1743/ THIS PAGE:
FAX #:. PHONE #:'
m
John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
December 28. 1995
Mr. Howard Turner
Turner & Associates
18420 24th Place NE
Seattle, Washington 98155
Re Revision submittals for
B95 -0110, B95 -0111
Dear Howard:
As you know, we are waiting for revisions to the landscape plans (L1 -L5) and the
architectural plans (SK -71, 78, 79, 80), based on our meeting of 12- 27 -95. These will
constitute changes to permits B95 -0110 and B95 -0111, based on changes made in the field
and subsequent design changes on the project initiated by the applicant. We are also waiting
for a full set of tear sheets for all site furnishings and details.
The other piece of information we have been requesting since November 13, 1995 is an
illustration and specifications for the clock that will be placed on the pediment. We are very
pleased that you decided to go ahead with something like this - we suggested it months ago.
But, as I have indicated, we need to know what it looks like. This is something that the
Board of Architectural Review has never seen in design review for the project or signs.
I saw a small sketch of the clock, with colors and a description, that was in the file with the
pole sign application for the project. Based on this description, we need a scaled drawing
and colored rendering of what the clock will look like, lighted, in daylight hours.
Your initial proposal in this area was to have white neon lighting in the coved areas around
the pediment, and white flood lighting washing the face of the pediment. The current
proposal, apparently, is to delete the flood lighting, and add green neon lighting in the coved
areas. I understand that the clock will be outlined in orange neon, and the clock face will
be white with black letters. We need to have a rendering of this proposal in order to make
a determination as to whether the Board of Architectural Review should see it, and /or to
review /approve it administratively. It is part of the overall design of the project.
The timing on the landscape and architectural revisions to the building permits is critical.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
It is my understanding that you want to do some work in the field on the irrigation system
next week. In order to get your irrigation permit from Public Works, you need to have an
approved set of landscape plans, including irrigation. In order to have an approved set of
landscape plans, you need to have an approved set of architectural plans, as the landscape
plans and architectural plans need to correspond. Please give me a call if you have any
questions.
Sincerely, ,
Diana Painter
Associate Planner
Joanna Spencer
Jack Pace
Steve Lancaster
Roy Bennion
Shawn Parsons
Pam Combs
i rr
� M1
IANOPLIIN . p5,.Tra Y. • _- • P,.Si6'4:
'Landscape Architecture
December 20, 1995
City of Tukwila
De partment of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Blvd:, Suite #100.
Tukwila, WA 98188
TTN: Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner ,
E.
Park Place Tree Relocation "Cash Assignment"
ear. Diana:
As per your letter dated December 19, 1995, to Roy Bennion, additional "cash assignment" will
be required; to enable transplanting trees from the original seven street trees to the potential
replacement of ten: trees:_' The associated costs with the additional. trees would be an additional
$1,201.50 Total adjusted cost to be used for cash assignment for the South Center Parkway
"Linden Trees" would now be $5,406.50:
-If you should have any questions, please contact me:`
incerely,
T:.Shawn Parsons;.R.L.A. #307
Principal/Landscape Architect
• Roy Bennion.ParkPlace Partners
Main Street
Sul t e D ,
Edmonds,
Washington
8 8.0 2 0
(206) 77674832.
(Fax) 774 - 7803..
trr��
7/• •
:DEC 2 6 1995''.
DEVELOPKrii ENT
.
z •
' mow.
U 0-
yam;
w w'
CO LL:
w o'
g.
'1- 0.
• z
• 2o
o U)!.
.w w,
U
z.
ui CO
-'
�.
0
z
FRd•l • I'Ttm9erbon WP
INUDPLAN
• : "Landscape' Arcliitecture
' December 20, 1995
PHONE NO. • 208 7715 2299 Dec. 20 1395 •01.18PI1 P2
•
City of TLikwila . • :.
•Dopartment of.Community beiiclopment .
' ' • .6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 1400 • •
Tukwila, WA 98188'• •
ATTN: • ,Diana Painter, 1CD Associate Planner •
•
•
RE: ' Paik.Place Tree Relocation "Cash Assignment"
Dear Diana: •
•
•
Asper your, letterdated December 19, 1995, to Roy Bennion, Additional "cash assignment "'will
lie required :to enable transplanting trees•from the original seven street'trees to,the potential' •• • •
replacement of tep'trees, `The associated costs with the additional trees would be an additional ' •
• $1•,201.50, •Total•adjusted cost to:be used for'cash' •ssigmnent for the South Center Parkway
• "Linden Trees''' would• now be•S5,406.50 :• • •
• If you should have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely; ; • •
T.: Shawn :Parsons;RL.A,: #307
Principal/Landscape Architect' •
Roy'Bennioti, Park Place Partners
PO
Q • 0•• ;•0
• ' Slain Street • •
' Sui'te "D,
Edmondr,, •
*iashinAtint
• .9• g0•:.2 0
770 4i 32 '
'(Ppz n4.7903 •
I''"��1»n1
:DEG• 0 i9
C l.,) iAM l iii
DEVFLOPIVIENT
Idn
City of Tukwila
John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
Mr. Roy Bennion
800 Fifth Avenue
Suite 3700
Seattle, Washington 98104
Re Park Place Tree Relocation
Dear Roy:
This is to authorize you to proceed with the work of relocating the Linden trees along
Southcenter Parkway. As we agreed, you will be:
relocating seven and possibly up to ten Linden trees, depending on the
configuration of the berm;
lowering the berm an average of 24 ", not to exceed 30';
the configuration of the berm and , final location of the trees will be
according to the detail on the landscape plans;
and, final height of the berm will be height of the finished curb in the
parking area.
You will be revising the cash assignment to reflect potential replacement of ten trees.
I will be forwarding my comments on the overall landscape plan revisions to Shawn, so
he can revise plans and the plan revisions can be approved.
Sincerely,
Diana Painter
Associate Planner.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 4313665
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director
Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner
FROM: Gary Schulz, DCD Urban Environmentalist
DATE: December 18, 1995
RE: Parkway Place Retail Center #L94 -0084 -
Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan.
I visited the Southwest portion of the site today to review the condition of the buffer area
and check on the requested silt or barrier fencing. The area adjacent to the buffer is being
prepared for paving. Additional sand and gravel material is being placed for the base. As
a result, the buffer has had more fill graded into it and all the vegetation including young
trees have been removed. In addition, there has not been any fence installed at the edge
of the buffer.
I spoke with one of the construction supervisors and was told that his instructions were to
survey the new pavement edge and showed me the stakes. The new edge of pavement may
encroach into the wetland buffer setback but I did not have a measuring tape with me. He
hopes to have the area paved this week.
The old edge of pavement (now buried) was the agreed on location of the wetland buffer.
The current plan drawing for the buffer enhancement (Sheet L -5) states "Construction
personnel, equipment, and debris /trash are prohibited within the existing wetland boundaries
except for that necessary to implement this mitigation plan ". Also, "A temporary chain link
fence shall be installed along existing edge of pavement prior to any removal or resurfacing
activity to prevent encroachment during such activity. Buffer enhancement planting shall
occur only after all paving activity is complete ".
Because of the encroachment, there are no trees remaining in the buffer area. These notes
are visible on the plan and clearly state that the reduced buffer area was to be protected.
Per the SAO Chapter 18.45.080 (c) (E), I recommend that the Developer be required to
implement the plan immediately after the paving of the local area is complete. It seems
likely that the same contractor installing the traditional landscaping will also be able to install
the buffer enhancement plan. This will reduce bonding amount and the need to work on
this after permits are issued.
City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
er „28, 1995
Mr. Roy Bennion
Park Place Partners
800 5th Avenue, Suite 3700
Seattle, WA 98104
Re: Park Place - Wetland Buffer Enhancement & Tree Replacement.
Dear Mr. Bennion:
During routine inspections about two weeks ago, I visited your Park Place retail center
project on Southcenter Parkway. I observed some construction associated encroachment
into the reduced wetland buffer at the southwest corner of the site. Gravelly fill material
has been pushed into this area. As a result, on 11/15/95 I contacted your consultant, Mr.
Shawn Parsons at LandPlan P.S., to discuss the schedule for installing wetland buffer
plantings. We discussed the fill material placed in the buffer area, the timing of traditional
landscaping and wetland buffer enhancement, as well as Tree Permit plantings on the site's
steep slopes. He expressed a preference to wait until the parking lot was paved to install
all project landscaping.
Regarding the buffer encroachment that has occurred from the graded gravel fill, there
should have been a construction fence installed at the edge of the pavement and wetland
buffer. This is noted on the plans and in LandPlan's June 7, 1995 Memorandum. This fill
material is not suitable for plantings so will need to be removed. In addition, the siltation
fence should be moved from within the wetland buffer to the top of the bank and installed
to be functional.
At the time of planting the buffer area should be stripped of blackberry shrubs. A
significant amount of topsoil amendment will be needed throughout the proposed buffer
enhancement area to insure adequate rooting of the new plantings.
I reviewed the file and found that there are two letters sent to you that require the
performance . bond for tree and wetland plantings be posted prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy. In accordance with the Zoning Code, DCD prefers that the
plantings be installed prior to completion of the project. However, the planting schedule is
determined by several factors including weather and paving of the area adjacent to the buffer.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
Mr. Roy Bennion
November 28, 1995
Page 2
Because of the current construction schedule and wet conditions on the site, it may not be
appropriate to install wetland buffer plants until spring. However, landscape bids should be
solicited so the bonding is approved before you apply for the C of O. With the occurrence
of relatively warm weather, the tree replacement plantings for the Tree Permit can be
installed now. I recommend that you check into using forestry tree planters as they will be
less busy now and usually work on a "per tree" payment basis.
To summarize the intent of this letter, I have listed the following Tree Ordinance and
Sensitive Area Ordinance requirements that are connected to the Park Place development
schedule.
1) Install a functional siltation fence at the wetland buffer edge (top of bank) now that
will remain in place until parking lot or irrigation construction is completed.
Plant the seedlings per approved plans for the Tree Permit requirement by
December 20, 1995. This will reduce the overall performance bond amount. The
City will conduct an inspection for this Tree Permit requirement. Survival monitoring
will also be required for the Tree Permit at 1 year from the time of planting.
Submit the bid documents for determining performance bonds as soon as possible so
these requirements will not delay your project. Please keep Tree Permit and
Wetland Buffer Enhancement cost estimates or bids separate.
If you have any questions or requests related to this letter, please respond in writing to
Diana Painter as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
\ 1 i
C. Gary Schulz
Urban Environmentalist
cc: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director
Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner
Joanna Spencer, PW Project Engineer
Greg Villanueva, Utilities Inspector
Shawn Parsons,R.L.A., LandPlan P.S.
LANOPIAN P8.
Landscape Architecture
• • • ,;„- eCeiiibeil5;.'1995
. • • ' ' .
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite #100
Tulcvvila, WA 98188
TTN: Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner.
RE Park Place — Wetland Buffer Enhancement, Tree Replacement & South Center Parkway
"Linden Trees" ,
, .
Pursuant to our conversation, I have assembled costs related to three separatelandscape related
items requiring "bonds" for performance assurance. Specifically, the following are listed below •
for your records and reference:
1. Wetland Buffer Enhancement: Sheet L-4 as developed by LandPlan P.S.,'latest revision
• .dated 10/26/95, list the performance bond amount of $18,040.00.
• 2. Tree Replacement: Sheet L-1 illustrates the rectangular area requiring specific tree
• ' replacement. Cost associated with this planting including substantial completion inspection
and yearly follow-up visit is $1,520.00.
• ', 3. , South Center Parkway Linden Trees . Sheet L-1 illustrates specifically seven (7) trees to ,
be relocated and transplanted. Cost associated with this operation is based on the
assumption that all trees would have to be replaced with 41/2" cal. species. Associated cost
is $4,205.00.
•
•
6 0 0
• Main Street.
Suite D,
• Edmonds,
Washington
•9 8 .0 2 0
(206) 776-4932
(Fax) 774-7803
z
x
w
, z
n'
.j0.
00
w
w
CO
lu 0
Y2 a
1—
•Z 1.-
I-- 0
Z
ILI
2
D
0 —
CI
W ui
= 0
Z
U)
0
Page 2 of 2.- Letter to City of Tukwila
12-14-95 - RE: Park Place - Wetland Buffer Enhancement, Tree Replacement &
South Center. Parkway "Linden Trees"
Diana,: we would appreciate your assistance in expediting the necessary paper work for this work
be accomplished along the South Center Parkway is scheduled to occur Tuesday,
`December 19th
hank :you.: If you should have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me:
inc erely,
. ,ShawnParsoris, R.L.A. , #307:
rincipal/Landscape Architect, .
a.:.r ^:;vi::i+naSti,^:u1..�...7. v;iWJ!i.' k•i: r:i.ix.i+.t
%�::rJ:�+iaikii4 +� ,.. "..�'�tiaEiiLLtia� �'•a.;� �':
z
w
re 2
00
00.
` w'.
w =. .
J H;
LL:.
D.
v
—mu) ,
.
z�
z�.
ww
0 F-`
wW
H
U
Lu
O
z
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
December 14, 1995
John W. Rants, Mayor
Steve Lancaster, Director
Mr. Roy Bennion
Park Place Partners
800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3700
Seattle, Washington 98104
Re Approval of building permit revisions
Park Place B95 -0110, B95 -0111
Dear Roy:
This is to reiterate my message to you on Tuesday, December 12, 1995. In response to Shawn's inquiry
on Monday, December 11, 1995, I need to review and send a letter approving revisions to your formal
landscape plan, dated 10- 26 -95, before you can proceed with the landscape work.
You also need a utility permit from Public Works for the landscaping work.
Also, I am still waiting for a final drawing from Howard that delineates and specifies site detailing and
furniture, and the building details that are the responsibility of the shell architect. To my knowledge, the
details that appeared on the tenant improvement permit drawings and should have appeared on the
permit for the shell, referenced above, have not been removed from the TI drawings, and have not been
consolidated in a revision to the shell permit.
Again, you will not receive your Certificate of Occupancy until these final revisions are approved and
installed in a manner satisfactory to the City.
Sincerely,
Diana Painter
Associate Planner
cc Jack Pace
Steve Lancaster
Kelcie Peterson
prmt:prkltr42
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
_ a..;: N.•.:; � ;t:,..�:hao,4:.._ >fv_.y,- sit.si x;�tctrisi�L1��� �c;,el�:
iu r'�;k. �. �s : •,:;.�: are �yv
ro
City of Tukwila
John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
October 24, 1995
Mr. Roy Bennion
Park Place Partners
800 Fifth Avenue
Suite 3700
Seattle, WA 98104
Re Park Place
Dear Roy:
This is a follow -up letter to our meeting of 11 October 1995, to document my understanding
of what I can expect in your revised landscape plan. As noted in the meeting, it would be
my preference to receive the revised plan and any supporting documentation all at once, and
not as the individual tasks are completed. If you have any questions, please feel free to call.
London plane trees.
The landscape architect will locate two or more suitable (3" - 3 1/2" caliper) replacement
trees to compensate for the London plane tree that was lost. These replacement trees may
be placed elsewhere on the site, but locating them in the southeast corner should be
considered. Siting them on landscape islands that are already identified for new trees is not
acceptable - the idea is that the existing tree served as a buffer between the two
developments, and marked an entrance to the project. The new trees should serve a similar
function.
Relocation of Linden trees.
Revise detail for relocation of the Linden trees as shown on attached sketch. Relocate trees
in accordance with parameters established in letter dated 29 September 1995.
Replacement of Oak trees at entrance drive.
Shawn will survey each tree along the entrance drive, and identify those trees that could be
retained and which should be replaced. He will submit a diagram and /or notes as to how
trees to be retained will be pruned so that they are 'compatible' with proposed new Oak
trees.
Removal of all mature site landscaping.
Shawn will survey interior lot landscaping that remains at this point, and make
recommendations for replacing trees that are damaged or unhealthy, so that new landscaping
as much as possible will be consistent with revised landscape plan.
•
ccau
0 o
0
cnw
w o.
Ra
mow'
.z
moo:.
:.
w :.
M Di
o -
0E-
w W
z,.
'w _'
z..
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
Removal of additional trees in sloped areas.
An exemption from the tree ordinance has been granted for the removal of these trees.
Tree planting in wetland and sloped areas.
This will be done according to the previously approved tree replacement and wetland buffer
enhancement plan.
In addition, Shawn will submit details - diagrams and /or notes - to show how pruning will be
done in typical situations (ie existing conifers, existing Lindens, existing Oaks).
Please note, again, that all landscaping must be in place and performance bonds established
before your Certificate of Occupancy will be approved. A performance bond will also be
required for the Linden trees.
Sincerely,
Diana Painter AICP
Associate Planner
Attachment
Jack Pace
Steve Lancaster
Howard Turner
Shawn Parsons
City of Tukwila
John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
September 29, 1995
Mr. Roy Bennion
Park Place Partners
800 Fifth Avenue
Suite 3700
Seattle, Washington 98104
Re. Park Place Retail Center
Dear Roy:
This letter is to request the revision and resubmittal of your landscape plans to address the
following issue areas:
1) Removal of a mature London plane tree and lack of protection for the remaining
London plane tree in southeast corner of site;
Revisions to the landscape detail for relocation of Linden trees and alteration of the
berm along Southcenter Parkway;
Revisions to the landscape plan addressing replacement of Oak trees along the
entrance drive to project;
4) Compensation for removal of all mature site landscaping;
5) A request to remove additional trees in the sloped areas on the west side of the site:
6) Issuance of a performance bond and completion of work and monitering for
replanting in wetland and sensitive areas.
* * *
London plane trees.
It has come to our attention that several of the conditions established by the Board
of Architectural Review on December 15, 1994 have been violated in the course of
project development, one of which was to protect and preserve two mature London
plane trees flanking the south entry drive to the project.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 4313670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
z
This condition stated:
"To ensure the survival of the existing London plane trees flanking the
secondary access drive just south of the Azteca restaurant, a protection barrier ,
consisting of six (6) foot high chain link fence should encircle each tree five
(5) feet outside of the dripline during construction. This is in place of the
protective tree barrier shown on landscape drawings."
Although a detail on the landscape drawings showed how this protection was to
occur, no protection was ever provided in the field. The north London plane has
been was removed and a truck trailer now sits in this location. In a field inspection
by staff the week of September 18, 1995, it was noted that rebar and concrete rubble
was stored under the dripline of the south London plane tree. In a field inspection
the week of September 25, 1995, it was noted that mud and rocks were running into
dripline area from site excavation, concrete rubble was still stored within dripline, and
an excavation about a foot deep had occurred on the south side of the tree within the
dripline, and tree roots were exposed to the air. Please note that we consider these
violations to be a serious matter. We expect these violations will be approprpiate
mitigated (see suggestions below), and that no further violations of project approval
conditions will occur.
2) Relocation of Linden trees.
As indicated on the building permit drawings, the detail provided for the removal and
relocation of the Linden trees along Southcenter Boulevard, and reconfiguration of
the berm in this location, is unacceptable. The berm is to be lowered no more than
1 to 1 1/2 feet, as indicated in my letter of 8 -1 -95, and the height of the crown of the
berm is to be no lower than the finished curb height of the parking lot in that
location. The berm is to retain the same shape it has now (ie rounded at the location
of the trees), and the trees are not to be replanted on the slope of the berm. You
must provide a revision to the building permit drawings correcting this detail, if you
intend to proceed with this plan.
Replacement of Oak trees at entrance drive.
As previously noted, the Oak trees along the entry drive are suffering from lack of
water and from construction activities. I noted in my letter of 8 -1 -95 that if it is
necessary to replace any additional trees along the entry drive, all Oaks should be
replaced so that the size of the trees is similar. At this point in time, landscape plans
show that nine Oak trees are to be retained, and ten new Oak trees added. Given
the damage to the existing Oak trees, we need to come to an agreement as to how
to best salvage this aspect of the landscape plan.
Removal of all mature site landscaping.
Condition #10 in the BAR conditions governing the development of your project
stated:
2
Z
-J C.)
UO
N D;
w w,
J:
w
u_ a;
co
1- w
z�,
moo.
z
w
2
Do
w
= V'
0
uzL.
i
U CO
r
z
"It is recommended that an attempt be made to save significant trees on the
site for use as specimen trees in the landscape scheme."
In the letter accompanying the revisions to your landscape drawings for the March
15, 1995 submittal, your landscape architect stated: "The site's existing parking lot
trees were retained where feasible, unfortunately, the city's requirement of re- paving
and re- configuration of the parking lot has eliminated some trees."
The City's code required re- configuration of the parking lot in one area, and has no
requirement to re -pave the parking area. In actuality, the site has been completely
de -nuded in the process of development, and all interior site areas used for
construction staging and material storage. No visible effort has been made to retain
any mature landscaping in the interior of the site and in fact, your landscape architect
stated verbally that it would have been impractical to do so, as the trees would not
have survived.
Removal of additional trees in sloped areas.
You have requested that additional trees in the sloped area behind the retaining wall
be removed for safety reasons. This was an area in which trees were to be replaced
according to the caliper method of tree replacement under the tree regulations. An
inventory of additional trees to be removed must be provided to the City as well as
a replacement plan for these trees (see TMC 18.54.080). A separate permit
application must also be submitted.
Tree planting in wetland and sloped areas.
We are reviewing your monitering plan submitted on June 6, 1995. As noted in my
letter of June 16, 1995, a performance bond (or other form of security) will be
required for both the wetland planting and tree replacement. Planting must be
complete (it is appropriate to complete this work in the fall), and the performance
bond must be filed before a Certificate of Occupancy will be issued. An estimated
cost for tree replacement, including tree planting labor, wetland planting, and
monitering costs must be provided in conjunction with the bond. If it is found that
runoff during site construction has contaminated the wetland area, further
remediation will be necessary.
In summary, there are several issues to be resolved. Please note that your landscaping must
be complete, inspected and approved before you will be issued a Certificate of *Occupancy.
At this time, you need to revise and to re- submit plans that represent a good faith effort to
rectify violations to design conditions and that meet code requirements. You also need post
a performance bond, as noted.
The following are a few suggestions as to how you might revise your landscape plans.
A. Do not remove or relocate existing Linden trees. Our Urban Ecologist, Gary Schulz,
3
1'�"fn+'X.ro!�rm, rt, WtAV.. axtequ!+ tc� +wV >M:tcrcNa�sro�wvm�w.•�mkr... ray. nmwr«,..,...« n.«....+,....., �.......,-......... �.. �... �......,, �..,... � ... ..........«.,�«........... —.�..
6:
JU
U O'
cnw
w=
J Fes,
N
w o;
u. Q:
m D
=o
_:
z o.
D
0 1--
uiw'
.z
co
z
has said that the trees, in all likelihood, will not survive the move. Your landscape
architect, in the context of another discussion, said it was impractical to relocate trees
on the site because they would probably not survive. Since approval of the relocation
of these trees was predicated on their survival, it would appear that the most likely
way to ensure their survival is to not touch them.
B. Replace all Oak trees along the drive with a commensurate tree of sufficient size (14'
- 16') to meet the original intent of this design feature, which was to present a
dramatic entry to the project.
C. Hire a professional to calculate the value of the London plane tree that was removed
(it was over 3 1/2' dbh), and purchase additional trees for the site equal to the value
of that tree. These trees should be incorporated into landscape plans to ensure that
the landscape buffers between this project and neighboring properties at this location
are adequate. Hire a professional to assess the damage, to the roots of the existing
tree, and take measures to ensure no further damage is done.
Provide for additional tree planting on site to compensate for additional trees
removed in the sloped area (this is a code requirement - see previous
correspondence).
E. Provide additional /enhanced plantings at the site entry.
We would be glad to meet with you to discuss these and any other ideas you might have to
address the issues noted above.
Please note that you need to provide sketches and details that illustrate how free - standing
signage will be integrated with landscaping, and diagrams illustrating any pruning anticipated
for the existing trees.
Sincerely,
Diana Painter
Associate Planner
4
U" •
.co la 0
w,
.
J Ht
w o:
J'
w a;
Ca•
• zI!
N' •
•
14 —,.
Ur • •
• o,
z
(01 •
• z .
Steve Lancaster
Jack Pace
Gary.. Schulze
Joanna Spencer
Greg Villanueva
Ron Cameron
Duane Griffin
Howard Turner
Shawn Parsons
(.4'14)
City of Tukwila
John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner
Jack Pace, DCD Senior Planner
FROM: Gary Schulz, DCD Urban Environmentalist
DATE: ; Apxll 24 1995
RE: Parkway Place Retail Center #L94 -0084 -
Environmental Permit Review.
1I-0E
I have reviewed the March 15, 1995 plan submittal from P -3 Partners related to sensitive
areas mitigation for the Parkway Place Retail Center. These submittals include letters from
the applicant and LandPlan P.S. that address project plan sheets LTR -1 & LTR -2, and L1
thru L5. Landscape irrigation design and details are not part of this memo's scope of
review.
My current review focuses on the project's compliance with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance
(SAO, #1599) and the Interim Tree Ordinance ( #1715). Several additions are needed prior
to final DCD approval.
SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE/WETLAND ENHANCEMENT
1. The wetland buffer width question has been resolved by field verification and the
minimum 25 -foot setback will be retained. It appears the wetland boundary has not been
professionally surveyed. However, because the wetland buffer area is measured and its edge
is delineated by the parking lot, there is now no need for the survey. The existing edge of
pavement must be marked in the field with fencing to prevent encroachment during the re-
surfacing of the parking area. Please show wetland boundary and buffer on all site maps.
2. There are a number of young red alder trees that are growing along the bank inside the
wetland buffer. These trees should be retained with the enhancement plantings filling in
openings and areas overgrown by blackberries. The enhancement plan shows new plantings
to the edge of existing pavement on the bank area. The bank will likely provide a better
medium for plantings. The planned irrigation system will avoid tree removal in this area.
rz?
Imo,
�g
� LL�
ul O,
D
a.'
tu
z
�L o
w w;
D o,
Io u)
;o
uj
1 --
IL O
Z'.
Log co`
F.
z
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
Parkway Place Memo
April 24, 1995
Page 2
3. The proposed planting plan has incorporated diversity with appropriate species.
However, the Plant Schedule does not include spacing and quantity of new plants. These
details are needed and will assist the landscape contractor.
4. The Wetland Construction Notes indicate a two -year landscape establishment period is
provided. This will be an adequate warranty period; however, a performance bond or some
other form of security is required for both wetland planting and the tree replacement. The
A two -year monitoring plan is also needed to document a performance goal has been
achieved. Typically, 80 percent survival is appropriate for planted trees and shrubs.
1. Because the tree clearing that occurred in order to conduct the geotechnical work was
much more extensive than permitted, there are two replacement methods being applied to
the project. Both methods applied have calculated adequate numbers of trees for enhancing
the forested slope.
The area where most of the tree removal is to occur has at least four tree species. As
previously discussed, the tree replacement plan should incorporate more species diversity._
Since most of the forested slope is dominated by deciduous tree species, please provide at
least three native conifer species for diversity in the replacement plan.
2. The plan sheet LTR -2 specifies that replacement tree seedlings will be 1 to 2 feet in
height. The previously recommended specification for this type of forest planting was to use
four year old tree seedlings. This should equate to trees that may be to 3 to 4 feet in height.
The height and age is important for new trees to compete with existing vegetation as well
as having vigorous root growth.
3. Please submit an estimated cost for tree replacement including the tree planting labor.
One performance bond can used to cover the wetland planting, tree replacement planting,
and monitoring costs.
cc: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director
•
UO:
0
W =' •
.J�- .
:Ili a,
•
• FZ W
moo;.
.z
'w W.
'D.01
'CO
•
_
z
w
Landscape Architecture
T. Shawn Parsons, R.L.A.
6110 Mein Street, Suite D Edmonds, WA 98020
Telephone (206), 776.4932 FAX (206), 6728912
TO:
FEA(zM, ri-
MEMORANDiTM .. •
Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner
Gary Schulz, DCD Urban Environmentalist
City of Tukwila; Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100; Tukwila, WA 98188
FROM: Elizabeth Koch, LandPlan P.S.
DATE: June 7, 1995
SUBJECT: Parkway Place Retail Center #L94 -0084 —
Environmental Permit Review
Thi's narrative is in response to a memorandum dated April 24, 1995, from Gary Schulz, DCD Urban
Environmentalist, to Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner, and Jack Pace, DCD Senior Planner, all with
the City of Tukwila.
Each part of the memorandum requiring action on our part will receive a response and will follow the order
of the memorandum.
SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE/WETLAND ENHANCEMENT
1. A note was added to the plan which directs that a fence be erected at the edge of pavement prior to
any demolition or construction activities in the parking lot.
A note was added to the plan stating that all trees and shrubs with the exception of Blackberry
species shall remain undisturbed.
3. With respect to adding spacing and quantities to the plan, in a phone conversation with Gary Schulz
(6- 5 -95), it was agreed upon to indicate spacing as a range of 6' -8' o.c. for trees and 2'-4' o.c. for
shrubs as shown on the plan. Wetland buffer plantings are intended to appear natural; therefore, an
irregular spacing is desired. It was also agreed upon that the contractor shall bear the responsibility
of counting trees and shrubs to provide the quantity indicated by symbol on the plan.
4. A monitoring plan has been established and is attached to this document. The bond amount will be
set based on bids which will be received for installation of the wetland buffer enhancement.
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWILA
PERMIT CENTER
Memorandum to: Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner
Gary Schulz, DCD Urban Environmentalist
City of Tukwila; Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100; Tukwila, WA 98188
Page 2 of 4 6 -7=95
TREE ORDINANCE/PERMIT
Two additional native confer species have been added to the plant list to satisfy the request for three
conifer species. This will increase diversity of the tree replacement plan.
Regarding the size of tree replacement seedlings, an agreement was reached during a phone
conversation with Gary Schulz that 2' -3' seedlings would be appropriate and acceptable for this type
of planting. The plant schedule has been changed to reflect that agreement.
A performance bond is required by the city of Tukwila to ensure proper implementation of the
wetland buffer enhancement, tree replacement plan and wetland buffer monitoring. As discussed by
phone with Gary Schulz and Diana Painter, the bond amount is to be determined when bids for the
project construction are receive& It will include plant material, installation and construction
observation for the wetland buffer and tree replacement plans as well as costs for the specified two -
year monitoring plan for the wetland buffer enhancement.
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWILA
JU 0
,..wa
PERMIT CENTER
L'.w�.,.. . .•i.. .::ii. ,..aa� > L•« : Y, d.. nr�ts,< �;?; rr. 5tff. uLasiiifinis'. i+ ;:r'�ai.�lni�:vi;;c:is;.t;�rce- �.`i:.a.'•;?;hiiJt;:u:as,:;a. �vs.fn'.cG�niO -' = ss..:�.Y,:'a ��w..ard�..• �+, �: aL-:: ir:. auab: b:: c:• ia& isr� .S;i:u,'s.:.:k'eit: ? +:iJ.`;: S`.�:.'S::Y;�:
Memorandum to: Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner
Gary Schulz, DCD Urban Environmentalist
City of Tukwila; Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100; Tukwila, WA 98188
Page 3 of 4 6 -7 -95
WETLAND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLAN
The buffer enhancement plan was prepared to obtain a buffer width reduction from 50' to 25'.
ENHANCEMENT GOALS
The goal of the enhancement plan is:
1.
3.
To increase density of the wetland buffer.
To increase diversity of the wetland buffer.
To reduce the proliferation of Blackberry species. While some Blackberry may be beneficial, as the
primary understory, it reduces opportunities for other species of shrubs to establish.
To increase productivity of soils throughout the buffer, specifically the old railroad bed area of the
buffer, by replacing existing material with more productive growing medium for each plant pit by
three times the size of the rootball.
To complete the proposed plan with minimal disturbance to existing trees and shrubs with the
exception of Blackberry plants which will be removed by hand.
To increase public awareness by installing permanent signs along the wetland buffer edge.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
A specific set of performance standards have been established that correspond to the stated enhancement
goals. These standards will be used to judge the success of the enhancement project. By monitoring the
project and comparing monitoring results to performance standards a determination can be made as to the
need for implementing the contingency plan. The performance standards are:
• 3.
To enhance the value of a 25' wetland buffer by increasing both density and diversity of plant
species.
To achieve 80 percent survival of the planted trees and shrubs in the wetland buffer.
To retain, undisturbed, all existing trees and shrubs in the wetland buffer with the exception of
Blackberry species.
•
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWILA
ib 0 1
PERMIT CENTER
u6 M •
U;
'0 0:
o: •
..cow'.
w_.
w :
• LL Q(
= 0
z
• z o;.
w"w
iO.Ns.
w W�
CY
. ;z
Memorandum to: Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner
Gary Schulz, DCD Urban Environmentalist
City of Tukwila; Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100; Tukwila, WA 98188
Page 4 of 4 6-7-95
MONITORING PROGRAM
The monitoring program will evaluate the success of the enhancement plan by comparing monitoring
results to the stated performance standards. The program will monitor vegetation for a period of two years.
Sampling points will be established for monitoring vegetation annually. Photographs will be taken to
supplement the sampling data. An annual report will be prepared in the first year and a final report will be
prepared in the second year. The monitoring information will be collected as detailed below.
Vegetation Monitoring. Percent survival of trees and shrubs will be used to measure the success of the
enhancement plan. Planted trees and shrubs will not likely achieve their growth potential in two years;
therefore, percent area coverage is an inadequate representation of enhancement success A total live count
of trees and shrubs will be conducted. The total number of live individuals by species can be compared to
. the original planting designed. If 80 percent of the trees and shrubs that were planted are living at the end
of the second year, then the establishment of the trees and shrubs will be considered successful. In
addition, the health and vigor of the plants and their potential for future success will be 'assessed.
• • • ' -; • • .
CONTINGENCY PLAN
The contingency plan will provide for replacing dead plants in the wetland buffer. If more than 20 percent
• of* trees and shrubs do not survive in the enhancement areas, then the appropriate number and species
Will be replaced according .to the performance standards. A plant mortality assessment and
• recomniendations for remedial action, will be made by the monitoring landscape architect. The contingency
plan may be enacted in whole or in part whenever the action is warranted by the monitoring reports. If the
. desired enhancement goals, as measured by the monitoring program and the performance standards, are not
achieved, a joint determination by the City of Tukwila and the project proponent may be made to
implement the contingency plan.
• '10 ==.1 • • •,
0 ,
•
RECEIVED
'CITY OF TUKWILA
BM 0 8 11:215
PERMIT CENTER
CITY OFT TUKWILA
JUN Q 8
PERMIT CENTER
35atx7, v:•4"` ""Y..,"V14:L1H ��ii4i ,�'.Nri:it�.li"cili4.�'1.ti:�r TJri.Ya:.'i.�]'ea2:v`eF. u.a..+e.i..::Sir':ie:LL"i.
,.,,a:::: - :�ti�luuL:r..�++.' �r a� lti;:i iii -.�i�3 L+:i '•a",u tr n;�:.�" v`.''ivwYbfi ';S ,iii ri;aa1)5c,gSr,4
\ \\ \ 1111111111111111/// �i_
rim 4.
- -- -.III
MO MI OW MN IN VII
02870 /URA
BuyLine 5002
STANDARD FLAT
3', 4', 5', 6' Sq.
OT SERIES
3', 4', 5', 6' Sq.
GUADALUPE
4', 4'6" Rd.
,__•
...P4...
"1111IIIII"
.1111, 0011111111110 ,11111111111 111111111111 „ t∎,1,.
RAISED CENTER*
3', 4', 5' Sq.
ECO
4' Sq. • 4' Rd.
OT TITLE 24*
3', 4', 5', 6' Rd.
STANDARD FLAT
3', 4', 5', 6' Rd.
OT COMBO
3', 4', 5', 6'
FAN*
4', 5', 6' Sq. • 4', 5', 6' Rd.
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWILA
0 11"A3
BENCH*
3', 4', 5', 6' Sq. & Rd. PERMIT CENTER
•Meets ADA standards.
CALL (206) 487 -0488
5
a.. ! !A7'e�F?+Ys'rWW:°rr!6°!'n1 . fim :tea.1teftvfetftersH1�Fe.A: etla +i
u_•�t.` Apr "!�fy?Ft�f��'�G.�dS'k�k�'�.+
z
w
6m.
UO
W=
J E.,.:
LL,
LU}
g J
?.
1=— _
Z H,
1-O:.
Z
UJ
O.N
O H.
= U;
LL p
W Z:
0 F-`
z
'Lin. 7 '95
9:34 0000 EMIL'S CONCRETE
TEL 206-869-2169
•
...„. . •••/::`.".3
. • 4' • I • • cw
poz. 4,0 • ....:•:••;/.:41!
•:A.• ...s. .
CoW Pro04.*•. • ." DV , . ••••• • • • • • •
• ^ • A' ••1•., , ' rt• , •1 •■•• •
1),4 s• • ••
It i *To
rex 'V flufloing gond TIN
0.• xr Ilse •
sve W Running. elond Tfl
rxeT1I.
at. • ir x 12- Tile -
Ile
i
1.4
1
— I .1' •
4- sr Soldier Course litrIcK
DUI* TOW
oK Herrin
loi■s
.,1 Bashetwesve Brick
Running Bono erica
• ;
-4.
4 k
x t?'
Soldier Course Brick
SoIdtrCcvra.D Ick
rrrrr
JiLfl
1:-.'4•+••4:1
24.
* eiehesale Cobbkia - tene Bunning Bond Cobblestone
Ftendom Stone Flagstone
eks•
='P4.7" ; ,
■,(f
' •
, ...I..' • . . ,
•
River Bock
r— El
Design ConsIcktrAtions
; • . hove it !Small degf4 of r
' :4•79.0fclifkif!tin.. OVA.
,
RC)MANITE and EH:MACRON AM not Usually inturukd tObo an • • tinder Vi •
exact SiMillatiOn of 001.014 Of Vona, but filOy Otu small:nos • Ida orm „
used to actiowl n oonarally !similar faalind. • , ;•.:f.actual Inetadaijorit'or:00*
• • 90MANITE and 130MACRON rw ruutio products And usually Itiallatrataciptiar • V
• • ' t,•• • . • ••' tp.)
firdor to Borhatillo Bullet[0.3'2r -roriOditronatparrefirs loctl
•
-.4
P. 3
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWILA
0 8
PEI1MIT CENTER
TO:
FROM: }�� PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING
DATE: ,A31.17-
SUBJECT: Parkway Place Retail Center
Grading Operations for. Retaining Wall Tieback
Verification Tests
17501 Southcenter Parkway
Project No. PRE94 -020
Activity Nos. PW95 -0199
Contact Person: Roy I. Bennion
Phone No. (206)624-1444'
City of Tukwila
Department of Public Works
, John W. Rants, Mayor
Ross A. Earnst, P. E., Director
NOTIFICATION OF UTILITY PERMIT ACTION.
PERMIT CENTER
THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC WORKS PERMITS HAVE BEEN APPROVED FOR ISSUANCE
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS APPROVED ON JUNE 16, 1994:
Permit Fee
Land Altering (for Tieback No Fee
(Verification Tests)
Two copies of the confirmed Utility Permit Application Form and
plans are attached for inclusion in the building permit file. If
any questions, please advice
JJS /jjs
Attachments a/s
£7
cf: PW Utilities Inspector (w /copy of application /plans)
Development File (w /copy of application /plans)
06/14/95 12:46 FAX 206 682 1040
UNt4 '95 }2 :24PM TUKWILA DCD'PW
City of Thks4474
Central Perna System— brzgineering Division
6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite #100, Thkwila, WA 98188
S M S
�w
'(
r. c IJ 002
-�5—
0031
Phone: (206) 433 -0199
UTILITY PERMIT APPLICATION
i'r`ogert_yOwner: 13 -For-Avers 4•
Street Address: 800 4P live , 3 n--0
Engineer: Da.tii %Zoe d lt4t%k'• s
Street Address o q 44.r ,4uu E
Contractor: CO . b-. Clark
Street Address: f/o," 741urer4
•
A ve Na e itl.
Phone No.: 6?2 - 686th'
Cit /State/Z1 • : £4//4 t rJ
Phone No.: 32.3 -+i941
City /StateRlp: .Sp�iYP W4 98 /n2
Phone No.: h2 y! -s. "4
C /Stata2i • : See*
F/o
Kin
C Assessor Acct a :a 6 2 o
9067
Contractor's License #: W -AG• 370N0 E
▪ Date:
Channelization /Strlping/Signing
O Curb Cut/Access/Sidewalk
O Fin Loop/Hydr. (=Into vault) - No.: Sizes:
0 Flood Zone Control
D Hauling
O Land Altering cubic yards
O Landscape Irrigation
❑ Moving an Oversized Load
Est. start/end times:
Date:
O Sanitary Side Sewer - No.:
Name:
Street;.Address:
N A
Name: ,tJ A
Street Address:
❑ Water ❑ Sewer ❑ Metro
tbweelbratomom
ASV
❑ Mult(pie -Farm Dwellin• ❑ Hotel
❑ Motel
❑ Office
52/Retail
O Sewer Main Extension ❑Private ❑ Public
• Storm Drainage
o Street Use
O Water Main Extension ❑Private ❑ Pubic
O Water Meter/ Exempt: -No.: _ Sizes:__.
Deduct D Water Only p
❑ Water Meter / Permanent - No.: Sizes:._.
Water Meter/ Temporary: - No.: Sizes:,.
Estimated quantity:
Schedule:
Other: -�72 P�2M / ?•
Phone No,:
City/State/Zip:
Phone No,:
City /State/Zip:
❑ Standby
❑ Slrgle•Fami§f Residential
❑ Du • lex ❑ A • artments
❑ Other:
No. of Units:
❑ CommerclaVlndustrial
❑ Tri • Iex
❑ Warehouse
❑ Condominiums
❑ Church
D School/Calleoe/Univeroit
ill
❑ Manufacturing 0 Hospital ❑•Other:
Er New Building ❑ Remodel/ Square footage of original building space:
Square • �. /6,r 000 Addition
Square toots • e of additional twildin • e • ace:
Kin
Count Assessors valuation of existing structures: $ A/4 Valuation of work to be done: $ N,4
plicant/Authoriz -
Agent SJ r a.iu -
Print Name:
, :w1 4 r ,e i 6 y , ? r. • ,. te fi : V -�'U ra:
AT_ ifiiirlimploimuum
Date: 6 - I'/ — 9 IF Phone: 2F, b'd ir
Date Application Accepted: : JUN if 1995
PERMIT CENTER
ntact Person
li )- 11=
Address:
Phone
Date Application Engines �.�r l�/ ei6 .
04021/92
7 _L
tra 1,D i e)
lip
WelbIAtti
z
~w
re 2
J U>
oo:
o..
• w:.
w=;
- j_
N LL,
u
g a
a.
=w
z�_
F- o
z I-.
LL! uj
0
0
al 1-U.
Z:
i .
r .
0E-.
Z
4une,16;*1995
t‘C''%
City of Tukwila Fr o/1 (ac
-0 ,o2-;inW' Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
Mr. Roy Bennion
Park Place Partners
800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3700
Seattle, Washington 98104
RE Parkway Place Tree Permit L95-0036
(Drawings L1-L5 dated 6/8/1995)
Dear Roy:
This is to verify that the landscape plans, plans demostrating compliance with the City's Sensitive Areas
Ordinance, and Tree Replacement Plan (L1-L5) demonstrate that the conditions established by the City
have been met (reference letter memo from Gary Schulz to Diana Painter dated April 24, 1995), and that
your tree permit is approved.
1. The replacement for the wall treatment plantings has been satisfied by additional landscaping
along the front facade of the buildings.
2. The wetland buffer treatment is satisfactory. Edge of pavement, wetland boundary and buffer
appears on landscape and site plans. Please ensure that they are also called out on other plans
that propose work in this area such as utility drawings.
3. Retention of existing vegetation (with the exception of blackberries) in the wetland buffer is
satisfactory. Proposed spacing for new vegetation in this area has been shown, per City
recommendation.
4. A performance bond (or other form of security) will be required for both wetland.planting and the
tree replacement. A two-year monitering plan is also required. The performance bond must be
filed before a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued. An estimated cost for tree replacement,
including tree planting labor, wetland planting, tree replacement planting, and monitering costs
must be provided in conjunction with the the bond.
5. Additional species of conifers have been added to the planting schedule for the tree replacement
area, as recommended. This area now includes Douglas firm, hemlock and pine. Trees are to
be 2' - 3' in height at time of planting.
If there are any questions, please give me at call at 431-3661.
Sincerely,*
Diana Painter
Associate Planner
cc Gary Schulz
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
•
City of Tukwila
John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner
Jack Pace, DCD Senior Planner
FROM: Gary Schulz, DCD Urban Environmentalist
DATE: „- .April'24 1995
RE: Parkway Place Retail Center #L94 -0084 -
Environmental Permit Review.
I have reviewed the March 15, 1995 plan submittal from P -3 Partners related to sensitive
areas mitigation for the Parkway Place Retail Center. These submittals include letters from
the applicant and LandPlan P.S. that address project plan sheets LTR -1 & LTR -2, and L1
thru L5. Landscape irrigation design and details are not part of this memo's scope of
review.
My current review focuses on the project's compliance with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance
(SAO, #1599) and the Interim Tree Ordinance ( #1715). Several additions are needed prior
to final DCD approval.
SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE/WETLAND ENHANCEMENT
1. The wetland buffer width question has been resolved by field verification and the
minimum 25 -foot setback will be retained. It appears the wetland boundary has not been
professionally surveyed. However, because the wetland buffer area is measured and its edge
is delineated by the parking lot, there is now no need for the survey. The existing. edge of
pavement must be marked in the field with fencing to prevent encroachment during the re-
surfacing of the ;.parking area Please show wetland boundary and . buffer on all site maps.
uti tity< clvau)1,
o~c w:
oo
co w
w 0;
w a;
1 w
Z
Z o,
w w
P, o'
. .oN
,o.I_1
wW
— 0:
u• Z:
o u)
=.
.0 '
z
2. There are a number of young' red alder trees that are growing along the bank inside the
wetland buffer. These trees should be : retained with the enhancement plantings filling in
openings and areas overgrown by blackberries. The enhancement plan shows new plantings
to the edge of existing pavement on the bank area. The =bank will likely provide a` better
medium for plantings:: The planned irrigation system will avoid tree removal in this area
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
Parkway Place Memo
April 24, 1995
Page 2
64)/
The proposed planting plan has incorporated diversity with appropriate species.
However, the Plant Schedule does not include spacing and quantity of new. plants. These
i �-k '
details are needed and will assist the landscape contractor. (���; -(� ��e( tf V►,S6 �
4. The Wetland Construction Notes indicate a two -year landscape establishment period is
p ovided. This will be an adequate warranty period; however, a performance bond or some
other form of security is required forr both wetland planting and the tree replacement. A
'two-year monitoring plan is also needed to document a performance goal has been achieved.
Typically, 80 percent survival is appropriate for planted trees and shrubs.
TREE ORDINANCEIPERMIT
1. Because the tree clearing that occurred to conduct the geotechnical work was much more
extensive than permitted, there are two replacement methods being applied to the project.
Both methods applied have calculated adequate numbers of trees for enhancing the forested
slope.
The area where most of the tree removal is to occur has at least four tree species. As
previously discussed, the tree replacement plan should incorporate more species. diversity.
Since most of the forested slope is dominated by deciduous tree species, please provide at
least three native conifer species for diversity in the replacement plan. «f ;6 r- /14 LQ
2. The plan sheet LTR -2 specifies that replacement tree seedlings will be .1 to ..2 feet in
eight. The previously recommended specification for this type of forest planting was to use
four year old tree seedlings. This should equate to trees that may be to 3 to 4 feet in height.
The height and age is important for new trees to compete with existing vegetation as well
as having vigorous root growth. a -e 2 ' - 3 '
3. Please submit an estimated cost for tree replacement including the tree planting labor.
One performance bond can used to cover the wetland planting, tree replacement planting,
and monitoring costs. (�. 6,. hones
cc: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director
ssg-:t
,_$$>.IUi. ueL'aflfl .'ae. +"[Wtsw xaivvlw • ✓�.t� �
ce
uJ
6D'
• -o o;
•w 0 :.
AL Q,
.:2 of
��.w.
Z
. z w:
• 2
• ;o —!
o�
w w•
H -
-O
,V -:
•
•
z : .
•
Landscape Architecture
arc,h`,:
City. of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, WA 98188
►TTN: , Diana Painter, DCD Associate. Planner
Park Place Retail Center .'
ear Ms. Painter:
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWILA
MAR 1 5 1995 .
PERMIT CENTER
Enclosed you'll find five (5) landscape development- drawings and two (2) landscape: tree
'replacement plans for your review. A description of each drawing is provided to clarify any
questions about: design intent.'
Sheet tL 1, Landscape Plan; is a comprehensive plan illustrating plant type, size and location. .= The
site's existing parking lot, trees were retained where feasible;; unfortunately, the city's requirement .
of re- paving and re- configuration of the parking lot has eliminated some trees. The store frontage
has been softened with the additional landscape: area incorporating Alaska Weeping Cedar and
Birch trees with rhododendrons underlying the tree canopy. A more formal and bold statement
has been created with the addition of ten (10) concrete (4'x4'x31/2) planters: These planters are to
• be installed with four (4) "Coral Beauty" cotoneaster. and one (1) :columnar flower cherry. All the
plant material sized adjacent the building has been increased above industry standards to provide a
more immediate effect. ..
The site's southern boundary has been adjusted to enhance security by thinning out the existing
cedar hedge: Pedestrian access has been added between the subject property and Levitz furniture:
Additional landscape buffering has also been provided between the restaurant at the site's
northeast corner and the subject property
6'..0 0
Main Street .
Suite D
Edmonds;
Washington
9 8_:0 2 0
(206)776 -4832
(Fax) 7747803
z
F=- W`.
00
w
Cnw;
w z:
-J
w
wO}}
J.
w
=a
�..w
z
uj
n0
0 co
a1—:
ww..
I 0
ti f".
O:
wz
0 ='
0 ~`
Page 2 City of Tukwila, Diana Painter re Park Place Retail Center - 3 -14 -95
Sheet:L -2, Landscape Details Sheet, has been provided for construction purposes and clarification
for city review of proposed action. Besides standard planting details, pruning of both deciduous
and evergreen trees are provided. A wood headerboard detail and tree protection barricade detail
have been provided as well Note two other site specific details have been provided;. existing
concrete planter detail and .replacement tree planting detail.
Sheet L -3, Irrigation Plan, and Sheet L -4, Irrigation Details, have been included for verification of
plant watering.
z
Z`
QQ �
JU
UO
U 0
wi
-J I.
(0 w.
w O
Sheet L -5, Enlarged Plans (Landscape), has been drafted to clarify both the store frontage
landscape and the wetland buffer planting. Both the buffer width and site - specific planting g
considerations have been addressed in this enlarged plan. Comments and concerns of Gary . _co d
Schultz have been addressed in this plan.
z1
I—O
zr
w w.
U Of.
0 - C3I
wW
I
u' O'
W
Z
—z
0
z
The next two-drawings, LTR -1 and LTR -2, are plans generated to comply with the Sensitive
Areas Ordinance (SAO, #1599) and the Interim Tree Ordinance ( #1715). Sheet LTR -1 deals with
the tree removal of existing trees during the year of 1994. Sheet LTR -2 involves itself with the
proposed tree removal required for the new retail center development.
Sheet LTR -1, Landscape Tree Replacement Plan -1994, is a response to the geotechnical work on
the site An approximate 15' wide bench adjacent the site's developed west area had been cleared
to enable soil boring equipment to provide needed testing. This linear strip recorded existing
type, size, and location of removed, trees. The city's planning staff had determined that the
geotechnical work involved an area too small to apply the canopy method. Therefore, the caliper
method for tree replacement was applied. Specifically, a graph has been supplied on the LTR -1
sheet showing type, size category, and quantity of existing trees and resultant tree count.
Sheet LTR -2, Landscape Tree Replacement Plan - 1995, has been developed to comply with the
proposed tree removal in the "Sensitive Slope" areas and has employed the tree canopy method as
its methodology. The area of tree removal has been calculated at 25,752 s.f The resultant tree
requirement is 82 trees (314 trees/tree canopy removed).
The "Tree Canopy" method has been used because the site meets the minimum canopy cover of at
: least 20 %. ".(Actual calculations: 140,265 s.f previous west slope area is 20.72% of the total site
area; 676,948. s.f.)
Both plans are to install two - to four -year old seedlings for forest enhancement planting in an
upland area near the site's overall southwest. corner. Note this was as per Gary Schultz, Urban
Environmentalist's memorandum comments dated November 28, 1994.
age 3. -,City of Tukwila, Diana Painter re Park Place Retail. Center - 3 -14 -95
I hope that this letter clarifies the information communicated on the plans: If you should have any
additional questions, please don't hesitate to call.
incerely,
T. Shawn Parsons, R.L.A. #30.7
Principal Landscape Architect
cc :RoyBennion, Park Place Partners
Howard Turner, Turner & Associates
z
1I -.
Z:
0
U O:
N0:
W
WI
J
0 u
W O:
co D
a
z11,,.
111 11.1
Do
off';
0 H
W W;
H V'
O.
Z:.
v —,
z
Min
November 2; 1994
City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director
••
Mr. Howard Turner
• Turner & Associates
• 18420 24th PlaceNortb.east
Seattle, Washington 98155
•
Re: Parkway Place Tree Clearing Permit
Dear Mr. Turner:
The following outlines our current agreement for tree clearing and replacement for the Parkway Place project.
Comments and requirements are based on Tukwila city ordinance #1715, adopted August 1994.
Tree clearing for geotech work
In response to the letter from Michael Sandorffy, dated October 31, 1994, the director of the planning division
has made the following determination. Work on tree clearing for the purpose of doing preliminary
geotechnical work on the site can proceed, provided that:
1. The applicant must provide a map•of the route by which the soil boring equipment will enter the site
and proceed with testing.
2. Trees to be removed must be counted (species and caliper noted), per Ordinance #1715, and this
information recorded. • •
3. • Clearing trees in.excess of 15" in diameter should be avoided wherever possible.
We will be inspecting the site, both when the trees are tagged and when soil boring in underway. You can
provide us with the requested materials after your testing is completed.
Tree clearing permit application
Please note that you must apply to the Department of Community Development in order to have your request
• to survey and replace your trees by the 'canopy method' considered, as it is an exception and not a choice in
fulfilling the requirements °lithe code. This request can be submitted in conjunction with your tree inventory,
•replacement plan, and other supporting. documentation. Please respond to exception criteria when making
this request Please note that permit application materials must be prepared by professional landscape
architect, surveyor or arborist, and must be consistent with code requirements.
Replacement of canopy cover
As stated in the ordinance, if you are granted an exception, you may determine the trees to be replaced by thc
following method (see 7.9 (D) (1) & (2)). You have a choice as to whether you wish to replace existing
landscaping by providing canopy cover over 20% of your entire site, or by replacing existing canopy area (both
trees in sensitive area and trees that are a part of formal landscaping scheme).
In order for us to review your proposal, you need to provide figures on existing canopy, and also demonstrate •
1
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
how your proposed scheme fulfills criteria in code. One method of doing this is to calculate total canopy area
in sensitive areas. Add to this the square footage of existing canopy within landscaped areas by assigning an
average canopy size to each species. Since all landscaping 'is mature, you can assign an average canopy size
at maturity per species. This will give you total canopy cover on the site.
Tree replacement can consist of any combination of new and existing trees over the entire site area. In order
to prepare the replacement plan, you need to know how many trees are required to replace canopy that is to
be removed. Divide the total canopy to be removed by 314 square feet to get the number of trees - for
replacement. For canopy to be retained (either: in place or retained elsewhere on site), existing trees can
'count' toward replacement trees at a 1:1 ratio, unless you are fulfilling the ordinance by the '20% of the site'
method. •
Please note. that once 'the total number of trees to be.replaced is determined, you must replace these at a
maximum density of 70.trees per acre, and they must.be a minimum of'2 /12" caliper (for deciduous trees).
Tree replacement plan
Please note that you must fulfill all relevant provisions of ordinance in your tree replacement plan. The
following items are discussed because they are of particular relevance to your project.
o The tree replacement plan or landscape plan must be prepared by an appropriate professional.
While the City places priority on saving existing mature landscaping, higher priority is . placed on
existing stands of trees, trees at the perimeter of site, and trees within sensitive areas. Therefore,
retaining existing trees within the parking lot would have lower priority than saving other trees on the
site. . •
Respond to items 5.4 (1) Best Management Practices, 7.3 (C) professional review, and 7.8 (B) Tree
Protection, in ordinance in preparing plan to preserve "and/or •relocate existing landscaping.
If you have any questions, please give me a call at 431 -3661.
Diana Painter, AICP
Associate Planner
Rick Beeler
Jack Pace
Gary Schulz
Ann'Siegenthaler
Michael Woodland
Michael Sandorffy
Roy Betmion '
Park Place Partners
800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3700
Seattle, Washington 98104
x;y; +�;•y;: +i:.�•r.r.`y:r. vxaSt" w. isu�'L'�'r£m.`,'+ei6'ti:u�"r't;" u: rs.,; y,` 3. i+. i' luiLil.:, i-: rt5: a. Y& r�.: c:; 'L?:::�?�R:uaiRd:.!"+i2t�1 ":+:3
0'644‘ PARK PLACE PARTNERS
• 800 FIFTH AVENUE
SUITE 3700.
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
206/624-1444
November 1994
• Ms. Diana Painter .
Associate Planner, City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, Washington 98188
RE: Parkway Place - Design Review # L94-0084
17501 Southcenter Parkway
Canopy Removal
Dear Ms. Painter:
• Attached is a tree inventory accompanied by a site plan. The tree inventory references
field work conducted by our consultant on November 1. The site plan delineates the
approximate course traversed.
The traverse is the most likely path to be followed by the equipment, to reach the
• proposed drilling sites. Along this path, each tree likely to be harvetsed was recorded for
• species and diameter at 4.5 feet (DBH). We .have instructed our field crews to avoid
harvesting any tree greater than 15" DBH and to avoid harvesting if machines can be
moved around the tree.
Noting the site plan, the proposed drilling sites are shown with a red circle marked with an
"X". The location of each tree potentially damaged or harvetsed is shown as a red cross
hatch on the traversed route. Please call if you have any difficulty deciphering the site
plan.
We thank you for your c000peration in obtaining a timely response to our request for
exception, provided in Ordiannce 1715. Our field crews will be mobilizing on site
Thursday morning. Work will be in progress Thursday and Friday.
Sincerely,
PARKWAY PLACE PARTNERS
Michael Sandorffy
' , • ,4e...1.3441-11,;:lia"..41,..Ezia.“.16.i., •, 11:44'44An, 'IL.,16.414.ag AU% "
RE.CETNTED
NOV 0 3 1994
CL, &VII y
DEVEW'r"'
•
.pared By IREA NW, Inc
TREE INVENTORY
10/31/94 3 :18 PM INVENTA.XLS
WED
1994
MErtiT
PROJECT:
PARKWAY
PLACE REDEVELOPMENT
MUNICIPALITY:
TUKWIIA
SURVEY SPECIFICATIONS:
MINIMUM DBH:
4
in
PATH
WIDTH :
10
ft
•
SURVEY DATE:
11/1/94
WEATHER:
CLOUDY :49
•
INSTRUMENTS
Hand Compass; D Tape, Pacing
TOTAL
STATION
DESCRIPTION
AZIMUTH
SPECIES
DBH
COUNT
COMMENTS
POB
+83
0+00
Enter Canopy
354
0+44
55
.
0+79
Alder
4
5
4
3
0+89
72
Cherry
6
1
1+09
Alder
5
1
1 +44
12
1 +88 .
Alder
8
1
1+98
6
1
2 +00
6
1
2+05
7
1
2 +07
9
1
2 +12
1st Drill Site
Alder
6
• 1
2 +30
Alder
6
1
2+55
Alder
7
1
2 +65
6
Alder
9
1
3+04
Cottwd.
23
Avoid, if possible
•
16
2
Avoid, if possible
3 +24
Alder
7
- 1
3+34
Cottwd.
15
5
2
3+39
•
Alder
4
1
3+69
Cottwd.
14
1
3+79
Cottwd.
15
9
2
3+89
Cottwd.
8
1
4 +04
Alder
7
1
4 +26
3 •
Cottwd.
7
•
17
2
Avoid, if possible
4 +46
Alder
4
5
2
4 +61
Alder
5
1
4 +65
Alder
11
1
4 +77
2nd Drill Site
Cottwd. •
10
16
2
Avoid, if possible
.4+84
Cottwd.
•
13
1
5+10
Cottwd.
15
1
Avoid, if possible
5+43
Alder
10
1
5+73
Cottwd.
15
Avoid, if possible
.
Alder
7
2
5+80
Alder
5
. 1
5+85
Alder
6
1
6+00
Cottwd.
5
•
12
2
6 +10
2
Alder
5
1
6+12
Alder
5
1
6+22
•
Alder
5
1
6+61
Alder
7 1
r` r'
6+85
3rd Drill Site
�i a_
7+07
Cottwd.
14
1
7 +62
Alder
4
r01/ f1
Alder
5
Y C1 `
.
Alder
13
3
7 +70
Property Line
CC.J 1`
50
DEVEL.:.}
10/31/94 3 :18 PM INVENTA.XLS
WED
1994
MErtiT
J" «,
PARK PLACE PARTNERS
800 FIFTH AVENUE
SUITE 3700
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
206/624 -1444
3L:Octobei.:1994 .
Ms. Diana Painter
Associate Planner, City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, Washington 98188
40\ a A 7994
RE: Parkway Place - Design Review # L94 -0084
17501 Southcenter Parkway
Canopy Removal
Dear Ms. Painter:
At the BAR hearing of last Friday, the 28th, City of Tukwila required various engineering and geo-
technical investigations on the hillside to the west of the current office building. Accomplishing the
soils tests will involve placement and movement of drilling equipment on the hillside. Removal of
minor portions of the tree canopy will be necessary to place and move the drilling equipment.
Please consider this letter a request for interim Exception under Section VII of the Tree
Clearing Ordinance, Item 7.9. Parkway Place Partners will formally apply for a tree clearing
permit once site redevelopment has been approved by City of Tukwila.
All vegetation on the hillside in question was entirely removed within the last thirty years. The
hillside naturally revegetated with various deciduous tree species including maple, cottonwood and
alder. The stem count . per acre is higher than current forest practices for managed native stands -
higher than one stem per square foot in many areas.
The applicant, Parkway Place Partners, has filed a plan for redevelopment of the site. Once
project approval is received from City of Tukwila a very minor portion of the hillside will be
removed. All removal of any vegetation will be in strict compliance with Ordinance 1715.
Therefore, any vegetative removal in conjunction with geo- technical testing should be subject to the
canopy removal permit we will apply for in conjunction with the redevelopment project.
The following discussion addresses the three criteria for Exception under Section 7.9 of the
Ordinance:
1. Strict compliance with the provisions of the ordinance will jeopardize project
feasibility and reasonable use of the property. The testing required by the city and SEPA
involves three drilling sites on the hillside. Pursuant to the timeline mandated by City of Tukwila,
our work must be accomplished and results submitted to the city not later than November 10.
Allowing one day for site testing and 5 business days for analysis and reporting, indicates our need
for canopy removal approval not later than Thursday, November 3.
9:\CITY.DOCJ11/1/94
Z
a. •
2 I-
f- Z
J U;
.o O.,.
�nw
J�
•
w.o.
•
LL
D.0.
• '1- w,
:z ,
0.
•Z w
.O co!
;w W!
•
Z1.
U
Z.
�,,,a,nc,T N n, Tie:: nr. u... r+s rtvxvatwPmx� ,.,,wnr..,rnnnru+ezvnn ,v,.- ,.....
2. Removal, replacement and mitigative measures proposed are co►.astent with Section
5.2 of the Ordinance. Most important is the fact that only a very minor portion of the canopy will
be removed as a result of testing. The site crews will be directed by our representatives on site to
remove as few stems as possible and to minimize the impact of machinery on vegetation.
Visual impacts will not occur as the area in question is not visible to any residential area and is
screened from traffic and other public exposure by the adjacent nine story office building.
Increases in run -off and erosion will not likely occur, given the density of hillside vegetation and
the proposed location of test sites. The drilling equipment will travel along a relatively flat
topographic bench, changing course only to avoid tree removal, where necessary. The pathway
created will be about 8 feet wide and 500 feet long.
The canopy /trees subject to removal under the testing program will be classified and the location
referenced on a site topographic map.
Tree root systems will not be disturbed as the machinery will not excavate other than drilling sites.
If allowed to revegetate, the portion of canopy removed would "in -fill" within a very short period
of time and be unnoticeable after the spring `95 growing season.
3. Granting of the exception will not be injurious or detrimental to the public welfare.
The testing will be beneficial to the public welfare because:
1) . The testing will support the city mandate for responsible development
2) Testing will remove a very narrow strip of canopy, amounting to a "thinning" of
the canopy. This is a desirable forest practice.
3) The trees removed will be in the area of proposed canopy removal once the retail
project commences. The canopy removal will be mitigated on site per the
requirements of Ordinance 1715.
If you have any question or comments, please call. Coordinating the equipment and crews will
require additional lead time; we will appreciate a timely response to our request for exemption. We
look forward to working together with the City of Tukwila on this project.
Sincerely,
PARK PLACE PARTNERS
Mich4el Sandorffy
B: \CITY.DOGI 1 /1/94
Landscape: Architecture
December 1, 1994
Diana Painter, AICP
Associate Planner
City of Tukwila
Dept. of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, WA 98109.
RE: :Parkway Place
Dear rMs. _Painter:.
In response to your letter dated October 31, 1994, to Mr Howard Turner as per the subject site,
have assembled responses to various issues as related to the site's environmental and landscape ,
architectural concerns. LandPlan P: S. in concert. with TALASAEA, Resource and Environmental
planners, have addressed the site's sensitive areas and vegetative matters: Specifically, the
foliowing items are enclosed for your overall review: ..
1' Sensitive areas study report (conducted and assembled by TALASAEA)
2 Tree inventory and removal plan
3 .Landscape/tree replacement plan
In addition, a professional review and recommendation is submitted herein per city of Tukwila's
Interim Tree Ordinance:
General observations of the site's existing ornamental plant materials is that such material is
fair to poor in overall quality within the parking lot planters:. Quality of plant material
improves around the site's perimeters. Existing vegetation adjacent Southcenter Parkway is .
to be retained as well as a some of the planters south of the existing driveway access.`
Main Street
Suite D,
Edmonds,
Washington
9 8 0 2 >0
(206)776 -4932
(Fax) 7747803'
...d!rN ltax ?:£:'.?r1•...i'isVi. <;:�•.r.. r .v.,:'r ?.rliz:: ;.a
z
w
6
J0.
U0:
N O`
W=
u.
w 0.
ga
u_
• CJ
= w'
z
0:
z �.
D • 0
*
w w
I
o
u. z
U -'
0H.
z.._
Page 2.- Letter to Diana Painter of City of Tukwila RE: Parkway Place
124-94
2: Protection measures would be undertaken to provide protection during construction. Such
measures would include fencing around a tree's "drip-line" and minimum cut/fill within a
tree's root zone area
3. The site's western four-acre area entitled Parcel "B" would have 25,752 square feet (s.f.) of
existing vegetation disturbed. Such vegetation consists primarily of "pioneer" type species
in plant succession ecological terminology. Because of the short lived nature of such
species, 30-40 years, a lower value is attributed. The removal of such vegetation is -
proposed to,,have the replacement trees as per "tree spy", replacement ratio -- one tree
per 314 square foot of removed vegetation, equalin110_, trees. Use of the "canopy"
methodology was selected due to the dense nature of tree growth and steeply sloped
portions of the "sensitive-slope" area Specific on-site locations have been chosen for tree
enhancement: "Climax type" species with a higher value are to be planted within a plateau
area near the site southwest corner. Tree species include Big-leaf maple and Douglas fir
species. Wetland buffer-type trees, hawthorns and willow trees, 29 or more scheduled to
supplement a wetland buffer adjacent the site's wetland.
An exception to the City's tree ordinance is requested. Justification to this request can be
substantialed by the following: • -
Eleven of the site's 15 acres are in a developed state and provide a minimum aesthetic value.
2. The proposed removal of an additional 25,752 s.f. along the site's west slope area has
minimum impact due to the nature of the vegetative material; e.g., alder and black
cottonwood. •
Total tree removal plant quantities remain consistent with the "canopy" criteria count of 82
separate trees. Size has been reduced within the native rectangular area within the
southwest corner to better insure plant 'survival and rapid growth. Adjacent the site's
Wetlands area larger caliper size has been suggested, 3/4-11/4" cal., to provide a more visible
. Existing plant material within planters are to be replaced with healthy "similar" species, 2-
TA" cal. This will provide great enhancement of the area which has current questionable
tree viability.
The granting of the exception/standard reduction will not be detrimental to the public
'welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity.
th;
Page 3 Letter to Diana Painter. of City of Tukwila RE: Parkway Place
12 -1 -94
If you should have any questions or request additional information, please don't hesitate to call.
Thank you
Sincerely, .
T. Shawn Parsons ; ;
Principal/Registered.Landscape Architect #307,
cc Roy Bennion, Parkplace Partner
Howard Turner, Turner & Associates ;.
John Anderson, Bush, Roed,,& Hitchings
Bill Shiels, Talasaea Consultants
City of Tukwila
John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Diana Painter, DCD Associate Planner
FROM: Gary Schulz, DCD Urban Environmentalist
DATE: November. 28, 1994
RE: Parkway Place Retail Center #L94 -0084 Preliminary
Environmental Review.
I have reviewed the project site studies and planned proposals for this project. Also, .I have
visited much of the undeveloped portion of the site to provide recommendations for the
SEPA file and BAR review. My comments focus on project compliance with the Sensitive
Areas Ordinance (SAO, #1599) and the Interim Tree Ordinance (#1715).
This review includes 1) Sensitive areas study report, .2) Tree inventory & renroval plan, 3)
Landscape /tree replacement plan, 4) Geotechnical report, and 5) SEPA checklist. The
following recommendations have been discussed with the Department of Community
Development Director.
SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE/WETLAND ENHANCEMENT
I. TMC Chapter 18.45.040 contains a provision to allow wetland buffer reduction when
enhancement is appropriate and approved by the DCD Director. Because the on -site
wetland buffer area has been altered and lacks significant native vegetation, the proposed
reduction in buffer width is appropriate. However, the applicant must apply the SAO
requirements for wetland alterations separately from other site development modifications
that require tree replacement by the Tree Ordinance.
The buffer enhancement plan is considered conceptual and will be reviewed under the
guidelines of the SAO. Tree replacement for loss on other areas of the site cannot be
transferred to the wetland buffer zone.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 4313665
•z
•
oo:
0:
.
wo
_ •
.
o
w
:I-
!LS,
z..
_.
.o 1.
Z
Parkway Place Memo
November. 28, 1994
Page 2
II. Site reconnaissance found additional wetland area extending off -site but just north of the
delineated wetland on the site. Although the additional wetland area is off-site, the 50 -foot
buffer zone is on the project site. A field measurement indicated that the buffer zone could
extend about 20 feet onto the project site. Since the on -site buffer is part of an old railroad
bed, it could be considered for buffer reduction with enhancement.
III. Wetland boundary and buffer need to be identified on all site maps. A 15 -foot building
setback line should be shown to extend from the outer edge of the proposed wetland buffer
area (TMC 18.45.040).
W. Following the standards of the SAO, the buffer enhancement plan will use native plants
to incorporate diversity and function. TMC 18.45.040 (c)(3)(A)(ii) states The plan must
include a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and
provides additional protection for the wetland or watercourse functions and values. The
proposed enhancement only includes two species, willow and hawthorn.
TREE ORDINANCE/PERMIT
I. The applicant has submitted a tree replacement proposal based on Tree Ordinance
Section 7.9 Exceptions. The Exception uses tree canopy cover guidelines for the project's
overall tree retention and replacement. This replacement guideline if particularly
appropriate because the area of trees to be removed is comprised of dense stands of trees.
The dense composition of young trees would be costly to identify and map as "significant
trees" on an individual basis.
As discussed above, the tree canopy cover approach cannot utilize the wetland buffer area
for replacement. However, it appears that most of the existing forested slope could be
enhanced with native conifer tree species to add an evergreen component, and possibly
provide long term slope stability. Two- to four -year old seedlings may be appropriate for
forest enhancement plantings.
The area where tree removal is to occur has at least four tree species. Sheet Ll
Landscape/Tree Replacement Plan shows planting of only one species (bigleaf maple) in the
Tree Replacement Area. The tree replacement plan should also incorporate more species
diversity.
1
z,
ce
6
0o
N 0,
v) W
WI
CO IL
wo.
u_ a:
W
I- W
i- o
Z W =.
o,„
W w'
1--
IL
,LLi z
-
o.
z
Parkway Place Memo
November 28, 1994
Page 3
II. As requested by Park Place Partners (Letter 10/31/94), tree removal was permitted on
the site to accommodate the required geotechnical investigation. The written request was
approved based on minimal tree disturbance including an 8 -foot wide cleared trail. The
impacts appear to be greater than described and the area that was cleared for a trail ranges
from 14 - 19 feet in width.
In response to the City's concerns, a tree inventory for the permitted clearing was submitted
by Park Place Partners (Letter 11/2/94). A total of fifty trees were inventoried and mapped
as potential tree loss from the slope area. Tree removal and replacement for this disturbed
area will be subject to the standards of the Tree Ordinance but not allowed the use of
Section 7.9 Exceptions. Specifically, .the disturbed area for geotechnical investigation will
follow the tree replacement guidelines of Section 7.8 C.
Detailed landscaping plans with specifications, planting notes, and performance measures
ect. will be necessary for both wetland buffer enhancement and tree replacement.
SEPA CONDITIONS
I. If feasible, consider saving and relocating the higher quality trees from the existing
landscape plantings.
II. This is a new project with a large amount of impervious surface. Stormwater
management plans should include detention and biofiltration using grass -lined swales and /or
a water quality pond. If the entire site is to be re- developed, the standards of the King
County Surface Water Design Manual should apply.
cc: Rick Beeler, DCD Director
•.._..x.4.4,
LANDPLAN 't
Landscape Architecture
November 10, 1994
REC7-1v7:13
NOV 1 0 1994
•11
DEVELOPMENT
Diana Painter, AICP -
Associate Planner •
City of Tukwila
• Dept. of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100
Tukwila, WA 98109
RE Parkway Place
Dear Ms. Painter:
In response to your letter dated October 31, 1994, to Mr. Howard Turner as per the subject site, I
•
have assembled responses to various issues as related to the Site's environmental and landscape
architectural concerns. LandPlan P.S. in concert With TALASAEA, Resource and Environmental : • •
planners, have addressed the site's sensitive areas and vegetative matters. Specifically, the
. • • following items are enclosed for your Overall review: _ • • '
-.1: Sensitive areas study report (conducted and assembled by TALASAEA)
2. Tree inventory and removal plan
* ' ,3. . -an scape/tree replacement plan
. ;
In addition, a professional review and recommendation is submitted herein per city of Tukwila's
Titter* Tree Ordinance.
fair' to poor in overall quality within the parking lot planters. Quality of plant material
' 1 General observations of the site's existing ornamental plant materials is that such materialis '
•
improves around the existing building and perimeters. Existing vegetation adjacent
: . Southcenter Parkway is to be retained as well as a majority of the planters south of the
existing driveway access.
Main Street
Suite D,
Edmonds,
Washington
9 8 0 2 0
(206) 776-4932
(Fax) 774-7803
Page 2 - Letter to Diana Painter of City of Tukwila RE: Parkway Place
Protection measures would be undertaken to provide protection during construction. Such
measures would include fencing around a tree's "drip- line" and minimum cut/fill within a
tree's root zone area
The site's western four -acre area entitled Parcel "B" would have 25,752 square feet (s.f) of
existing vegetation disturbed. Such vegetation consists primarily of "pioneer" type species
in plant succession ecological terminology. Because of the short lived nature of such
species, 30 -40 years, a lower value is attributed. The removal of such vegetation is
proposed to have the replacement trees as per "tree canopy" replacement ratio -- one tree
per 314 square foot of removed vegetation, equaling 82 trees. Use of the "canopy
methodology was selected due to the dense nature of tree growth and steeply sloped
portions of the "sensitive- slope" area Specific on -site locations have been chosen for tree
enhancement: "Climax type" species with a higher value are to be planted within a plateau
area;near the site southwest corner. Tree species include Big -leaf maple and Douglas fir
species. Wetland buffer -type trees, hawthorns and willow trees, 29 or more scheduled to
supplement a wetland buffer adjacent the site's wetland.
An exception to the City's tree ordinance is requested. Justification to this request can be
substantialed by the following:
Eleven of the site's 15 acres are in a developed state and provide a minimum aesthetic value.
The proposed removal of an additional 25,752 s.f.: along the site's west slope area has
minimum impact due to the nature of the vegetative material; e.g., alder and black
cottonwood.
Total tree removal plant quantities remain consistent with the "canopy" criteria count of 82
separate trees. Size has been reduced within the native rectangular area within the .. .
southwest corner to better insure plant survival and rapid growth. Adjacent the site's
wetlands area larger caliper size has been suggested, 3/4 -11/4" cal., to provide a more visible
impact.
Existing plant material within planters are to be replaced with healthy "similar" species, 2-
2' / ". cal. This will provide great enhancement of the area which has current questionable
tree viability.
The granting of the exception/standard reduction will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity.
dl =eu%rY1fY'i.'aieir. J:bt. `aee `3v1[af71:41tiG ' •Lldi l.W:ifiYair"� i.:titi:y.Y.Crb. , •�.wL,Sx �u._,i.a.wao-...•:_ ..r...__io..s...uo...t�+�:..a. ti+
utti
z
z'
re w
00
o.
ww
J ='
U w.
w O.
ua
• a
: =d •
I- III
Z �.
F- o •
Z �.
uj
0.
0a
o �
= V,
LL: O `.
w Z,.
.0 u
•
•0
• z
Page 3.= Letter to Diana Painter of City of Tukwila RE: Parkway Place
If you should have any questions or request additional information, please don't hesitate to call..:
Thank you. •
Sincerely,
T Shawn Parsons '
Principal/Registered Landscape Architect #307
Roy Bennion, Parkplace Partner
Howard Turner, Turner & Associates
John Anderson, Bush, Roed, & Hitchings
Bill. Shiels, Talasaea Consultants
Sx; S' �5;:' tii. 5.' 1>... c...:: �s. I1:�6...+.;•Saxin :.�.t.,.....v. e.,�k's!• =�,;�.yt,' ...u......_..
•
PARK PLACE PARTNERS
800 FIFTH AVENUE
SUITE 3700
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
206/624 -1444
2 November 1994
Ms. Diana Painter .
Associate Planner, City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, Washington 98188
RE: Parkway Place - Design Review # L94 -0084
17501 Southcenter Parkway
Canopy. Removal
Dear Ms. Painter:
Attached is a tree inventory accompanied by a site plan. The tree inventory references
field work conducted by our consultant on November 1.. The site plan delineates the
approximate course traversed.
The traverse is the most likely path to be followed by the equipment, to reach the
proposed drilling sites. Along this path, each tree likely to be harvetsed was recorded for
species and diameter at 4.5 feet (DBH). We have instructed our field crews to avoid
harvesting any tree greater than 15" DBH and to avoid harvesting if machines can be
moved around the tree.
Noting the site plan, the proposed drilling sites are shown with a red circle marked with an
"X". The location of each tree potentially damaged or harvetsed is shown as a red cross
hatch on the traversed route. Please call if you have any difficulty deciphering the site
plan.
We thank you for your cooaperation in obtaining a timely response to our request for
exception, provided in. Ordiannce 1715. Our field crews will be mobilizing on site
Thursday morning. Work will be in progress Thursday and Friday.
Sincerely,
PARKWAY PLACE PARTNERS
Michael Sandorffy
RECE! ;EED
NOV 0'3 1994
G�147L�
REVELv ' r'iv..t_ I
, ,: Pr ; ared By IREA NW, Inc
TREE INVENTORY
10/31/94 3 :18 PM INVENTA.XLS
IVED
1994
IVr E NT
PROJECT:
PARKWAY
PLACE REDEVELOPMENT
MUNICIPALITY:
TUKWILA
SURVEY SPECIFICATIONS:
MINIMUM DBH:
4
In
PATH WIDTH :
10
R
•
SURVEY DATE:
11/1/94
WEATHER:
CLOUDY;49
•
INSTRUMENTS
Hand Compass. D Tape, Pacing
TOTAL
STATION
DESCRIPTION
AZIMUTH
t SPECIES
DBH
COUNT
COMMENTS
POB +83
0+00
Enter Canopy
354
0+44
55
0+79
Alder
4
5
4
3
0+89
72
Chevy
6
1
1+09
Alder
5
1
1 +44
12
1 +88
Alder
8
1
1 +98
6
1
2 +00
6
1
2 +05
7
1
2 +07
9
1
2 +12
1st Drill Site
Alder
6
1
2 +30
Alder
6
1
2 +55
Alder
7
1
2 +65
6
Alder
9
1
3+04
Cottwd.
23
Avoid, if possible
•
16
2
Avoid, If possible
3 +24
Alder
7
-. 1
3+34
Cottwd.
15
5
2
3+39
Alder
4
1
3+69
Cottwd.
14
1
3+79
Cottwd.
15
9
2
3+89
Cottwd.
8
1
4 +04
Alder
7
1
4 +26
3 .
Cottwd.
7
•
17
2
Avoid, if possible
4 +46
■Alder
4
.•
5
2
4 +61
Alder
5
1
4 +65
Alder
11
1
4 +77
2nd Drill Site
Cottwd. •
10
16
2
Avoid, if possible
4 +84
Cottwd.
13
1
5+10
Cottwd.
15
1
Avoid, if possible
5+43
Alder
10
1
5+73
Cottwd.
15
Avoid, If possible
Alder
7
2
5+80
Alder
5
1
•
5+85
Alder
6
1
6+00
Cottwd.
5
•
12
2
6+10
2
Alder
5
1
6+12
Alder
5
1
6+22
•
Alder
5
1
6+61
Alder
7
1
REC./7.-
6+85
3rd Drill Site
7 +07
Cottwd.
14
1
7 +62
Alder
4
NOV n [ f1
Alder
5
t1
.
Alder
13
'
3
7 +70
Property Line
CiU,•
5o
DEVEL;.:r
10/31/94 3 :18 PM INVENTA.XLS
IVED
1994
IVr E NT
November 2, 1994
City of Tukwila • John W. Rants, Mayor
Department of Community Development Rick Beeler, Director
Mr. Howard Turner
Turner & Associates
18420 24th Place'Northeast
Seattle, Washington 98155
z
..� tom.
Liu
6
t0) 0
. r W W
J ;
cn u_;:
W q
J
The following outlines our current agreement for tree clearing and replacement for the Parkway Place project.
• . Comments and requirements are based on Tukwila city ordinance #1715, adopted August 1994. = d,
Tree clearing for geotech work Z �;
O.
z t—'.
In response to the letter from Michael Sandorffy, dated October 31, 1994, the director of the planning division ` W W
D DI has made the following determination. Work on tree clearin g for the purpose of doin g preliminary
D p•.
geotechnical work on the site can proceed, provided that: 8 m,
1. • The applicant must provide a map of the route by which the soil boring equipment will enter the site W v
and proceed with testing.
2. Trees to be removed must be counted (species and caliper noted), per Ordinance #1715, and this 0'
'
information recorded. ' it z
3. . Clearing trees in.excess of 15" in diameter should be avoided wherever possible. H =?
z..
Re: Parkway Place Tree Clearing Permit
Dear Mr. Turner:
We will be inspecting the site, both when the trees are tagged and when soil boring in underway. You can
provide us with the requested materials after your testing is completed.
Tree clearing permit application
Please note that you must apply to the Department of Community Development in order to have your request
to survey and replace your trees by the 'canopy method' considered, as it is an exception and not a choice in
fulfilling the requirements of•the code. This request can be submitted in conjunction with your tree inventory,
.replacement plan, and other supporting.` documentation. Please respond to exception criteria when making
this request. Please note that permit application materials must be prepared by professional landscape
architect, surveyor or arborist, and must be consistent with code requirements.
Replacement of canopy cover
As stated in the ordinance, if you are granted an exception, you may determine the trees to be replaced by the
following method (see 7.9 (D) (1) & (2)). You have a choice as to whether you wish to replace existing
landscaping by providing canopy cover over 20% of your entire site, or by replacing existing canopy area (both
trees in sensitive area and trees that are. a part of formal landscaping scheme).
In order for us to review your proposal, you need to provide figures on existing canopy, and also demonstrate
1
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax. (206) 431-3665
how your proposed scheme fulfills criteria in code. One method of doing this is to calculate total canopy area
in sensitive areas. Add to this the square footage of existing canopy within landscaped areas by assigning an
average canopy size to each species. Since all landscaping is mature, you can assign an average canopy size
at maturity per species. This will give you total canopy cover on the site.
Tree replacement can consist of any combination of new and existing trees over the entire site area. In order
to prepare the replacement plan, you need to know how many trees are required to replace canopy that is to
be removed. Divide the total canopy to be removed by 314 square feet to get the number of trees . for
replacement. For canopy to be retained (either: in place or retained elsewhere on site), existing trees can
'count' toward replacement trees at a 1:1 ratio, unless you are fulfilling the ordinance by the '20% of the site'
method.
Please note. that once 'the total number of trees to be replaced is determined, you must replace these at a
maximum density of 70•trees per acre, and they must be a minimum oft /12" caliper (for deciduous trees).
•
Tree replacement plan
Please note that you must fulfill all relevant provisions of ordinance in your tree replacement plan. The
following items are discussed because they are of particular relevance to your project.
The tree replacement plan or landscape plan must be prepared by an appropriate professional.
While the City places priority . on saving existing mature landscaping, higher priority is placed on
existing stands of trees, trees at the perimeter of site, and trees within sensitive areas. Therefore,
retaining existing trees within the parking lot would have lower priority than saving other trees on the .
site.
Respond to items 5.4 (1) Best Management Practices, 7.3 (C) professional review, and 7.8 (B) Tree
Protection, in ordinance in preparing plan to preserve and /or relocate existing landscaping.
If you have any questions, please give me a call at 431 -3661.
Sincerely,
Diana Painter, AICP
Associate Planner
cc Rick Beeler
Jack Pace
Gary Schulz
Ann' Siegenthaler
Michael Woodland
Michael Sandorffy
Roy Bennion
Park Place Partners
800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3700
Seattle, Washington 98104
•
PARK PLACE PARTNERS
800 FIFTH AVENUE
SUITE 3700
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
206/624 -1444
`31;October:.1994 ,.
Ms. Diana Painter
Associate Planner, City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, Washington 98188
RE: Parkway Place - Design Review
17501 Southcenter Parkway
'Canopy,-Removal
Dear Ms. Painter:
to 0 1994
OE v��pp1J►'�I`�T
# L94 -0084
At the BAR hearing of last Friday, the 28th, City of Tukwila required various engineering and geo-
technical investigations on the hillside to the west of the current office building. Accomplishing the
soils tests will involve placement and movement of drilling equipment on the hillside. Removal of
minor portions of the tree canopy will be necessary to place and move the drilling equipment.
Please consider this letter a request for interim Exception under Section VII of the Tree
Clearing Ordinance, Item 7.9. Parkway Place Partners will formally apply for a tree clearing
permit once site redevelopment has been approved by City of Tukwila.
All vegetation on the hillside in question was entirely removed within the Last thirty years. The
hillside naturally revegetated with various deciduous tree species including maple, cottonwood and
alder. The stem count per acre is higher than current forest practices for managed native stands -
higher than one stem per square foot in many areas.
The applicant, Parkway Place Partners, has filed a plan for redevelopment of the site. Once
project approval is received from City of Tukwila a very minor portion of the hillside will be
removed. All removal of any vegetation will be in strict compliance with Ordinance 1715.
Therefore, any vegetative removal in conjunction with geo- technical testing should be subject to the
canopy removal permit we will apply for in conjunction with the redevelopment project.
The following discussion addresses the three criteria for Exception under Section 7.9 of the
Ordinance:
1. Strict compliance with the provisions of the ordinance will jeopardize project
feasibility and reasonable use of the property. The testing required by the city and SEPA
involves three drilling sites on the hillside. Pursuant to the timeline mandated by City of Tukwila,
our work must be accomplished and results submitted to the city not later than November 10,
Allowing one day for site testing and 5 business days for analysis and reporting, indicates our need
for canopy removal approval not later than Thursday, November 3.
B:\CITY.DOCJI1 /1/94
0 •
2. Removal, replacement and mitigative measures proposed are consistent with Section
5.2 of the Ordinance. Most important is the fact that only a very minor portion of the canopy will
be removed as a result of testing. The site crews will be directed by our representatives on site to
remove as few stems as possible and to minimize the impact of machinery on vegetation.
Visual impacts will not occur as the area in question is not visible to any residential area and is
screened from traffic and other public exposure by the adjacent nine story office building.
Increases in run -off and erosion will not likely occur, given the density of hillside vegetation and
the proposed location of test sites. The drilling equipment will travel along a relatively flat
topographic bench, changing course only to avoid tree removal, where necessary. The pathway
created will be about 8 feet wide and 500 feet long.
The canopy/trees subject to removal under the testing program will be classified and the location
referenced on a site topographic map.
Tree root systems will not be disturbed as the machinery will not excavate other than drilling sites.
If allowed to revegetate, the portion of canopy removed would "in -fill" within a very short period
of time and be unnoticeable after the spring `95 growing season.
3. Granting of the exception will not be injurious or detrimental to the public welfare.
The testing will be beneficial to the public welfare because:
1) The testing will support the city mandate for responsible development
2) Testing will remove a very narrow strip of canopy, amounting to a "thinning" of
the canopy. This is a desirable forest practice.
3) The trees removed will be in the area of proposed canopy removal once the retail
project commences. The canopy removal will be mitigated on site per the
requirements of Ordinance 1715.
If you have any question or comments, please call. Coordinating the equipment and crews will
require additional lead time; we will appreciate a timely response to our request for exemption. We
look forward to working together with the City of Tukwila on this project.
Sincerely,
PARK PLACE PARTNERS
B:\CflY.noal1 /1/94
ee,,,,,/c 14/ //j
et/2/i P7/--
//,0 V/ 10/,e_ 11,“: -A59. P-/12._
c-,0
CL
3)
/1
.�:;..:rtit.:'A..:,.v_S.: -a `. �,:: su: itl •Bv.M. >: <- ,.:<S:•:ii:':ss�.C: uSEi: S 'x..s�xas:r'u�'i+.:.v�'.tcliac�.