The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPermit L08-065 - SMITH TODD - TREE CLEARINGCOOKS CREEK MEADOWS TREE PERMIT 13325 MACADAM RD S L08 -065 • • City of Tukwila Planning and Permits Tree Permit Response to 18.54.130 & 18.54.140 Permit Approval Criteria, I wish to request the removal of a number of small trees from my property located at 13325 Macadam Road S. and the invasive blackberries and ivy that is climbing on several of the large trees. The area in question is a sensitive area bounded by a type 3 wetland to the east and Southgate creek to the west. I removed about 35 trees. No trees or shrubbery will be removed within 40 feet of the creek, nor trees above 11" dia. keeping the canopy intact. We removed three 8 inch and one 9 inch diameter Alders that were crowding and shading a 40 year old hazelnut tree (starving for sunlight), and several cherry trees. I removed two 8 inch broadleaf trees that were diseased. The leaves were heavily discolored and lacking foliage. Upon cutting down inspection revealed one had a crevice through the center about 4 inches, and the other had severe discoloration through over half of the rings at the base. The rest of the trees, 90% alder, were 4" or less. I plan to follow the attached ESA mitigation recommendations, which includes removal of the invasive blackberry roots, canary grass, and much of the ivy that chokes several of the larger trees, which I would very much like completed this fall. My plan is to plant next spring 3 -4 quaking aspen, a couple of vine maple, a large leaf maple, and 2 conifers. Shrubs will be planted along the wetland such as blueberries, red twig dogwood bush, currants and other shrubs or bushes that attract wildlife. In the spring we will continue to maintain the area free of invasive species. Sincerely, Todd Smith a•tit 9' 3 0 2 V! - • • T Smith From: Scott Lankford [scott@designsnw.com] Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 12:50 PM To: 'Cooke Riverside' Subject: RE: autocad files for Cooke Creek Meadows Hi Todd, Good to hear from you. Hope things are going well. P indicates Quaking Aspen, Populus tremuloides, 1 -2" caliper. V indicates Vine Maple, Acer circinatum, 8 -12' tall, multi cane. in circle indicates Western Red Cedar, Thuja Plicata excelsior, 8' tall Blueberries indicates blue berry, Vaccinum sp., 5g. set 5' on center. Hope this helps. Let me know if I can help further. Scott, Original Message From: Cooke Riverside [mailto:cookecottages @ q.com] Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2008 10:04 PM To: 'Scott Lankford' Subject: FW: autocad files for Cooke Creek Meadows Would you please send the planting legend for this drawing. I have gotten myself into a pit of a spot with Tukwila. Thanks Todd Smith, CEO Cooke Riverside Properties, LLC. PO Box 97193 Tacoma, WA 98497 253 - 691 -8191 Cookecottages @q.com www.cottagesnw.com From: Scott Lankford [mailto:scott@designsnw.com] Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 11:28 AM To: 'Chandler Stever'; 'Cooke Riverside' Cc: Dan @designsnw.com Subject: autocad files for Cooke Creek Meadows Hi Tod and Chandler, Please review the following attachment for the autocad layout for Cooke Creek Meadows. Because we are numbering the parking layout, we gave the units letters to avoid confusion. Please give us feedback on any adjustments you have at this stage. Scott, i i i PLANTING SCHEDULE SCIENTIFIC NAME WETLAND ENHANCMENT PLANTS Athyrium f1io— lemino Cornus stolonilero Males fusee Rubes spectabilis Thuja plicate BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANTS Acer circinotum Acer mocrophyllum Corylus cornuto Physocarpus capitatus Populus tremuloides Ribes sanguineurn Rubus spectabilis Rosa gyrnnocarpo Symphoricarpos olbus Thuja plicato SCARIFY ROOTBALL AND SPREAD ROOTS CONSTRUCT 3' WATERING BASIN. 1.5 X ROOTBALL DEPTH COMMON NAME Lady Fern Redtwig Dogwood Oregon Crabapple Salmonberry Western Red Cedor Vine Maple Big Leaf Maple Hazelnut Pacific Ninebork 0uaking Aspen Red — flowering Curront Salmonberry Boldhip Rose Snowberry Western Red Cedar 'NOTE: ON SLOPES, CONSTRUCT WATERING BASIN DN DOENHILL SIDE OF PLANTING HOLE ONLY. 1 3X ROOTBALL DIAMETER TREE/SHRUB SLOPE PLANTING DETAIL SECTION NOT TO SCALE 3 LAYER OF MULCH IN 304 CIRCLE AROUND TREES & SHRUBS FINISH GRADE OTY X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 117E 1 GAL 1 GAL. 5 GAL. 1 GAL. 1 GAL. 2 GAL. 1 GAL. 2 GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. GAL. SCARIFY ROOTBALL AND SPREAD ROOTS 1.5 X BACKFILL WITH NATIVE TOPSOIL R001BALL DEPTH SCARIFY EDGES OF PLANTING HOLE TO ALLOW FOR ROOT PENETRATION COMPACT SOIL UNDER ROOTBALL SPACING/NOTES, 4' D.C. 3' 0.0. 9' O.C. 9' 0.0. 4' 0.0. 4' 0.C. 9' 0.C. 4' 0.C. 4' 0.C. 9' 0.0. 4' 0.C. 4' 0.C. 4' O. C 4' 0.C. 9' 0.C. OOIBALL DIAMETER 3 MAIN( 1EORA7a1 TO as,s0 (7111 91506 (7114 WES (1104 11111.1. 1,4' 1 041131E TOOT WA ISd8 TYPICAL WETLAND BUFFER ENHANCEMFNT PI ANTING DFTAII tuvi➢w (711.1 MCAT 111.17111217 8000801115415 A 1.524 8010E 1807 71EA TO CONSIST 00 1 1166 MO 00 SHOJIS PLANT MOM 00 9101!5 N 003/5 00 2, 5, 7, 00109 11 IN A mmu.Sna 9271113. 008 9915 440 001 03050 PATTE758 AM 107 0E01E9 3' LAYER OF MULCH IN 30' CIRCLE AROUND TREES & SHRUBS— KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM STEMS CONSTRUCT 3' WATERING BASIN FINISH GRADE BACKF1LL WITH NATIVE TOPSOIL 1127 SCARIFY EDGES OF PLANTING HOLE TO ALLOW FOR ROOT PENETRATION COMPACT SOIL UNDER 900194LL SEMI TREE/SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 107108001 5' 606 SPOT CEDAR POST. NOTCHED TO HOLD RAILS 9110E AREA SIGN SPOT CEDAR RAIL 64 DIA CEDAR POSTS Bo-CRUSHED ROCK, TYP. CONCRETE F001150, TYP, SLOPE TOP TO DRAIN. 14 -18'. ELEVATION TYP, SPLIT RAIL FENCE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 4OURCE: Sdood.r Land 53ne41121, Sr, Cooks Flow&. 0205127.0 Figure 6 Conceptual Mitigation Plan -Notes Tukwila, Washington WETLAND AND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT AREA — 16,580 SF WETLAND A (906 SF) FOOTBRIDGE/3' PATH UNREGULATED WETLAND B (227 SF) SPLIT -RAIL FENCE 50' STANDARD WETLAND BUFFER Nc3T s L.e w0 P ■M\ Y J LOT 73.600962 CB TA, LOT 7340600993 FAST N90'00'00'E SOUTHGATE CREEK TYPE 2 STREAM 50' WETLAND BUFFER Fr 1o0'STREAM BUFFER 90 South 134th Street SENSITIVE AREAS SIGNAGE 10' BUILDING SETBACK 25 BUFFER .»l wn a tea. 20' OUIET TITLE EASEMENT BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY LEGEND 2.6 al af9aNaN avm WETLAND AND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT AREA SOURCE: Schroo.r Wd 6wwy9p. 2007 Co o. Pmryny. 0209127.0 Figure 4 Conceptual Mitigation Plan Tukwila. Washington SOUTHGATE CREEK TYPE 2 STREAM WETLAND A (908 SF) FOOTBRIDGE/3' PATH - 0 !-- 0__' � 1 Jr° aa:1110 7. L^i 7.C.0863 .i �i,. =11- Rai I i - --� :Lni ii UNREGULATED WETLAND B (227 SF) PROPOSED AREA OF REDUCTION -2,820 SF 50' WETLAND BUFFER .1 nee lack oamlad CI • 0 O. 3 0 0 a 0 0 50 WETLAND BUFFER T Feat 101 7340900902 „da a[sl lo• 100' STREAM BUFFER South 134th Street N„roa..a) f- 10' BUILDING SETBACK �-- 25' BUFFER PROPERTY BOUNDARY 20' QUIET TITLE EASEMENT BOUNDARY apraa SOURCE. sd..et.r land 619va190. 2007 C00Ye a.,wro. 02Ce127a Figure 3 Wetland Buffer Impacts Tukwila, Washington UNREGULATED WETLAND B (227 SF) WETLAND A (908 SF) SOUTHGATE CREEK TYPE 2 STREAM I Tut 007 7340800983 50' WETLAND BUFFER .ut .d a• .eea I.e. .l nun a Loa 50' WETLAND BUFFER 100' STREAM BUFFER Fee 88S7 .90p V0"F 1. .1 �— 1— O.S - 1 Soul:? 1.141h Sl eei PROPERTY BOUNDARY CENTERLINE OF SWALE ...at ..t .k Imo .e. hnp •oee bap 20' QUIET TITLE EASEMENT <'a rcte 177•.77 C...e. So. 1].in St EXISTING RESIDENCE (TO BE DEMOLISHED) ary..1 opran SOURCE: 8avo.tar Land 8444455l, 2087 C01 Fro9•at. =8177.0 Figure 2 Wetland Survey Tukwila Washington r 14'SAAdolfsafb Ai memorandum 5309 Shilshole Avenue. Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 206.789.9658 phone 206.789.9684 fax www adolfson.com date October 16, 2007 to Mr. Todd Smith from Ms. Linda Krippner subject Cooke Property Conceptual Mitigation Plan ESA Adolfson (Adolfson) is pleased to present this conceptual mitigation plan for the Cooke Property at 13325 Macadam Road South in Tukwila, Washington (Figure 1). This property is currently developed with a single - family residence. The project proposal is to subdivide this approximately one -acre property into two lots for a cottage house development with nine housing units. New homes would be situated on the east portion of the property. Several low impact development strategies are being proposed for stormwater treatment on this site. Site Description Macadam Road bounds the Cooke property to the east, and other low- density single - family residential lots surround it to the north, and south. The western edge of the property abuts Southgate Creek, a perennial, fish bearing stream. The east portion of the property is developed with a single family home (Photo 1) and the remainder of the site is dominated by Himalayan blackberry and red alder. The site slopes relatively steeply near the center of the site to a wetland swale on the west portion of the site. The west portion of the site is relatively flat between the wetland swale and Southgate Creek. Wetland Study Summary One wetland (Wetland A) is located on the east portion of the site and one wetland (Wetland B) is located offsite to the north (Figure 2). Adolfson scientists, Linda Krippner and Brooke Sullivan, conducted wetland delineation field surveys on December 5, 2006 and February 16, 2007. The boundary for Wetland B was revised during the wetland verification site visit by Sandra Whiting from the City of Tukwila, on August 6, 2007. Teresa Vanderburg and Brooke Sullivan from Adolfson were present for the City's wetland verification site visit and the wetland memorandum, dated August 13, 2007, was revised accordingly. Wetland A is a depressional wetland located on the west portion of the site at the base of a slope in a drainage swale west of the single - family home. Wetland B is a small slope wetland located offsite to the north. Wetland B is too small to be regulated by the City (Tukwila Municipal Code [TMC] 18.45.80.B.3). Wetland A is an emergent and forested wetland that is contained within a 10 -foot wide swale on the site. Reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry dominate in open emergent areas (Photo 2) and red alder, Sitka willow and Himalayan blackberry dominate in forested areas (Photo 3). South of the site Wetland A is positioned in a wider depressional area that is dominated by a monoculture of reed canarygrass (Photo 4). North of the site Wetland A remains contained in a swale and is dominated by creeping buttercup and Himalayan blackberry (Photo 5). The Cooke Property October 16, 2007 • • wetland buffer on the site and in offsite areas is dominated by Himalayan blackberry (Photo 6) with some relatively dense stands of red alder and willow also present. The habitat functions of Wetland A and its buffer are limited by the prevalence of non - native invasive species, mainly Himalayan blackberry and reed canarygrass. English ivy is also present in some areas of the wetland and buffer. Water quality functions are moderate due to the presence of dense vegetation and the lack of a surface water outlet. Hydrologic functions are moderate due to the position of Wetland A in a closed depression. City of Tukwila Regulations Wetlands and streams in the City of Tukwila are regulated in accordance with the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 18.45. Wetland A is considered a Type 3 wetland because it is less than one acre in size and has two wetland classes (emergent and forested) (TMC 18.45.080). Wetland B does not meet the criteria for a Type 3 wetland because it is less than one thousand square feet in size, though it contains two wetland classes (TMC18.45.80.B.3). Thus, it is not regulated by the City of Tukwila and requires no standard wetland buffer. Southgate Creek, located offsite to the west, is considered to be a Type 2 Watercourse because it is perennial and has the potential to provide habitat for salmonoids (TMC 18.45.100). The standard buffer for Type 2 Watercourses is 100 feet. This buffer extends onto the west portion of the site. The buffer boundary for the stream is shown on Figure 3. The stream buffer does not extend as far east as Wetland A. The buffer setback for residential buildings is 10 feet from the buffer edge. Building plans must also show the 20- foot area beyond the buffer setback within which the potential impacts of development on the buffer will be reviewed. Project Impacts No regulated wetland areas will be filled as a result of this proposal. The bridge will span the width of the wetland so that no footings will be located within the wetland, but they will be located in the wetland buffer. The project proposal includes the reduction of the standard 50 -foot wetland buffer to 25 feet, a 3 -foot wide wood chip trail in the buffer, and a 3 -foot wide, approximately 10 -foot long pedestrian bridge spanning the wetland swale (Figure 3). Existing vegetation in the outer 25 feet (east side only) of the 50 -foot buffer will be cleared for the development. This outer buffer area has limited habitat functions and is dominated by Himalayan blackberry. A few young trees may also be cleared in this area but none of these trees are 10 inches dbh (diameter at breast height) or more in size. The total area of buffer reduction is approximately 2,620 square feet. The 25 -foot wetland buffer east of the wetland boundary and the wetland and stream buffer areas on the west portion of the property will be cleared of Himalayan blackberry and other non - native invasive plant species and replanted with native vegetation under the enhancement plan. Since the 25 -foot buffer area east of the wetland is dominated by Himalayan blackberry, no impacts to the protected 25 -foot buffer are expected as a result of construction and the placement of permanent buildings within 20 feet of the building setback. Stormwater runoff from the site is not expected to negatively affect the wetland or buffer functions. As you have described, several low impact development strategies are proposed to minimize the negative effects normally associated with stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces. Pervious pavement will be used for the driveways and other internal roadways. Rainwater catchment systems will collect water from the metal roofs of some of the houses to provide irrigation water supply during the summer for landscaping. Other roof runoff will likely be dispersed using a level spreader system or some other similar functioning system before entering the wetland or wetland buffer. 2 • Cooke Property October 16, 2007 • • Conceptual Mitigation Plan Mitigation sequencing: avoidance, minimization, and compensation have been followed in the preparation of this conceptual mitigation plan. Wetland impacts will be avoided and no high quality buffer areas will be affected by the proposal. Most of the vegetation to be cleared within the outer 25 -feet of the standard wetland buffer is non- native Himalayan blackberry. To compensate for reducing the wetland buffer to 25 feet the remaining wetland and stream buffer areas between the development and the wetland and between the wetland and the stream will be enhanced. In addition, the onsite wetland area will be enhanced to compensate for minor impacts from the pedestrian bridge and pathway located in buffer and wetland areas. Low impact development strategies will be used to control stormwater runoff from the new development. Wetland and Buffer Enhancement The conceptual mitigation plans for this wetland and buffer enhancement are provided in Figures 4 and 5. The total area of wetland and buffer enhancement is estimated to be 16,580 square feet. This provides more than a 6:1 mitigation ratio for the buffer reduction proposed. TMC does not specify a mitigation ratio for compensation for buffer impacts. All wetland and buffer areas on the site will be enhanced by removing invasive plant species and replanting with native shrubs and trees. Dense stands of young red alder may be selectively thinned to allow remaining trees more space to grow to larger; no other native species will be removed in these areas. These trees will be replaced with a more diverse array of trees including quaking aspen, western redcedar, big -leaf maple, and vine maple. The enhancement planting is expected to result in a more diverse vegetation community that attracts a variety of native wildlife species, mainly birds in this urban setting. Split rail fencing will be placed along the north property boundary in order to prevent all terrain vehicles from entering the site. Sensitive area signs will be placed along the 25 -foot buffer boundary east of the wetland. Maintenance, Monitoring, and Contingency An aggressive weed management program will need to be followed in order for this buffer enhancement project to be successful. This may entail the use of cardboard and mulch following weed removal to keep the blackberry from re- establishing and to prevent erosion on the slope. Spot treatment using herbicide treatment may also be necessary for continued blackberry control. The maintenance, monitoring, and contingency plans will be provided in the final mitigation plan. Monitoring and maintenance are expected to occur for a period of five years following plant installation. Limitations Within the limitations of schedule, budget, seasonal constraints, and scope -of -work, we warrant that this study was conducted in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and criteria in effect at the time this study was performed, as outlined in the Methods section. The results and conclusions of this report represent the authors' best professional judgment, based upon information provided by the project proponent in addition to that obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Attachments: Figures 1 through 5 Photos 1 through 6 3 SOURCE: City of Tukwila, 2005; King County, 2006 Figure 1 Vicinity Map Cooke Property Tukwila, Washington Cooke Property 1 Photo 1. Developed portion of the site, view east towards Macadam Road (12-05-06) i•‘1 • 7 Photo 2. Wetland A dominated by reed canarygrass and Himalayan blackberry on the site (2-16-07). Cooke Property Photo 5. Wetland A dominated by creeping buttercup and Himalayan blackberry north of the site (12- 5 -06). 1 Photo 6. Wetland A buffer dominated by Himalayan blackberry (2- 16 -07). Cooke Property Photo 3. Wetland A forested habitat on the site (12- 05 -06). sit < t1 Photo 4. Wetland A dominated by reed can Y canarygrass south of the site (2- 16 -07). • • CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan(a4ci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, a1ents, engin ntracto o other representatives e n t to enter upon Owner's real property, located at T i 3 5� for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at T"4WV (city), (state), on a Cie) Print Name 76-?e S377 Addressed a d)c 97) q3 1-G 08” 7 ,20 OK Phone Number Signature On this day personally appeared before me to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she signed the same as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. /7 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS ?V DAY OF a , 20 0� A _ wAA 1 A NOT PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington IN • My Commission expires on 1 b' ( \ 12p 1 residing at P: \Planning Fonns\Applications\2007 Applications \TreePermit- 12- 07.doc December 5, 2007 • CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA OCT 2 0 2008 TREE R CLEARING PERMIT - - - - -- - APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P -TREE Planner: r , r (le(y f File Number: LP — 0 b Application Complete (Date: v ) Project File Number: Application incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: RCA -Oa) - r)-7 3 NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Cooke_ Creek Re, t LOCATION OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. $ 3 a ‘ S ;rives IA-, LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). 7VMO$0 9g3 DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the owner /applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Address: 0 b g)g 77 i A — 98P9'1 Phone: 2 e 3 - ql FAX: 0 % — 35/9g E -mail: ` %; ( _ / Date: /(9/ �1/ 2_c O'( Signature: P:1Planning Forms\Applications\2007 Applications \TrccPermit -12 -07 doc December 5, 2007 J: June 1, 2010 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development NOTICE OF DECISION TO: Todd Smith, Applicant King County Assessor, Accounting Division Washington State Department of Ecology USACOE Jack Pace, Director This letter serves as a notice of decision and is issued pursuant to TMC 18.104.170 on the following project and permit approval. I. PROJECT INFORMATION Project File Number: L09 -012 Buffer Reduction, L08 -065 Tree Clearing Permit Applicant: Todd Smith, Property Owner Type of Permit Applied for: Special Permission from the Director to deviate from the City's buffer requirements for a Type 3 wetland buffer; Tree Clearing permit (mitigation plan) for unauthorized tree clearing in a sensitive area buffer. Project Description: Location: Associated Files: Comprehensive Plan Designation/Zoning District: II. DECISION SEPA Determination: SM FBA Cooke Cottages\SAO NOD.doc The applicant has been selected by the City to develop his site into a 9 -lot compact single family development under the City's Housing Options Ordinance. As part of the site design, the applicant is seeking approval of a 50% buffer reduction, buffer mitigation and enhancement plans, wetland dredging and tree clearing permit. The applicant has requested to reduce the buffer distance from 50 feet to 25 feet. Additionally, using low - impact development techniques, some stormwater from the site will eventually be discharged into the buffer area and wetland. 13325 Macadam Road South L09 -020 (Short Plat), E09 -001 (Environmental Review), L09 -013 (Design Review), future Development Permit and future Public Works Activities Permits Low - Density Residential (LDR) A Determination of Non - Significance was issued on November 20, 2009. Page 1 of 3 06/01/2010 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Decision on Substantive Permit: The Community Development Director has determined that the application for wetland enhancement, wetland buffer reduction and tree clearing in preparation to develop a 9 -lot compact single family project • complies with applicable City and state code requirements and has approved that application, subject to any conditions which are set forth in the Decision based on the findings and conclusions contained in the staff report. The following conditions have been placed on the project: 1. Work in the mitigation area will only occur during non - flowing/saturated conditions. The preferred time for construction is in the dry season (June- October). 2. Prior to the issuance of the Public Works permit: a. Provide a cost estimate of the labor and materials for the five year monitoring requirement for the City's approval. b. Submit a performance and maintenance security guarantee (bond or cash assignment) of 150% of the approved cost of labor and materials for the project to guarantee performance, maintenance, monitoring costs and correction of possible deficiencies. The guarantee may be held longer than 5 years if the performance standards have not been met or the mitigation has not been successfully established (TMC 18.45.090F7 and 18.45.210). 3. Monitoring: a. A monitoring report, prepared by a qualified wetland biologist that documents performance of the wetland/buffer area in comparison to the performance standards, shall be submitted to the City on an annual basis, starting approximately 1 year after completion of the construction. b. The monitoring report shall include evidence that this project has not changed the hydrology of any downstream, off-site wetlands. Prior to the final inspection of the public works permit the applicant shall provide baseline off -site hydrology conditions and the future monitoring shall be compared to the baseline conditions. c. A qualified landscape maintenance contractor is required to carry out the maintenance for the five year monitoring period. III. YOUR APPEAL RIGHTS The Decision on this Permit Application is a Type 2 decision pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code §18.104.010. Other land use applications related to this project may still be pending. No administrative appeal of a DNS or an EIS is permitted. One administrative appeal to the Planning Commission of the Decision on the Permit itself is permitted. If an MDNS was issued, any person wishing to challenge either the conditions which were imposed by the MDNS decision or the failure of the Department to impose additional conditions in the MDNS must raise such issues as part of the appeal to the Planning Commission. A party who is not satisfied with the outcome of the administrative appeal process may file an appeal in King County Superior Court from the Planning Commission decision. IV. PROCEDURES AND TIME FOR APPEALING In order to appeal the Community Development Director's decision on the Permit Application, a written notice of appeal must be filed with the Department of Community Development within 21 days of the issuance of this Decision, which is by June 23, 2010. SM H:1A Cooke Cottages\SAO NOD.doc Page 2 of 3 06/01/2010 • • The requirements for such appeals are set forth in Tukwila Municipal Code 18:116. All appeal materials shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Appeal materials MUST include: 1. The name of the appealing party. 2. The address and phone number of the appealing party; and if the appealing party is a corporation, association or other group, the address and phone number of a contact person authorized to receive notices on the appealing party's behalf. 3. A statement identifying the decision being appealed and the alleged errors in the decision, including any specific challenge to an MDNS. 4. The Notice of Appeal shall identify (a) the specific errors of fact or errors in application of the law in the decision being appealed; (b) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and (c) the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be limited to matters or issues raised in the Notice of Appeal. 5. Appeal fee of $115. V. APPEAL HEARINGS PROCESS Any administrative appeal regarding the Permit shall be conducted as an open record hearing before the Hearing Examiner based on the testimony and documentary evidence presented at the open record hearing. The Hearing Examiner's decision on the appeal is the City's final decision. Any party wishing to challenge the Director's decision on this application must file an appeal pursuant to the procedures and time limitations set forth in RCW 36.70C. An appeal challenging a DNS, an MDNS or an EIS may be included in such an appeal. If no appeal of the Planning Commission decision is properly filed in Superior Court within such time limit, the Decision on this permit will be final. The City's decision to issue a DNS, an MDNS or an EIS is final for this permit and any other pending permit applications for the development of the subject property. VI. INSPECTION OF INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at the Tukwila Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100, Tukwila, Washington 98188 from Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Stacy MacGregor, who may be contacted at 206 -433 -7166 or smacgregor @ci.tukwila.wa.us for further information. Property owners affected by this decision may request a change in valuation for their property tax purposes. Contact the King County Assessor's Office for further information regarding property tax valuation changes. The notice board must be removed at the expiration of the appeal period if no appeal is filed. �ft Jack 11' ace, Director Dep.! ent of Community Development City of Tukwila SM H:W Cooke Cottages\SAO NOD.doc Page 3 of 3 06/01/2010 • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development MEMORANDUM Jim Haggerton, Mayor Jack Pace, Director June 1, 2010 TO: Jack Pace, Director, Department of Community Development FM: Stacy MacGregor, Assistant Planner RE: L09 -012: Special Permission- Director, Request to Alter a Type 3 Wetland and Reduce a Type 3 Wetland Buffer; L08 -065: Request to Approve a Buffer Enhancement Plan for unauthorized tree clearing in a sensitive area Todd Smith, property owner, and Chandler Stever, project architect, have received approval to develop a cottage housing project under the Housing Options Program (TMC 18.120). The 9 -home cottage development is dependent upon a wetland buffer reduction to create the building area needed for the project's design. Following approval of a buffer reduction, a short plat application and design review decision will be pursued. Sensitive area enhancement is also required as mitigation for unauthorized tree clearing within the wetland and stream buffers. The project site contains a Type 3 wetland with associated buffers and the buffer for a Type II stream. The applicant has requested to reduce the development (east) side of the wetland buffer from 50 feet to 25 feet plus the required 10 foot building setback. Located within the reduced buffer would be portions of two cottages, landscaping and pathways, a portion of a rain garden and a 50' dispersion trench. The project proposes to use both sides of the wetland and the stream buffer for sensitive area enhancement and mitigation. The buffered area between the wetland and stream will be improved to enhance their function via native plantings and removal of invasive species; a walking trail . will lead through the buffers; the wetland volume will be increased through excavation to increase the holding capacity of the wetland and planted to improve the wetland's water filtration. Some of the stormwater from the site will filter through the rain garden system and be dispersed into the wetland. A weir will be installed that will hold back the increased water volume and act as a footbridge over the wetland. The applicant has applied for a permit from the USACOE for work within the wetland. This application is seeking approval of a 50% buffer reduction, buffer mitigation and enhancement plans, wetland dredging and tree clearing permit. Background The project site contains a Type 3 wetland and is adjacent to Southgate Creek, a Type II stream. TMC 18.45.080 defines Type 3 wetlands as wetlands that are greater than 1,000 square feet and less than one acre in size with two or fewer wetland classes; Type 3 wetlands require a 50 -foot buffer. TMC 18.45.100 defines a Type II stream as a stream that has perennial or intermittent flow and supports salmonid fish. A Type II stream is required to have a 100 -foot buffer from ordinary high water mark (TMC 18.45.100). The site contains two parcels with one house on the eastern -most parcel. In the past, the area between the wetland and the stream was used as a garden area for the existing home. According to the applicant, water in the wetland has decreased in recent years and this decrease occurred simultaneously with upland development. It appears that in the past, the site was cleared and according to the applicant's Geotechnical Report fill was brought onto the site. The wetland is bisected by a drainage swale. SM H:W Cooke Cottages\SAO SR.doc Page 1 of 7 06/01/2010 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • According to the Conceptual Mitigation Plan dated October 16, 2007, the habitat functions of the wetland and buffer are limited and the water quality functions and hydrologic functions are moderate. The buffer contains invasive non - native vegetation including reed canary grass, blackberries and ivy. Decision Criteria Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 18.45 addresses Environmentally Sensitive Areas. The applicable portions of this code are referenced below along with staffs response describing how the proposal meets the code. TMC 18.45.070 SENSITIVE AREA PERMITTED USE The following uses may be located within a sensitive area or buffer: A3) Passive recreation and open space. A path is proposed within the watercourse and wetland buffer. It will be made of play chips over 2 layers of biodegradable cardboard or burlap. B5) Enhancement or other mitigation including landscaping with native plants subject to administrative review. The wetland and all buffers will be landscaped with native plants and the invasive non - native species will be removed. TMC 18.45.070B.9 Dredging, Digging or Filling a) Dredging, digging or filling within a sensitive area or its buffer may occur only with the permission of the Director and only for the following purposes: 1) Uses permitted by TMC 18.45.080, 18.45.090, 18.45,110, 18.45.130; According to TMC 18.45.080 (3), wetland .functions include, but are not limited to the following: a) Improve water quality; b) Maintaining hydrologic functions (reducing peak flows, decreasing erosion, groundwater); and c) Providing habitat for plants, mammals, fish, birds, and amphibians. The proposed dredging is part of a low- impact development technique that will filter some of the roof drains from the nine homes through a rain garden system and into the wetland. The goal of dredging is to increase the holding capacity of the wetland needed due to the increased discharge from development. The landscaping, removal of invasive species, and improved soil proposed in the plan is intended to improve the functioning of the wetland, increase hydrology on site and holding capacity during 100 -year flood events, and improve water quality on and off site. From the SEPA Staff Report (E09 -001): "50% of the driveway stormwater will be tight -lined into the storm drain system. All of the remaining stormwater on the site will be filtered through the rain gardens before either entering the storm drain system, the wetland, or used on site for irrigation. Three of the houses (1, 2 & 3) will have about 30% of the stormwater flow through a rain garden system to the east then tight -lined into the existing stormwater conveyance system. The remaining 70% stormwater runoff from the site flows into the wetland via the dispersion trench. The run -off from six houses (4, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9) will be directed through the rain gardens and used to hydrate the common landscaping. Excess water will be dispersed into the wetland from a 50' dispersion trench running north -south 25' from the wetland. The impervious concrete driveway will divert 50% of the stormwater east tight -lined to the stormwater drain system. The remaining 50% will flow west connecting to the rain garden system getting filtered and biologically treated before it enters the wetland." 2) Maintenance of an existing watercourse; This does not apply as a watercourse does not occur on the property. 3) Enhancement or restoration of habitat in conformance with an approved mitigation plan identified in a sensitive area study; This proposal includes a mitigation plan designed to provide wildlife habitat. The plan includes native plantings and non- native plant removal. The design adds a native grass meadow to attract raptors and the addition of snags, stumps, and logs to provide habitat for wildlife. SM H:1A Cooke Cottages\SAO SR.doc Page 2 of 7 06/01/2010 • • 4) Natural system interpretation, education or research when undertaken by, or in cooperation with the City, This does not apply as the project is private and not proposed by the City. 5) Flood control or water quality enhancement by the City; This does not apply as the project is private and not proposed by the City. 6) Maintenance of existing water quality controls, for normal maintenance needs and for any diversion, rerouting, piping or other alteration permitted by TMC Chapter 18.45; The goal of dredging is to increase the holding capacity of the wetland. The holding capacity is to be increased as an alternative to routing surface water into the stormwater system. 7) Filling of abandoned mines. This does not apply as the project does not propose filling an abandoned mine. b) Any dredging, digging or filling shall be performed in a manner that will minimize sedimentation in the water. Every effort will be made to perform such work at the time of year that the impact can be lessened According to Sheet W -1, 2.6 of the mitigation plan, "All graded areas will be stabilized with hydroseed or mulch per 3.4.2 upon completion of grading. Orange construction fencing and/or erosion control fences will be placed around the mitigation area. Flow of water through the mitigation area will not commence until all bare soil surrounding the channel has an established grass layer. The preferred time for construction is in the dry season (June- October). Work in the mitigation area will only occur during non - flowing/saturated conditions. c) Upon completion of construction, the area affected must be restored to an appropriate grade, replanted according to a plan approved by the Director, and provided with care until newly planted vegetation is established According to Sheet W -1, 4.0 of the mitigation plan, "...a maintenance contract shall be established with a qualified landscape maintenance contractor to carry out maintenance for the 5 year period after planting, as a condition of the final PW grading permit approval." TMC 18.45.080 WETLAND DESIGNATIONS, RATINGS AND BUFFERS TMC 18.45.080.G permits the Director to reduce a wetland buffer width based upon the following criteria: 1) The reduced buffer area does not contain slopes over 15% and is not over 50 %; This project does not contain slopes over 15 %. The applicant is requesting to reduce the buffer from 50 feet to 25 feet, thus the buffer reduction is 50 percent of the required buffer. 2) a) Additional protection to wetlands will be provided through the implementation of a buffer enhancement plan; A buffer enhancement plan is included in this request. b) The existing condition of the buffer is degraded; The buffer is degraded with invasive species infiltration. Additionally, the applicant removed 6 trees within the wetland and stream buffers. According to the Conceptual Mitigation Report, dated October 16, 2007, "the habitat functions of Wetland A (on the applicant's property) and its buffer are limited by the prevalence of non - native invasive species, mainly Himalayan blackberry and reed canary grass. English ivy is also present in some areas of the wetland and buffer. Water quality functions are moderate due to the presence of dense vegetation and lack of a surface water outlet." c) Buffer enhancement includes, but is not limited to the following: 1) Planting vegetation that would increase value for fish and wildlife habitat or improve water quality; Native plant species will aid in the Mitigation Concept (Sheet W -1, 1.1). The wetland creation area will provide greater floodway attenuation and ecological benefits while being aesthetically pleasing. SM H:W Cooke Cottages\SAO SR.doc Page 3 of 7 06/01/2010 • • 2) Enhancement of wildlife habitat by incorporating structures that are likely to be used by wildlife, including wood duck boxes, bat boxes, snags, root wads /stumps, bid houses and heron nesting areas; or Sheet WT -1, Legend states that the project shall include at least 2 snags, 3 logs, and 3 stumps. 3) Removing non - native plant species and noxious weeds from the buffer area and replanting the area subject to TMC 18.45.080G.2.c(1) Sheet W -1, 3.1.3 states that "the landscape contractor will hand grub all invasive species. Weed debris will be disposed of off site." 4) Every reasonable effort shall be made to maintain the existing viable native plant life in the buffers. Vegetation may be removed from the buffer as part of an enhancement plan approved by the Director. Enhancements will ensure that slope stability and wetland quality will be maintained or improved. Any disturbance of the buffers for wetlands shall be replanted with a diverse plant community of native northwest species that are appropriate for the specific site as determined by the Director. If the vegetation must be removed, or because of the alterations of the landscape the vegetation becomes damaged or dies, than the applicant for a permit must replace existing vegetation along wetlands with comparable specimens, approved by the Director, which will restore buffer functions within five years; and The proposal includes a contingency plan that addresses this requirement. The site is predominately invasive non - natives. The few native trees on the site will remain. The proposed site plan has been developed and reviewed in coordination with the applicant's engineer, landscape architect, and wetland biologist. Additionally, City staff including the Urban Environmentalist has reviewed the plan. The planting palette consists of native species appropriate for the site conditions. Sheet W -1, 5.2 lists Standards of Success which include the following: 1. Evaluation of the success of the mitigation project will be based upon 100% survival for all planted woody vegetation at the end of year 1 and 80% survival for all planted woody vegetation at the end of year 5. 2. Not more than 10% cover of non - native invasive species within the mitigation area at the end of any year during the 5 year monitoring period. 3. Saturation within the creation area during the early growing season that meets US Army Corps hydrology criteria. 4. Volunteer native, non - invasive species will be included as acceptable components of the mitigation, but will not be counted towards the 80% success requirement. Sheet W -1, 5.4 states that "if the monitoring results indicate that any of the performance standards are not being met, it may be necessary to implement all or part of the contingency plan.... Contingency /maintenance activities will include, but are not limited to: Replacing all plants lost to vandalism, drought, or disease, as necessary. Replacing any plant species with a 20 percent or greater mortality rate with the same species or similar species approved by the City. 5) The Director shall require subsequent corrective actions and long -term monitoring of the project if adverse impacts to regulated wetlands or their buffers are identified In addition to the Standards of Success and Contingency Plan included in the proposal, the applicant shall provide a bond or cash assignment in the amount of 150% of the value of the labor and materials for the project to guarantee performance, maintenance, monitoring costs and correction of possible deficiencies. The guarantee may be held longer than 5 years if the performance standards have not been met or the mitigation has not been successful. TMC 18.45.090 WETLAND USES, ALTERATIONS AND MITIGATION 18.453.090.8 permits the alteration of a Type 3 wetland with the permission of the Director. The alteration is subject to a mitigation or enhancement plan in addition to the following: 1) a) The alteration will not adversely affect water quality; The project is designed to improve filtration of stormwater entering and exiting the wetland which should improve water quality. SM H:1A Cooke Cottages\SAO SR.doc Page 4 of 7 06/01/2010 • b) The alteration will not adversely affect fish, wildlife, or their habitat; The project is designed to improve the area with native vegetation which should improve habitat. c) The alteration will not have an adverse effect on drainage and/or stormwater detention capabilities; The alteration is designed to support a 100 -year flood event while maintaining drainage rates downstream of the wetland. Monitoring will verify that there are no adverse effects on drainage or stormwater detention capabilities. d) The alteration will not lead to unstable earth conditions or create an erosion hazard or contribute to scouring actions; The project is to comply with Geotechnical Engineering Report, by GEO Group Northwest, dated July 17, 2008. ESC measures as recommended in the 1998 KCSWM must be utilized. e) The alteration will not be materially detrimental to any other property; and A monitoring program is required as a condition of this project. A detailed monitoring program must be completed prior to the final Public Works grading permit. The monitoring report will address off-site impacts. If detrimental impacts occur on any other property as a result of this project, they shall be mitigated by the applicant. The alteration will not have adverse effects on any other sensitive areas. A monitoring program is required as a condition of this project. A detailed monitoring program must be completed prior to the final Public Works grading permit. The monitoring report will consider impacts to any other sensitive areas. If adverse effects occur to any other sensitive area as a result of this project, they shall be mitigated by the applicant. g) Isolated Type 3 wetlands may be altered or relocated only with the permission of the Director. A mitigation or enhancement plan must be developed and must comply with the standards or mitigation required in TMC Chapter 18.45. Mitigation plans that comply with the standards of TMC 18.45 are included in this application. h) Mitigation plans shall be completed for any proposal for dredging, filing, alteration and relocation of wetland habitat allowed in TMC Chapter 18.45. Mitigation plans are included in this application. MITIGATION PLANS TMC 18.45.070 -090 and 18.54.080.4 require sensitive areas enhancement or mitigation plan for digging in the wetland, the buffer reduction, wetland alteration, and clearing in a sensitive area or buffer. 1) The mitigation plan shall be developed as part of a sensitive area study by a specialist approved by the director. Wetland and/or buffer alteration or relocation may be allowed only when a mitigation plan clearly demonstrates that the changes would be an improvement of wetland and buffer quantitative and qualitative functions. The plan shall follow the performance standards of TMC Chapter 18.45 and show how water quality, wildlife and fish habitat, and general wetland quality would be improved. The submitted mitigation plan has been prepared in concert with a landscape architect, an engineer, and a wetlands ecologist. The proposed plan improves the wetland and buffer function and meets the performance standards of TMC Chapter 18.45. According to TMC 18.45.090 F, a mitigation plan requires the following components: a) Baseline information of quantitative data collection or a review and synthesis of existing data for both the project impact zone and the proposed mitigation site; The wetland capacity and drainage specifications were addressed based on flow control. In a developed condition, the increase peak flow to the wetland is .096cfs. The wetland volume increase was engineered to create no change in down stream flows and to provide storage capacity during a 100 -year flood event. The weir is designed to be adjusted in response to annual monitoring if site conditions indicate flow rate changes. The applicant will provide offsite photo SM H: A Cooke Cottages\SAO SR.doc Page 5 of 7 06/01/2010 • • documentation of the offsite north wetland conditions along with visual observations of offsite plant types, quantity and quality. b) Environmental goals and objectives that describe the purposes of the mitigation measures. This should include a description of site - selection criteria, identification of target evaluation species, and resources functions; To paraphrase Sheet W -1, 1.1 the wetland creation area will provide greater floodway attenuation and ecological benefits while being aesthetically pleasing. The mitigation goal is to create a high quality emergent wetland area with seasonal inundation and a diversity of native plant species. c) Performance standards of the specific criteria for fulfilling environmental goals, and for beginning remedial action or contingency measures. They may include water quality standards, species richness and diversity targets, habitat diversity indices, or other ecological, geological or hydrological criteria; Performance standards are detailed on Sheet W -1, 5.2 and are based on hydrology, plant survival rate, and limits to invasive species coverage. d) A detailed construction plan of the written specification sand descriptions of mitigation techniques. This plan should include the proposed construction sequence and construction management, and be accompanied by detailed site diagrams and blueprints that are an integral requirement of any development proposal; Sheets W -1 and WT -1 provide construction sequencing, management, and planting diagrams for the project. e) Monitoring and/or evaluation program that outlines the approach for assessing a completed project. An outline shall be included that spells out how the monitoring data will be evaluated by agencies that are tracking the mitigation project's progress; Sheet W -1, 5.0 explains that a monitoring program is required for five years. Performance standards are detailed above and include monitoring or vegetation and hydrology. j) Contingency plan identiffing potential courses of action and any corrective measures to be taken when monitoring or evaluation indicated project performance standards have not been met; A contingency plan is detailed on Sheet W -1, 5.4. Possible contingency actions are described. If the performance standards are not met, a detailed contingency plan will be developed and implemented with City approval. gJ Performance security or other assurance devices as described in TMC 18.45.210. An assurance device, detailed on Sheet W -1, 5.3, will be required prior to public work's permit final approval. RECOMIVIENDATION Staff recommends approval of a 50% reduction in the eastern buffer for the Type 2 wetland and the approach for mitigation that is outlined by Sewell Wetland Consulting and Ken Large, Landscape Architect. Approval of the attached, red -line plan set shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. Work in the mitigation area will only occur during non - flowing/saturated conditions. The preferred time for construction is in the dry season (June - October). 2. Prior to the issuance of the Public Works permit: a. Provide a cost estimate of the labor and materials for the five year monitoring requirement for the City's approval. b. Submit a performance and maintenance security guarantee (bond or cash assignment) of 150% of the approved cost of labor and materials for the project to guarantee performance, maintenance, monitoring costs and correction of possible deficiencies. The guarantee may be held longer than 5 years if the SM H:W Cooke Cottages\SAO SR.doc Page 6 of 7 06 /01/2010 • • • performance standards have not been met or the mitigation has not been successfully established (TMC 18.45.090F7 and 18.45.210). 3. Monitoring: a. A monitoring report, prepared by a qualified wetland biologist that documents performance of the wetland/buffer area in comparison to the performance standards, shall be submitted to the City on an annual basis, starting approximately 1 year after completion of the construction. b. The monitoring report shall include evidence that this project has not changed the hydrology of any downstream, off -site wetlands. Prior to the fmal inspection of the public works permit the applicant shall provide baseline off -site hydrology conditions and the future monitoring shall be compared to the baseline conditions. c. A qualified landscape maintenance contractor is required to carry out the maintenance for the five year monitoring period. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 1. No modification to the enhancement plan or the plantings shown on the enhancement plan shall occur without the prior written approval of the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development. NEXT STEPS 1. Obtain a Public Works grading permit. a. Permit approval will require compliance with the red - lined and approved plans attached to this letter. b. A pre - construction conference will be required with Planning in attendance. c. Include a note on the Public Works plan set that this project is to comply with Geotechnical Engineering Report, by GEO Group Northwest, dated July 17, 2008. d. ESC measures as recommended in the 1998 KCSWM must be utilized. e. Project is to comply with the Infiltration Evaluation Report dated 8/11/2009. 2. Provide a copy of the USACOE permit for the files. 3. Prior to fmal approval of the public works permit: a. The applicant shall have Ken Large, Landscape Architect submit a "Certification of Planting" to the City of Tukwila. The Certification shall note that the planting has been completed per the approved enhancement plan. The City shall not conduct any inspection until this certification has been provided. b. The applicant shall record a "Sensitive Area Easement" with the King County's Recorders Office. The City shall review a copy of the easement prior to recording. c. A detailed monitoring program shall be submitted for the City's approval. d. An as-built drawing/report will be submitted to the City upon completion of construction (this forms the basis for monitoring). e. Submit a copy of the contract with a qualified landscape maintenance contractor who has been contracted to carry out maintenance for the five year period after planting. Attachments have all been red -lined and stamped "Approved" by the Planning Division of DCD. a. Critical Area Mitigation Plan Sheet W -1 prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting. b. Critical Area Mitigation Grading Plan prepared by Blueline Group. c. Critical Area Mitigation Planting Plan prepared by Ken Large, Landscape Architect. SM H:\A Cooke Cottages\SAO SR.doc Page 7 of 7 06/01/2010 Related files with supporting documentation RFA08 -273 Tree and Brush clearing in a wetland buffer and steep slope L08 -065 Tree Clearing Permit for RFA08 -273 RFA10 -314 Clearing and Grading outside buffer without a permit PW10 -295 Clearing and Grading Permit for RFA10 -314 PRE07 -026 Preapp for consideration into housing options program PRE08 -023 Preapp for Cottage Housing 109 -012 Buffer Reduction – Contains sensitive areas info for buffer, tree, and sepa 109 -013 Design Review -- Contains Cottage Housing Review info L09 -020 Short Subdivision E09- 001 —SEPA C09 -007 Traffic Concurrency for 9 cottages and demo of one house PL13 -009 Project file L13 -008 Appeal of Revocation of L09 -013 • City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director Sent via email to Todd Smith at cookcottages @g.com (no hard copy to follow) December 23, 2008 Todd Smith PO Box 97193 Tacoma, WA 98497 RE: 13325 Macadam Road South L08 -065, RFA08 -273 Comments on Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan and Required Actions Related to Tree Removal Dear Mr. Smith, This letter is in regards to your property at 13325 Macadam Road South. In September of this year, you cleared trees on your property in a sensitive area that contains a stream buffer, a wetland and its associated buffer. Tree clearing in sensitive areas requires a tree clearing permit and an approved mitigation plan prior to removing any trees. The Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan submitted last year as part of your request for a wetland buffer reduction never received City approval and you did not obtain a tree clearing permit. Therefore, vegetation removal in the wetland and its buffer was not authorized. Further, your site has been approved as a site for a cottage housing demonstration project. One condition of approval as a demonstration project states that you must preserve existing trees within the buffer areas. Because of your failure to obtain a permit prior to tree removal and other vegetation clearing, a code enforcement action was started against you. In order to respond to the code enforcement action you must present for the City's approval mitigation plans for the stream buffer and for the wetland and its buffer as discussed below. The mitigation plans must then be carried out in full in order to close the code violation. The existing conceptual wetland mitigation plan must now be modified and expanded to include additional mitigation to compensate for the vegetation removed in the wetland and its buffer. In addition, a mitigation plan is needed for the stream buffer. This could be a separate mitigation plan or it could be incorporated into the wetland mitigation plan. The mitigation plans, which must be prepared by a qualified wetland/watercourse biologist, must include proposed planting details that take into account the replacement requirements of the Tukwila Tree ordinance at a minimum. SM Page 1 of 3 H: \Cooke Cottages \ L08-065 Wetland Mitigation.doc 12/23/2008 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • • The 6 significant trees that were removed in the stream and wetland buffer . areas, as described in your tree permit application, need to be replaced with at least 12 new trees in addition to the trees already proposed in the wetland buffer mitigation plan. Additionally, it appears that you removed at least 2 stands of multi -trunk willow trees from the wetland or buffer; the City requires that you replace the removed willows with an additional 16 native willows (such as Sitka or Pacific willow) in addition to the trees already proposed in the conceptual wetland mitigation plan. Given that the cut trees were removed from the site (not allowing the wood to stay on -site as wildlife habitat features), the City would like to see the addition of large woody debris and wildlife snags back into the site as part of the mitigation plans. In addition to the above comments, the City has reviewed the Conceptual Mitigation Plan prepared by ESA Adolfson and has the following specific comments that must be addressed in the revised plan. The plan must: 1. Meet the requirements of TMC 18.45.090.F (Mitigation Plan Standards) to include goals and objectives, performance standards, detailed planting plan (including plant quantities), monitoring plan, maintenance plan, contingency plan and identification of a financial assurance device and the amount. 2. Present a reason and justification for why a buffer reduction is being requested and show how the buffer function will be improved by the enhancement plan. 3. Discuss the slope of the wetland buffer that is requested for reduction, as Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance does not permit buffer reductions on slopes of 15% or greater. 4. Provide a sensitive area sign detail. The sign must indicate that the City of Tukwila is to be contacted for more information and the telephone number for DCD must be provided (206- 431 - 3670). 5. Provide footbridge construction details and trail construction details. 6. Modify the planting details to show that the planting hole is no deeper than the depth of the rootball and show that the bottom of the planting hole is scarified before planting. 7. Provide information on how the plants will be irrigated until they are established. The City is concerned with potential erosion and lack of shade to the wetland, as well as lost habitat functions that may result from your tree clearing. Therefore the wetland/stream biologist should evaluate the erosion risks and recommend any needed short-term controls no later than January 23, 2009; thirty days from today. Replacing the removed trees needs to happen as soon as possible to address the potential imminent impacts of your illegal clearing. Therefore, the revised mitigation plan for the wetland and the new mitigation plan for the stream buffer should be submitted no later SM Page 2 of 3 H: \Cooke Cottages \ L08-065 Wetland Mitigation.doc 12/23/2008 • • than February 15, 2009 and planting should take place in the early spring. Along with submitting a revised plan for the wetland mitigation you will also need to apply for a Special Permission Buffer Reduction permit. Your code enforcement violation will not be resolved until you have implemented an approved mitigation and enhancement plan and obtained a tree clearing permit. If you have any questions, please contact me at 206 - 433 -7166 or SMacGregor @ci.tukwila.wa.us. Sincerely, Stac Gregor, Assistant Planner Department of Community Development cc: Kathy Stetson, Code Enforcement Officer Sandra Whitting, Urban Environmentalist Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supervisor File numbers L08 -065, RFA08 -273 SM Page 3 of 3 H: \ Cooke Cottages \ L08 -065 Wetland Mitigation.doc 12/23/2008