Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit L08-067 - FOLEY JEFF - SPECIAL PERMISSION BUFFER REDUCTION
JEFF FOLEY SHORT PLAT BUFFER REDUCTION HILL LAND DIVISION LAND DEVELOPMENT 14011 MACADAM RD S L08 -067 Special Permission Sensitive Areas Ordinance Deviations: CRITICAL SENSITIVE AREA Request to Fill a Wetland and Reduce a Stream Buffer Ciiy of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director NOTICE OF DECISION TO: Jeffrey Foley, Applicant/Owner King County Assessor, Accounting Division Washington State Department of Ecology U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 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: L08 -067 Applicant: Jeffrey Foley Type of Permit Applied for: Special Permission Director— CRITICIAL AREA Sensitive Areas Ordinance Deviations: Request to Fill a Wetland and Reduce a Stream Buffer Project Description: Jeffrey Foley is requesting to fill a 0:03 acre wetland and reduce a stream buffer. In exchange he proposes to create and enhance wetlands offsite on City of Tukwila property and to enhance the reduced stream buffer on his property. This work is proposed to support Mr. Foley's application for a four -lot short plat. Location: 40111 Macadam Rd. S., Tukwila, WA Associated Files: L07- 014— SEPA/Environmental Review L07- 001 —Short Plat Comprehensive Plan Designation/Zoning District: Low Density Residential Low Density Residential H: \Foley -- Special Permission Director #L08- 067 \NOD Foley. Special Permission.L08- 067.doc Rf 1 12/30/2008 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206= 431 -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665 • • II. DECISION SEPA Determination: The City SEPA Responsible Official has previously determined that the project, as proposed, does not create a probable significant environmental impact and issued a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS). Decision on Substantive Permit: The Community Development Director has determined that the application for a Special Permission, Director, Sensitive Areas Ordinance Deviation complies with applicable City and state code requirements and has approved that application, subject to the conditions which are set forth in the Decision based on the findings and conclusions contained in the staff report as follows: 1. The applicant shall comply with and carry out the approved off -site wetland mitigation plan and the on -site watercourse buffer enhancement plan. 2. The applicant shall ensure, as part of the short plat development, that current drainage from the slope on the east side of the site, that runs through the ditch and existing wetland, continues to discharge to the watercourse channel located off -site to the south (either by maintaining an open ditch or putting the drainage into a pipe). Proposed drainage shall be shown on site plans for approval by the City. 3. The Stream Buffer sign shown on Sheet 7 must include the telephone number for DCD (206 -431- 3670). 4. The applicant shall sign a wetland mitigation agreement with the City and pay the required fee to the City for use of City property, prior to issuance of the construction permit for the infrastructure. Also the offsite wetland mitigation and the on -site watercourse buffer enhancement plan shall be completed and final inspection approved by the City prior to the final short plat approval. 5. At the off -site wetland mitigation location, in lieu of the standard Sensitive Area sign required for wetland mitigation projects, the applicant shall install a sign at the construction access road along S 144th to inform the public about the project. The sign shall state: "Wetland mitigation project underway. Contact the City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development at 206- 431 -3670 for more information." 6. The applicant shall be responsible for maintenance and monitoring at the off -site mitigation location, in accordance with the approved mitigation plan, for a period of 5 years. Monitoring and maintenance of the stream buffer enhancement shall be for a period of 3 years. 7. The applicant's monitoring and maintenance contractors shall notify Tukwila Parks and Recreation Department at least 24 hours prior to each monitoring or maintenance visit at the wetland mitigation site (206- 433 - 7157). H: \Foley -- Special Permission Director #L08- 067 \NOD Foley. Special Permission.L08- 067.doc Rf 2 12/30/2008 • • 8. The applicant shall provide a bond in the amount of 150% of the cost of the wetland mitigation and stream buffer enhancement. 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 is permitted. One administrative appeal to the Planning Commission of the Decision on the Permit itself is permitted. 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 De artment of Community Development within 14 days of the issuance of this Decision, that is by 1 15- aq 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 in LDR (2009 fee). V. APPEAL HEARINGS PROCESS Any administrative appeal regarding the Permit shall be conducted as an open record hearing before the Planning Commission based on the testimony and documentary evidence presented at the open record hearing. The Planning Commission decision on the appeal is the City's final decision. H: \Foley -- Special Permission Director #L08- 067 \NOD Foley. Special Permission.L08- 067.doc Rf 3 12/30/2008 • • Any party wishing to challenge the Planning Commission 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 Rebecca Fox, who may be contacted at 206 - 431 -3683 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. Depa fluent of Community Development City s f Tukwila H: \Foley -- Special Permission Director #L08- 067 \NOD Foley. Special Permission.L08- 067.doc Rf 4 12/30/2008 • Cizj' of Tukwila Department of Community Development MEMORANDUM December 30, 2008 Jim Haggerton, Mayor Jack Pace, Director TO: Jack Pace, Director, Department of Community Development FM: Rebecca Fox, Senior Planner RE: L08- 067 — Special Permission Director –Sensitive Areas Ordinance Deviations Request to Fill a Wetland and Reduce a Stream Buffer Jeff Foley is requesting permission to fill a 0.03 acre wetland and reduce a stream buffer. In exchange, he proposes to create and enhance wetlands offsite on City of Tukwila property, and to enhance the reduced stream buffer on his property. This work is proposed to support Mr. Foley's application for a four -lot short plat at 14011 Macadam Road South, Tukwila. SEPA Environmental review was addressed through SEPA review for the Foley short plat project (E07 -014). A Determination of Non - Significance was issued on December 8, 2008. Background The City of Tukwila has worked with Jeff Foley to develop this proposal. Mr. Foley initially wanted to reduce the entire buffer of the Type 3 wetland in order to use the existing "barn" as a foundation for a new home. An on -site Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Area Study was prepared and forms the basis for information about the site and its characteristics (David Evans Associates, 2/08). Staff considered that the proposed buffer reduction and on -site buffer enhancement to accommodate the "barn" development was not a feasible solution from an environmental perspective. It would have meant that the wetland buffer would surround the remodeled barn on two sides and that the owner would not be allowed use of a back yard because it was enhanced wetland buffer. Staff felt that the likelihood of the reduced buffer being altered by the property owner over time was very high, thus reducing the buffer effectiveness and jeopardizing the wetland itself. As an alternative, staff suggested offsite wetland mitigation and offered the possibility of using portions of City -owned rf Page 1 of 7 12/30/20082:43:57 PM I1• \Fnlev-- Cnerial Permiccinn Ilirertnr #I OR- 067 \I OR -067 -- CP nirertnr CtaliRept SW revicinm - -17 30 OR - -nn track rhne dne 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • • property located at the Macadam Wetland at Macadam Road S.and S. 144th . When completed, this project would be the first example of wetland mitigation carried out per agreement on City property under the City's Offsite Wetland Mitigation Program. The applicant prepared a conceptual design for the off -site wetland mitigation, which has been reviewed by the City and found to meet the standards established in TMC 18.45. The applicant proposes to fill 0.03 acres of wetland on -site by enhancing 0.02 acres of an existing Type 3 wetland and creating 0.04 acres of additional wetland at the Macadam Wetland mitigation site. The applicant has obtained approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the required Nationwide Permit 18 for the on -site wetland fill and the off -site wetland mitigation. Authorized work complies with Washington DOE's Water Quality Certification and the Coastal Zone Management Act requirements. The work also complies with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act and complies with federal requirements for Essential Fish Habitat. The Special Permission request also includes a 50% buffer reduction for an off -site watercourse adjacent to the short-plat property. This watercourse conveys drainage that flows from on -site seeps on the steep slopes on the west side of the site, through a ditch and through the wetland into the watercourse. The watercourse, in turn discharges to storm water along Macadam Road. The City of Tukwila identifies the watercourse as a Type 4 stream with a required 50' buffer. The Wetland and Watercourse Study finds that the on -site ditch does not meet the definition of a watercourse as described in TMC 18.06.920, and staff concurs. No natural surface flows were identified, and indications of past flows were absence (Wetland and Watercourse Study, 2/08, p. 5). Decision Criteria -- Wetland TMC 18.45.090 A. states that any use or development in a wetland is subject to review and approval by the Director. Typically, isolated Type 3 wetlands may be altered or relocated only with the permission of the Director. . TMC 18.45.090 B. 4. states that isolated Type 3 wetlands may be altered or relocated. Alterations to wetlands are discouraged and are limited to the minimum necessary for project feasibility. In this case, wetland mitigation and creation is taking place off -site on City -owned property. Requests for alterations must meet the criteria that follow below. The criteria are in italics with the response following. a. The alteration will not adversely affect water quality; The offsite wetland mitigation and creation complies with the Washington state Department of Ecology's Water Quality Certification and will not adversely affect water quality. Filling the wetland on the subject property will not adversely affect water quality — the existing wetland has a low rating for water quality function. Rf 2 12/30/2008 H: \Foley -- Special Permission Director #L08- 067 \L08 -067 -- SP Director StaffRept SW revisions -- 12.30.08 - -no track chng.doc • • b. The alteration will not adversely affect fish, wildlife, or their habitat; Per the U.S. Army Corps Nationwide Permit 18, the offsite wetland mitigation and creation will not affect fish or their habitat. Filling the wetland on the subject property will not affect fish or their habitat. c. The alteration will not have an adverse effect on drainage and /or storm water detention capabilities; A condition of the Special Permission and the short plat will be to maintain existing drainage flows through the site (either by maintaining an open ditch or putting the drainage into a pipe) so that they continue to discharge to the off -site stream channel. This will ensure that downstream flows are maintained. According to the Wetland Functional Assessment, very minimal storm water detention is provided by the on -site wetland. Therefore, no significant adverse effect on storm water detention due to wetland filling is likely. . d. The alteration will not lead to unstable earth conditions or create an erosion hazard or contribute to scouring actions; Neither the off -site wetland creation and enhancement, nor the filling of the wetland on the subject property site will lead to unstable earth conditions, create an erosion hazard or contribute to scouring actions. A silt fence will be required during construction to protect the off -site stream channel. Erosion and sedimentation controls will also be required at the mitigation site to protect the existing Type I wetland. e. The alteration will not be materially detrimental to any other property; and Neither the off -site wetland creation and enhancement, nor the filling of the wetland on the subject property site will affect properties other than those on . which the work is taking place. Buffers at the mitigation site will not be extended on to private property. f The alteration will not have adverse effects on any other sensitive areas. There are steep slopes immediately west of the site of the wetland fill, and a Type 4 stream/ditch offsite adjacent to the subject property. The request to fill the wetland will not negatively affect the steep slopes or adjacent watercourse, provided adequate erosion and sedimentation controls are utilized during construction and that site drainage is maintained to continue to discharge into the watercourse. . At the mitigation site, an adjacent Type I wetland will be protected during construction by the implementation of temporary erosion and sedimentation control mechanisms. The Type I wetland will not be negatively impacted by the Rf 3 12/30/2008 H: \Foley -- Special Permission Director #L08- 067 \L08 -067 -- SP Director StaffRept SW revisions -- 12.30.08 - -no track chng.doc • • mitigation project, and will actually benefit by having some buffer enhancement carried out in conjunction with the mitigation project. Mitigation sequencing. TMC 18.45C requires that wetland and buffer impacts be avoided, minimized and as a last resort, mitigated. Staff's opinion is that the wetland impacts cannot be avoided. Buffer reduction with enhancement will not be effective due to the configuration of the proposed use. There would be long -term adverse impacts on the wetland and its buffer. Therefore, mitigation has been proposed. Off -site mitigation TMC 18.45E.1.b. allows for off -site mitigation when mitigation is not practical due to potentially adverse impact from surrounding land uses, which is the case with this wetland. Experience in Tukwila has shown that single family residential uses often have serious impacts on wetlands and their buffers, particularly due to encroachment on the sensitive areas over time. Mitigation Plan The Sensitive Areas Ordinance requires that impacts to wetlands and their buffers be mitigated by restoration, creation or enhancement. TMC 18.45.D. sets standards for mitigation plans and for the amount of mitigation required. The off -site wetland mitigation/creation plan calls for .02 acres of enhancement and .04 acres of creation. A total of 2, 250 s.f. (.06 acres) is affected. The applicant's proposed mitigation plan meets the standards of 3:1 ratio for enhancement of an existing off -site degraded wetland and 1.5:1 ratio for wetland creation adjacent to the same degraded wetland. Buffer enhancement will also be provided at the mitigation site. Some grading will be required, with appropriate temporary erosion and sediment control measures provided. Plantings include upland and wetland hydroseed mixes, as well as native trees, shrubs and emergents. Variation of Standard Watercourse Buffer Width TMC 18.45.100 states that the Director may reduce the standard watercourse buffers on a case -by -case basis, provided the buffer does not contain slopes of 15% or greater. The approved buffer width shall not result in greater than a 50% reduction in width, and must demonstrate that it will not result in direct, indirect or long -term adverse impacts to watercourse. Requests for alterations must meet the criteria that follow below. The criteria are in italics with the response following. a. The buffer is vegetated and includes an enhancement plan as may be required to improve the buffer function and value; or Rf 4 12/30/2008 H: \Foley -- Special Permission Director #L08- 067 \L08 -067 -- SP Director StaffRept SW revisions -- 12.30.08 - -no track chng.doc • • b. If there is no significant vegetation in the buffer, a buffer may be reduced only if an enhancement plan is provided. The plan must include using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the watercourse functions and values. The City of Tukwila identifies a Type 4 stream with a 50' buffer and a ten foot building setback. A stream buffer enhancement plan is provided for the reduced buffer, per item b. above. The buffer currently lacks a diversity of vegetation. An increase in the vegetation's diversity and density will add to the habitat value of the watercourse buffer. The enhancement plan (shown on sheet WM 6) includes a variety of native vegetation to improve the functional attributes of the buffer, and provides additional protection for the watercourse functions and values. The plan calls for adding native trees including a Western Red Cedar, Sitka Spruce and an Oregon Ash. Shrubs include a Red Osier Dogwood, Snowbenry, Black Twinberry and Nootka Rose. A wetland hydroseed mix. In addition, a split rail fence will be placed at the edge of the buffer. A printed metal "sensitive area" sign that identifies the stream buffer will be posted at the boundary of the buffer. CONCLUSIONS 1. Permission is requested to fill a low- functioning Type 3 wetland and reduce the buffer of the adjacent Type 4 watercourse by 50% in exchange for off -site wetland mitigation through enhancement and creation and on -site watercourse buffer enhancement. . 2. Wetland creation and mitigation will take place adjacent at the Macadam Wetland Site at S. 144th and Macadam Road S. Wetland fill and buffer reduction with enhancement will take place at 14011 Macadam Road South, the site of the proposed four -lot short plat. 3. The project SEPA was addressed through environmental review for the overall Foley Short Plat SEPA (E07 -014). 4. The applicant has obtained a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 18 (NWP) to fill the on -site wetland and carry out wetland mitigation (enhancement and creation) on the City of Tukwila's property. The authorized work complies with Washington DOE's water quality and coastal zone requirements, and federal Endangered Species Act and Essential Fish Habitat requirements. 5. Neither the offsite wetland mitigation and creation nor the on -site wetland filling and stream buffer reduction will adversely affect water quality. Rf 5 12/30/2008 H: \Foley -- Special Permission Director #L08- 067 \L08 -067 -- SP Director StaffRept SW revisions -- 12.30.08 - -no track chng.doc • • 6. Neither the offsite wetland mitigation and creation, nor the on -site wetland filling and stream/ditch buffer reduction will adversely affect fish and their habitat. 7. The offsite wetland mitigation and creation will not adversely affect drainage and/or storm water detention capabilities of the wetlands. A drainage ditch is located on the west side of the site, which conveys water from the adjacent slope through the existing on -site wetland and into an off -site watercourse. Care must be taken to ensure that drainage from the hillside continue to discharge to the watercourse channel located off -site to the south (either by maintaining an open ditch or putting the drainage into a pipe). Maintaining the flow from the ditch will ensure that on- site wetland filling and stream/ditch buffer reduction will not negatively affect drainage and/or storm water detention capabilities of the wetlands. 8. A split rail fence and sign will alert residents to the presence of stream buffer enhancement work. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Special Permission permit with the following conditions for wetland impacts at the short plat site. 1. The applicant shall comply with and carry out the approved off -site wetland mitigation plan and the on -site watercourse buffer enhancement plan. 2. The applicant shall ensure, as part of the short plat development, that current drainage from the slope on the east side of the site, that runs through the ditch and existing wetland, continues to discharge to the watercourse channel located off - site to the south (either by maintaining an open ditch or putting the drainage into a pipe). Proposed drainage shall be shown on site plans for approval by the City. 3. The Stream Buffer sign shown on Sheet 7 must include the telephone number for DCD (206- 431 - 3670). 4. The applicant shall sign a wetland mitigation agreement with the City and pay the required fee to the City for use of City property, prior to issuance of the construction permit for the infrastructure. Also the offsite wetland mitigation and the on -site watercourse buffer enhancement plan shall be completed and final inspection approved by the City prior to the final short plat approval. 5. At the off -site wetland mitigation location, in lieu of the standard Sensitive Area sign required for wetland mitigation projects, the applicant shall install a sign at the construction access road along S 144th to inform the public about the project. The sign shall state: "Wetland mitigation project underway. Contact the Rf 6 12/30/2008 H: \Foley -- Special Permission Director #L08- 067 \L08 -067 -- SP Director StaftRept SW revisions -- 12.30.08 - -no track chng.doc • • City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development at 206- 431 -3670 for more information." 6. The applicant shall be responsible for maintenance and monitoring at the off -site mitigation location, in accordance with the approved mitigation plan, for a period of 5 years. Monitoring and maintenance of the stream buffer enhancement shall be for a period of 3 years. 7. The applicant's monitoring and maintenance contractors shall notify Tukwila Parks and Recreation Department at least 24 hours prior to each monitoring or maintenance visit at the wetland mitigation site (206- 433 - 7157). 8. The applicant shall provide a bond in the amount of 150% of the cost of the wetland mitigation and stream buffer enhancement. Attachments: Exhibit A: Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study (David Evans Associates, 2/08) Exhibit B: Wetland Creation and Mitigation Plan/Buffer Enhancement Plan (9/08) Rf 7 12/30/2008 H: \Foley -- Special Permission Director #L08- 067 \L08 -067 -- SP Director StaffRept SW revisions -- 12.30.08 - -no track chng.doc CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF APPLICATION PROJECT INFORMATION Jeff Foley filed an application for a Special Permission Director — Sensitive Areas Ordinance Exception/ Buffer Reduction. To address site conditions as part of preparation for a four -lot short plat (L07 -001), the applicant has developed an offsite wetland creation and mitigation plan. In exchange for filling a relatively low - functioning wetland on site and reducing a watercourse /ditch buffer, the applicant will provide off - site mitigation in the form of wetland enhancement and creation, and on -site watercourse buffer enhancement. On the site, 1, 347 s.f. of Wetland A will be impacted. Off -site 1, 000 s.f. of wetland will be enhanced, and 1, 520 s.f. of wetland will be created for a total of 2, 520 s.f. or .06 acres. Projects applied for include: L08 -068, Special Permission Director — Sensitive Areas Ordinance Exception/Buffer Reduction Other known required permits include: US Army Corps of Engineers— Nationwide Permit 18 (Ref. #NWS- 2008 - 0599 -N0) Studies required with the applications include: Environmental review for this project was included in E07 -014 Foley Short Plat. A Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) was issued on December 8, 2008. FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The application is available for review at the City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Blvd #100. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT Your written comments on the project are requested. They must be delivered to DCD at the address above or postmarked no later than 5:00 P.M., Friday, December 22, 2008. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling DCD at (206) 431 -3670. For further information on this proposal, contact Rebecca Fox at 206 - 431 -3683 or via e -mail rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: September 22, 2008 Notice of Completeness Issued: December 2, 2008 Notice of Application Issued: December 9, 2008 OF- 51 IV wE'rcAND eN+istNeter9wt 4 amen Di+ 30' CALL BEFORE YOU DIG Call: TOLL FREE ▪ .. . W ` O A ` W 1 W ` I W 'a.i W ,) W W W )W W Wes"---• W .'`.a ', • * I1 W W ,W W W W\ , \ J. . 1 — T`--- ) j i 1 ) ` '4, v _ \ ,\ .\.. \ 'i l N . ' c ttt 11 W �_,\ {r aft I \ � � 11 1 \1 \ ( \ �, / I� \\,i. 1) W .�,'�I 'to. 1II \ — 4. 1 ., 4RC wERARD' /'' 1 W\ \ • W W * 4.••\ ., I. , \` '' ' NI, 1 W....../W IV W I W W W, .1 * I W ,\ `` ' W W W \ I WI (� * ' \ 4 . l IW 1 W W .�� / W �` I W I W I, i <� &a 0 20 40 80 TEMPORARY ERO8 SEE SHEET WM -2 GRADING NOrTE& SEE SHEET WM -2 LEGEND EL.TSZo —..-1 ,w CIA Bn PR. E10 PR EXI PR( DO! STRAW % e TO 10 M WW1 111010211 awns STRAW WA site Jefo mitigation \JEF01_1A -5.drg LEGEND SPLIT RAIL FENCE STREAM CHANNEL FLOW UNE 25' STREAM BUFFER UNE SENSITIVE AREA 5101 EXISTING WETLAND CALL BEFORE YOU DIG Coll: TOLL FREE 0 20 40 80 SCALE: 1"=20' PLANT SCHEDULE BOTANICAL NAVE _ COM TREES/ LARGE SRUEIS TNUJA PUCATA unit PICEA STOIENSS STKA FRAXINUS LATIFOUA OREG 0.. SHRUBS /GROUNDGOWtS CORMS SERI EA RED CORMS ® n STYPHORICARPOS ALMS 910101 LONICERA INVOLUCRATA BLAO! ROSA NUTNANA NOOTK WETLAND HYDROS NINO/VARIETY X RICE CUIORF65 WESTERN MAMA GRASS CANADA REED SPIKE BEN(GRA55 WOOL -GRASS APPUCATION RATE• W000 CELLULOSE FIBER ARAM — 14N- 14P -14K FERTOIZER: -- GUAR TACKBTER: �UFFtR REpuCTIaN # FNNIkNG0MENT RP eitv of guliwital. Dept. Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION 1, (J (l (iG ttal ) ` k 191' t `Q HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non - Significance Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Project Number: LOS -0(o Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Mailer's signature: Zirrucia___ �'" Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Packet .' Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda x Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit _ _ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other: Was mailed to each of the addresses listed/attached on this /ile1 day of DECOM (t'in the year 20Cg P:\USERS\TERI\AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC Project Name: q toy Sens t-hvi2 CX 6'✓l Project Number: LOS -0(o Mailing requested by: A:JYJC CCc a Mailer's signature: Zirrucia___ �'" ' .' P:\USERS\TERI\AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW /SHORELINE PERMIT MAILINGS FEDERAL AGENCIES YxC.ORP '®F- ENGINEER ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE ( ) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( ) U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. ( ) NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( ) FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( ) DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #11 ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #2 ( ) K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION ( ) K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC ( ) K.C. ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY ( ) RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( ) QWEST ( ) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) PUGET SOUND ENERGY ( ) HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) AT &T CABLE SERVICES ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPT (x ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: (x) PUBLIC WORKS ( ) POLICE ( ) PLANNING ( ) PARKS & REC. ( ) CITY CLERK ( ) FIRE ( ) FINANCE ( ) BUILDING ( ) MAYOR SCHOOLS /LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES ( ) DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE ( ) DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELAND DIV IDEP..TOF�_ UQLOGY,f!S DIVISION' ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL ' SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS • SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION ( ) HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTLE ( ) K.C. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL ( ) K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY ( ) K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ( ) HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT #20 ( ) WATER DISTRICT #125 ( ) CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR - LAKERIDGE SEWER/WATER DISTRICT ( ) RENTON PLANNING DEPT ( ) CITY OF SEA -TAC ( ) CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU ( ) STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE* ' NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( ) SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ( ) MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( ) CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM ( ) FISHERIES PROGRAM ( ) WILDLIFE PROGRAM MEDIA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL HAFOLEY- -SEPA (E07- 014)\MAILING_CHKLIST.DOC ( ) DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE ( ) P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY ( ) SOUND TRANSIT ( ) DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COALITION *SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPLICATIONS ON DUWAMISH RIVER ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKWILA.WA.US.WWW JeAyFOIQ.y 120 S• w• �vorrN40dy Puy j4»4 9'8/66 • • Ciij' of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION December 2, 2008 Jeff Foley 120 SW 194th St. Normandy Park, WA 98166 Subject: Foley Short Plat—Special Permission Director L08 -067 Dear Mr. Foley: Jack Pace, Director Your application for a Special Permission Director Sensitive Area Ordinance Deviation is considered complete on December 2, 2008 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. This determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that you submit additional plans or information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. This notice of complete application applies only to the permit identified above. It is your responsibility to apply for and obtain all necessary permits issued by other agencies. Feel free to contact me at 206 -431 -3683 or via email at rfox@ci.tukwila.wa.us if you have questions about the review process for your application. Sincerely, Ailee4/0.,X)C Rebecca Fox Senior Planner cc. L08 -067 Rf 1 H:\Foley -- Special Permission Director #L08- 061TFoley. special .permission.COMPLETE.APP..DOC 12/02/2008 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 i • • City of Tukwila Mitigation Agreement AND WETLAND MITIGATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TUKWILA , FOR WETLAND MITIGATION TO BE CARRIED OUT ON CITY PROPERTY THIS MITIGATION AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of Tukwila, hereinafter the "City," and a organized under the laws of the State of Washington, hereinafter the "Applicant." WHEREAS, the Tukwila City Council adopted Resolution No. 1608 authorizing the use of City -owned property for off -site wetland mitigation, when on -site mitigation is not technically or environmentally feasible per TMC 18.45.090.E; and WHEREAS, Resolution No.1608 authorizes the Mayor to enter into agreements with Applicants for using portions of City -owned property for off -site wetland mitigation; and WHEREAS, the proposed wetland mitigation plan prepared by the Applicant has been reviewed by City staff and has been determined to be consistent with all applicable City of Tukwila ordinances and regulations, including the Tukwila Sensitive Areas Chapter of the Zoning Code (TMC 18.45); and WHEREAS, the proposed off -site mitigation has incorporated measures approved by the Director of the Department of Community Development, to ensure the long -term ecological success of the mitigation program; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. Property. The Applicant is the owner of certain property located at (Parcel Number: ) containing Type wetland(s), as determined by the approved Sensitive Areas Study/Wetland Delineation Report, (hereinafter the "Subject Property "). The City is the owner of certain property located at (Parcel Number: ) where existing wetland can be enhanced or additional wetland can be created (hereinafter the "City Property "). Section 2. Effective Date and Term. The effective date of this Agreement shall be the last date of execution as set forth below, and shall continue in force until terminated. Page 1 of 7 S.Whiting, h: \Wetland Mitigation\Ivlitigation Agreement template. 12/10/2008 • • City of Tukwila Mitigation Agreement Section 3. Mitigation. 3.1. Wetland Mitigation. The Applicant shall perform mitigation as detailed in the Wetland Mitigation Plan ( "Mitigation Plan "), entitled dated , City File No. on the City Property. Execution of this plan will satisfy the Applicant's requirement for mitigation of the wetland filled on the Subject Property. 3.2 Consideration for City Property Use. The Applicant shall pay the City a one time fee of $ in exchange for the right to carry out wetland mitigation on City Property. This dollar amount is based upon a sales comparison of wetland properties from an appraisal by Murray Brackett, MAI dated August 27, 2007 and must be paid prior to issuance of the development permit that causes wetland filling on the Subject Property. 3.3 Wetland Permitting. The Applicant shall obtain all required city, state and federal permits and shall complete any required SEPA process for filling the wetlands on the Subject Property and for carrying out the mitigation on the City Property. No City permit shall be issued for the development of the Subject Property that causes filling of wetlands until the necessary permits for the work on the City Property have been issued and the Applicant has provided a financial guarantee to the City as required below. 3.4 Wetland Mitigation Timing. The Applicant will work on the City Property in accordance with the schedule in the approved Mitigation Plan. Section 4. Protection of Work, Property and Persons. The Applicant will adequately protect the wetland mitigation work, adjacent property and the public and shall be responsible for any damage or injury due to its act or neglect. The Applicant will permit and facilitate observation of the work on the City Property by the City and its agents and public authorities at all times. Section 5. Financial Guarantee. In order to ensure the construction of the wetland mitigation, prior to the issuance of the development permit that requires wetland filling on the Subject Property, the Applicant shall provide a bond or other financial guarantee approved by the City for 150% of the cost of the work specified in the Mitigation Plan. The financial guarantee may be used by the City for the completion of the mitigation if it is not completed pursuant to the actions and schedule in the Mitigation Plan. The financial assurance will be released in accordance with TMC 18.45.210. Section 6. Indemnification. The Applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City its officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all claims, losses or liability, including attorney's fees, arising from injury or death to persons or damage to property Page 2 of 7 S.Whiting, h: \Wetland Mitigation\Mitigation Agreement template. 12/10/2008 • • City of Tukwila Mitigation Agreement occasioned by an act, omission or failure of the Applicant its officers, agents and employees, in performing the work required by this Agreement. With respect to the performance of this Agreement and as to claims against the City its officers, agents and employees, the Applicant expressly waives its immunity under Title 51 of the Revised Code of Washington, the Industrial Insurance Act, for injuries to its employees and agrees that the obligation to indemnify, defend and hold harmless provided for in this paragraph extends to any claim brought by or on behalf of any employee of or contractor for the Applicant. This waiver is mutually negotiated by the parties. This paragraph shall not apply to any damage resulting from the sole negligence of the City, its agents and employees. To the extent any of the damages referenced by this paragraph were caused by or resulted from the concurrent negligence of the City, its agents or employees, this obligation to indemnify, defend and hold harmless is valid and enforceable only to the extent of the negligence of the Applicant, its officers, agents and employees. Section 7. Insurance. The Applicant will carry public liability and property damage insurance with carriers satisfactory to the City in the following amounts: i. $ 50,000 property damage ii. $ 500,000 public liability (each person) iii. $1,000,000 public liability (each occurrence) The Applicant will provide the City with endorsements naming the City as an additional insured and with certificates of insurance prior to start of mitigation and with 30 days notice prior to cancellation. Section 8. Liens. Applicant shall have no authority, express or implied, to create or place any lien or encumbrance of any kind or any nature whatsoever upon, or in any manner to bind, the City Property. Should a lien be created arising from Applicant's mitigation on the City Property, the Applicant agrees that the lien shall be attached to the Subject Property. Section 9. General Provisions. 9.1 Assignment of Interests, Rights, and Obligations. This Agreement shall be binding and inure to the benefit of the Parties. No Party may assign its rights under this Agreement without the written consent of the other Party, which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors, and assigns of the Applicant and the City. 9.2 Incorporation of Recitals. The Whereas provisions contained in this Agreement are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. Page 3 of 7 S.Whiting, h: \Wetland Mitigation\Mitigation Agreement template. 12/10 /2008 • • City of Tukwila Mitigation Agreement 9.3 Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. 9.4 Termination. This Agreement shall be terminated as follows: 9.4.1. This Agreement shall expire and be of no further force and effect if the mitigation contemplated in this Agreement and all of the permits and/or approvals issued by the City for such mitigation is not substantially underway prior to expiration of such permits and/or approvals. Nothing in this Agreement shall extend the expiration date of any permit or approval issued by the City for any mitigation. 9.4.2. This Agreement shall expire and be of no further force and effect if the Applicant does not perform mitigation as contemplated by the Mitigation Plan. 9.4.3. This Agreement shall terminate upon the abandonment of the Mitigation Plan by the Applicant. The Applicant shall be deemed to have abandoned the Mitigation Plan if within two years from the effective date of this Agreement the Applicant has not submitted a complete development permit application that requires wetland filling on the Subject Property and has not submitted a financial guarantee as required by this Agreement. 9.5 Specific Performance. The parties specifically agree that damages are not an adequate remedy for breach of this Agreement, and that the parties are entitled to compel specific performance of all material terms of this Agreement by any party in default hereof. 9.6 Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Venue for any action shall lie in King County Superior Court or the U.S. District Court for Western Washington. 9.7 Attorney's Fees. In the event of any litigation or dispute resolution process between the Parties regarding an alleged breach of this Agreement, the prevailing party in any such action shall be entitled to its attorney's fees and costs. 9.8 No Third -Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is for the benefit of the Parties hereto only and is not intended to benefit any other person or entity, and no person or entity not a signatory to this Agreement shall have any third -party beneficiary or other rights whatsoever under this Agreement. No other person or entity not a Party to this Agreement may enforce the terms and provisions of this Agreement. Page 4 of 7 S.Whiting, h: \Wetland Mitigation \Mitigation Agreement template. 12/10/2008 • • City of Tukwila Mitigation Agreement 9.9 Integration. This Agreement and its exhibits represent the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. There are not other agreements, oral or written, except as expressly set forth herein. 9.10 Authority. The Parties each represent and warrant that they have full power and actual authority to enter into this Agreement and to carry out all actions required of them by this Agreement. All persons are executing this Agreement in their representative capacities and represent and warrant that they have full power and authority to bind their respective organizations. 9.11 Covenants Running with the Land. The conditions and covenants set forth in this Agreement and incorporated herein by the Exhibits shall run with the land and the benefits and burdens shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties. The Applicant and every purchaser, assignee or transferee of an interest in the Subject Property, or any portion thereof, shall be obligated and bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and shall be the beneficiary thereof and a party thereto, but only with respect to the Subject Property, or such portion thereof, sold, assigned or transferred to it. Any such purchaser, assignee or transferee shall observe and fully perform all of the duties and obligations of a Applicant contained in this Agreement, as such duties and obligations pertain to the portion of the Subject Property sold, assigned or transferred to it. 9.12 Amendment to Agreement; Effect of Agreement on Future Actions. Either party may request changes in the Agreement. Proposed changes which are mutually agreed upon shall be incorporated by written amendments to this Agreement. address: 9.13 Notices. Notices to the City of Tukwila shall be sent to the following City Clerk City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Notices to the Applicant shall be sent to the following address: 9.14 Third Party Legal Challenge. In the event any legal action or special proceeding is commenced by any person or entity other than a party to this agreement to challenge this Agreement or any provision herein, the City may elect to tender the defense of such lawsuit or individual claims in the lawsuit to Applicant and/or Landowner(s). In such event, Applicant shall hold the City harmless from and defend the City from all costs and expenses incurred in the defense of such lawsuit or individual claims in the lawsuit, including but not limited to, attorneys' fees and expenses of litigation, and damages awarded to the prevailing Page 5 of 7 S.Whiting, h: \Wetland Mitigation \Mitigation Agreement template. 12/10/2008 • • City of Tukwila Mitigation Agreement party or parties in such litigation. The Applicant shall not settle any lawsuit without the consent of the City. The City shall act in good faith and shall not unreasonably withhold consent to settle. 9.15 No Presumption against Drafter. This Agreement has been reviewed by legal counsel for both Parties and no presumption or rule that ambiguity shall be construed against the party drafting the document shall apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. 9.16 Headings. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for reference only and shall not be construed to expand, limit or otherwise modify the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 9.17 Recording. Applicant shall record against the Subject Property an executed copy of this Agreement with the King County Auditor. 9.18 Legal Representation. In entering into this Agreement, Applicant represents that it has been advised to seek legal advice and counsel from its attorney concerning the legal consequences of this Agreement; that it has carefully read the foregoing Agreement and knows the contents thereof, and signs the same of its own free act; and that it fully understands and voluntarily accepts the terms and conditions of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the last date as set forth below: CITY OF TUKWILA Date: Mayor APPLICANT Date: ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By By City Clerk City Attorney STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) Page 6 of 7 S.Whiting, h: \Wetland Mitigation \Mitigation Agreement template. 12/10/2008 • • City of Tukwila Mitigation Agreement On this day of , 20_, before me personally appeared , to me known to be the individual that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be his/her free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he /she is authorized to execute said instrument. Print name: NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington Residing at Commission expires: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 20_, before me personally appeared , and said person acknowledged that he /she signed this instrument, on oath stated that he /she was authorized to execute the instrument, and acknowledged as the of the City of Tukwila to be the free and voluntary act of said party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. Print name: NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington Residing at Commission expires: Page 7 of 7 S.Whiting, h: \Wetland Mitigation\Mitigation Agreement template. 12/10/2008 • 1 Rebecca Fox - SEPA required for wetland mitigation? From: "Stough, Greta (ECY)" To: Date: 12/04/2008 11:20 AM Subject: SEPA required for wetland mitigation? Rebecca, Page-1 of 2 Just to re -cap our phone conversation —in this case the wetlands mitigation is part and parcel to the parent project of the 4 lot subdivision. It is a mitigation measure for that project and will be included as part of the greater proposal in the SEPA. Please include all permits and requirements in that document and don't be shy about adding to the checklist as prepared by the applicant. When you submit the SEPA to the SEPA Unit at Headquarters we would like to see the DNS, checklist, and the staff report if one is available at that time. I appreciate you double- checking with us and please let me know when you have more SEPA questions. Thanks, Greta Stough SEPA Coordinator 425/649 -7131 From: Padgett, Rebekah (ECY) Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 10:51 AM To: Bunten, Donna (ECY) Cc: Stough, Greta (ECY) Subject: RE: SEPA required for wetland mitigation? Hi Donna, That's definitely a question for an Ecology SEPA coordinator. Greta is our SEPA person here at NWRO - -maybe she can help get an answer to this. Best, Rebekah From: Bunten, Donna (ECY) Sent: Thu 12/4/2008 8:47 AM To: Padgett, Rebekah (ECY) Subject: FW: SEPA required for wetland mitigation? Hi, Rebekah, file: / /C: \temp\XPGrpW ise \493 7BCFEtuk- mail6300 -po 10013463351188801 \GW } 00001.... 12/04/2008 • • Page 2 of 2 I'm not sure about the answer to this question. I'm assuming it's "No SEPA checklist is required," but I'm not sure about the WAC reference she asks for. If you're able to respond, could you please cc me on the email so I'II know for future reference? If you don't have time for this, let me know and I'll ask the SEPA folks here. I just thought you'd probably be more knowledgeable about NWPs. Thanks! Donna J. Bunten CAO Review Coordinator Dept. of Ecology PO Box 46700 Olympia, WA 98504 (360) 407 -7172 dbun461@ecy.wa.gov From: Rebecca Fox [mailto:rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 4:52 PM To: Bunten, Donna (ECY) Subject: SEPA required for wetland mitigation? Hello Donna, The City of Tukwila and an individual have developed a plan whereby the individual will do offsite wetland mitigation and creation, in exchange for filling a wetland on his property. The US Army Corps of Engineers has provided documentation stating that Nationwide Permit 18, Minor Discharges authorizes the proposal. T The Army Corps further states that the authorized work "complies with the Washington State Department of Ecology's Water Quality Certification and the Coastal Zone Management Act requirements for the NWP. No further coordeination with Ecology is required." Our in -house urban environmentalist has said that Ecology does not need to approve the wetland fill and offsite mitigation. Based on this information, I believe that no SEPA checklist is required. Please confirm that this is the case. Could you please also reference the WAC for this decision? Thank you very much. Rebecca Fox Senior Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 206 - 431 -3683 (tel) 206 - 431 -3665 (fax) rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us file: / /C: \temp\XPGrpW ise \4937BCFEtuk- mail6300 -po 10013463351188801 \GW } 00001.... 12/04/2008 • • Rebecca Fox - Fwd: Special Permission Director /SEPA- -Info needed From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Hi Jeff, Rebecca Fox jefffoleyl @aol.com 11/26/2008 9:50 AM Fwd: Special Permission Director /SEPA- -Info needed Page 1 of 1 I'm resending this message, in case you didn't receive it when it was sent on 11/13/08. Please provide the information that's requested in the attached Word document so that we can move forward with the SEPA and Special Permission. I also sent this to you and Bruce MacVeigh via postal mail on 11/13/08. I'm cc'ing Sharon Mann on the email since I don't have her address. Thanks, Jeff. Rebecca Fox Senior Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 206 - 431 -3683 (tel) 206 - 431 -3665 (fax) rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us »> Rebecca Fox 11/13/2008 1:46 PM »> Hi Jeff, Please disregard my earlier email and use this instead. I've attached the letter that I'II send to you. Bruce MacVeigh will also receive a copy. I don't have Sharon Mann's address, so she's cc'd on the e -mail. Please provide the requested information so that we can move forward. Thank you. Rebecca Fox Senior Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 206 -431 -3683 (tel) 206 - 431 -3665 (fax) rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us file: / /C: \temp\XPGrp W ise \492D 1 BEDtuk- mail6300 -po 10013463351186E81 \G W } 00001... 12/16/2008 • City of Tukwila • Jim Haggerton, Mayor DD Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director pai,eut-se hrrz. Y4-5/gy7 Jeff Foley 120 SW 194th St. Normandy Park, WA 98166 November 13, 2008 RE: Special Permission Director (L07 -001) Dear Mr. Foley: We have received materials for your Special Permission Director application. Please provide the following additional information at your as soon as possible so that we may proceed with review of your project. 1) Cut and Fill Provide complete and current cut and fill amounts and categories. How much fill will be used for the wetland? How much cut and fill for road access, other site work, etc.? The Geotechnical Evaluation from Bruce MacVeigh (rev. 4/23/08) says that "significant earthwork" will be required. The SEPA checklist (rev. 2/08) item B. 1. e indicates that there will be 1, 200 cu. ft. of cut (relocated on site), and 1, 500 cu. ft. of fill (including filtration trench), for a total of 2, 700 cu. ft . Both of these documents predate your decision to do offsite mitigation and fill the wetland on site. We need the most current information that takes into account your plans to fill the wetland on the short-plat site. 2) Barn Do you still intend to use the barn? Will it be demolished? Will you use the foundation for a future house? Will you locate any new house in a different spot on lot #4? 3) Plans Provide a copies of the most recent short plat plans, including civil, with dates indicating when they were drawn. 4) Infiltration Will infiltration be used for the entire site? Confirm that infiltration via a common main trench will be used for all impervious areas on site, including the new residences. Rf 1 11/13/2008 I 6300 SouthcenI\treU r ,B1Ao.u., e rvLat r dj , 0S7 uOQ t e # f' o, • ... uk y i/ a, /a0s/ in gton 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • Please provide this information at your earliest convenience so that we may proceed with review of your project. Sincerely, Rebecca Fox Senior Planner cc. Bruce MacVeigh Rf 2 1 1/13/2008 H:1Foley Short Plat #L07- 001\Jeff Foley-- info.request.1 I.13.08.doc • • Rebecca Fox - Special Permission Director /SEPA From: Rebecca Fox To: jefffoleyl @aol.com Date: 11/13/2008 12:53 PM Subject: Special Permission Director /SEPA CC: Sharon Mann Jeff, Page 1 of 1 Thanks for the Special Permission Director info. Please provide the following information at your earliest convenience so that we can continue. Some of this may be a Bruce McVeigh matter, so please forward to him. 1) Cut and Fill_- • Specify the total cut and the total fill. • How much fill will be used for the wetland? • How much fill will be used for the access, etc. 2) Are you still using the "barn" or will it be demolished? If so, will a future house be placed elsewhere on the lot? Where? 3)Provide a copy of the latest civil plans. Be sure to include a date on the plan. Thanks. I will also send you this request by postal mail. Rebecca Fox Senior Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 206 - 431 -3683 (tel) 206 - 431 -3665 (fax) rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us file: / /C: \temp\XPGrpW ise \491 C23 5 5tuk- mail6300 -po 100134633 511845D 1 \G W } 00001.... 12/16/2008 • Page 1 of 1 Rebecca Fox - Foley Short Plat - Department of Ecology approval In1=1100611: Mural RIPS a r• *VOW at- Itie Paw�YlS96i ^tRlli1s..1. *.,• .. ppt7'.w.. 7• :rtl7l ANICAM :'A • VP IA • ...L.•10 From: Sandra Whiting To: Rebecca Fox Date: 11/06/2008 2:53 PM Subject: Foley Short Plat - Department of Ecology approval Rebecca, Ecology does not need to approve this wetland fill and off -site mitigation. For the type of Nationwide Permit that the Corps has approved, the Ecology water quality certification is automatic and so Ecology does not need to review the plans. So, Jeff is good to go on that end. Sandra file: / /C:\ temp\ XPGrpWise \491304EBtuk- mail6300 -po 10013463351182C61 \GW } 00001.... 11/13/2008 EPARTMENT OF THE ARMY tEATTLkIISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS ' P.O. BOX 3755 COMMUNITY SEAJ tLE, WASHINGTON 98124 -3755 • REP To pEVEL©PF: c;UT ATTEL QN OF • • Regulatory Branch Mr. Jeff Foley 120 Southwest 194th Street Normandy Park, Washington 98166 Dear Mr. Foley: OCT - 9 2008 Reference: NWS- 2008 - 0599 -NO Foley, Jeff We have reviewed your application to place fill in 0.03 of an acre of wetlands adjacent to an unnamed tributary to the Duwamish River at Tukwila, King County, Washington. Based on the information you provided to us, Nationwide Permit 18, Minor Discharges (Federal Register, March 12, 2007 Vol. 72, No. 47), authorizes your proposal as depicted on the enclosed drawings dated September 12, 2008, provided you implement the mitigation plan dated September 12, 2008. In order for this NWP authorization to be valid, you must ensure that the work is performed in accordance with the enclosed Nationwide Permit 18, Terms and Conditions. The authorized work complies with the Washington State Department of Ecology's (Ecology) Water Quality Certification and the Coastal Zone Management Act requirements for this NWP. No further coordination with Ecology is required. Also, we have reviewed your project pursuant to the requirements of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Magnuson - Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act in regards to Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). We have determined that this project complies with the requirements of NWP National General Condition regarding ESA and will not adversely affect EFH. Our verification of this NWP authorization is valid for 2 years from the date of this letter unless the NWP is modified, reissued, or revoked prior to that date. If the authorized work has not been completed by that date, please contact us to discuss the status of your authorization. Failure to comply with all terms and conditions of this NWP verification invalidates this authorization and could result in a violation of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act. Also, you must obtain all State and local permits that apply to this project. Upon completing the authorized work, you must fill out and return the enclosed Certificate of Compliance with Department of the Army Permit form. Thank you for your cooperation during the permit process. We are interested in your experience with our Regulatory Program and encourage you to complete a customer service survey form. This form and information about our program is available on our website. • • -2- If you have any questions about this letter, please contact me at (206) 766 -6438 or via email at Amy.S.Klein(a7usace.army.mil. Sincerely, Amy Klein, Project Manager Regulatory Branch Enclosures 0 20 40 80 CITY OF TUKWILA a MITIGATION SUMMARY 5 0 LEGEND: EXISTING WETLAND WETLAND IMPACT REMAND FACT (FROM 1) PROPOSED OFF —SIZE MITIGATION IMPACT WETLAND 'A' : 1.347 S.F. 0 3:1 enhancement 1,000 S.F. (0.02 AC) • 1.5:1 creation 1,520 S.F. (0.04 AC) TOTAL %VIAND IMPACT o 1,347 SF. M1710A110N REQUIRED . 2.520 SF. (0.06 AC) TOTAL WETLAND MmGATION PROVIDED a 2,520 S.F. (0.06 AC) DAVID EVANS min ASSOCIATES ono. 4E- 030 lows* sE Bdrn. W&!l4on 0e30e1aas Pbmr 42681116600 PROJECT N7• Li772e/ - /AA a -7 33 MW1523NO'- E J. FOLEY and S. MANN SHORT PLAT JARPA EXHIBIT — MITIGATION PLAN SHEET EXH.1A COUNTY KING DRAIN BY GBK PROJECT JEF00000 -0001 DESIGN BY GBK SCAM AS NOTED APPROVED BY JASH DATUM NAVD 88 DATE 9 -12 -08 US Army Corps of Engineers ® Seattle District • • NATIONWIDE PERT 18 Terms and Conditions Effective Date September 10, 2007 A. Description of Authorized Activities B. Corps National General Conditions for all NWPs C. Corps Seattle District Regional General Conditions D. Corps Regional Specific Conditions for this NWP E. State 401 Certification General Conditions F. State 401 Certification Specific Conditions for this NWP G. EPA 401 Certification General Conditions H. EPA 401 Certification Specific Conditions for this NWP 1. Spokane Tribe of Indians 401 Certification General Conditions J. Tribal 401 Certification Specific Conditions for this NWP K. CZM Consistency Response Specific Conditions for this NWP L. Additional Limitations on the Use of NWPs In addition to any special condition that may be required on a case -by -case basis by the District Engineer, the following terms and conditions must be met, as applicable, for a Nationwide Permit 18 authorization to be valid in Washington State. A. DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES 18. Minor Discharges. Minor discharges of dredged or fill material into all waters of the United States, provided the activity meets all of the following criteria: (a) The quantity of discharged material and the volume of area excavated do not exceed 25 cubic yards below the plane of the ordinary high water mark or the high tide line; (b) The discharge will not cause the loss of more than 1 /10 acre of waters of the United States; and (c) The discharge is not placed for the purpose of a stream diversion. Notification: The permittee must submit a pre - construction notification to the district engineer prior to commencing the activity if: (1) The discharge or the volume of area excavated exceeds 10 cubic yards below the plane of the ordinary high water mark or the high tide line, or (2) the discharge is in a special aquatic site, including wetlands. (See general condition 27.) (Sections 10 and 404) B. CORPS NATIONAL GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR ALL NWPs • • 1. Navigation. (a) No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation. (b) Any safety lights and signals prescribed by the U.S. Coast Guard, through regulations or otherwise, must be installed and maintained at the permittee's expense on authorized facilities in navigable waters of the United States. (c) The permittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States require the removal, relocation, or other alteration, of the structure or work herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will be required, upon due notice from the Corps of Engineers, to remove, relocate, or alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby, without expense to the United States. No claim shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal or alteration. 2. Aquatic Life Movements. No activity may substantially disrupt the necessary life cycle movements of those species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody, including those species that normally migrate through the area, unless the activity's primary purpose is to impound water. Culverts placed in streams must be installed to maintain low flow conditions. 3. Spawning Areas. Activities in spawning areas during spawning seasons must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Activities that result in the physical destruction (e.g., through excavation, fill, or downstream smothering by substantial turbidity) of an important spawning area are not authorized. 4. Migratory Bird Breeding Areas. Activities in waters of the United States that serve as breeding areas for migratory birds must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. 5. Shellfish Beds. No activity may occur in areas of concentrated shellfish populations, unless the activity is directly related to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized by NWPs 4 and 48. 6. Suitable Material. No activity may use unsuitable material (e.g., trash, debris, car bodies, asphalt, etc.). Material used for construction or discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts (see Section 307 of the Clean Water Act). 7. Water Supply Intakes. No activity may occur in the proximity of a public water supply intake, except where the activity is for the repair or improvement of public water supply intake structures or adjacent bank stabilization. 8. Adverse Effects From Impoundments. If the activity creates an impoundment of water, adverse effects to the aquatic system due to accelerating the passage of water, and/or restricting its flow must be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. 9. Management of Water Flows. To the maximum extent practicable, the pre - construction course, condition, capacity, and location of open waters must be maintained for each activity, including stream channelization and storm water management activities, except as provided below. The activity must be constructed to withstand expected high flows. The activity must not restrict or impede the passage of normal or high flows, unless the primary purpose of the activity is to impound water or manage high flows. The activity may alter the pre - construction course, condition, capacity, and location of open waters if it benefits the aquatic environment (e.g., stream restoration or relocation activities). 10. Fills Within 100 -Year Floodplains. The activity must comply with applicable FEMA- approved state or local floodplain management requirements. 11. Equipment. Heavy equipment working in wetlands or mudflats must be placed on mats, or other measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance. 12. Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls. Appropriate soil erosion and sediment controls must be used and maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fills, as well as any work below the ordinary high water mark or high tide line, must be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. Permittees are encouraged to perform work within waters of the United States during periods of low -flow or no -flow. 2 • • 13. Removal of Temporary Fills. Temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to pre - construction elevations. The affected areas must be revegetated, as appropriate. 14. Proper Maintenance. Any authorized structure or fill shall be properly maintained, including maintenance to ensure public safety. 15. Wild and Scenic Rivers. No activity may occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River System, or in a river officially designated by Congress as a "study river" for possible inclusion in the system while the river is in an official study status, unless the appropriate Federal agency with direct management responsibility for such river, has determined in writing that the proposed activity will not adversely affect the Wild and Scenic River designation or study status. Information on Wild and Scenic Rivers may be obtained from the appropriate Federal land management agency in the area (e.g., National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 16. Tribal Rights. No activity or its operation may impair reserved tribal rights, including, but not limited to, reserved water rights and treaty fishing and hunting rights. 17. Endangered Species. (a) No activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed for such designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or which will destroy or adversely modify the critical habitat of such species. No activity is authorized under any NWP which "may affect" a listed species or critical habitat, unless Section 7 consultation addressing the effects of the proposed activity has been completed. (b) Federal agencies should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of the ESA. Federal permittees must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements. (c) Non - federal permittees shall notify the district engineer if any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, or if the project is located in designated critical habitat, and shall not begin work on the activity until notified by the district engineer that the requirements of the ESA have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. For activities that might affect Federally - listed endangered or threatened species or designated critical habitat, the pre - construction notification must include the name(s) of the endangered or threatened species that may be affected by the proposed work or that utilize the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the proposed work. The district engineer will determine whether the proposed activity "may affect" or will have "no effect" to listed species and designated critical habitat and will notify the non- Federal applicant of the Corps' determination within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre - construction notification. In cases where the non - Federal applicant has identified listed species or critical habitat that might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, and has so notified the Corps, the applicant shall not begin work until the Corps has provided notification the proposed activities will have "no effect" on listed species or critical habitat, or until Section 7 consultation has been completed. (d) As a result of formal or informal consultation with the FWS or NMFS the district engineer may add species- specific regional endangered species conditions to the NWPs. (e) Authorization of an activity by a NWP does not authorize the "take" of a threatened or endangered species as defined under the ESA. In the absence of separate authorization (e.g., an ESA Section 10 Permit, a Biological Opinion with "incidental take" provisions, etc.) from the U.S. FWS or the NMFS, both lethal and non - lethal "takes" of protected species are in violation of the ESA. Information on the location of threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat can be obtained directly from the offices of the U.S. FWS and NMFS or their world wide Web pages at http: //wwiv.fivs.gov /and http : / /www.noaa.gov /fisheries.html respectively. 18. Historic Properties. (a) In cases where the district engineer determines that the activity may affect properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places, the activity is not authorized, until the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) have been satisfied. (b) Federal permittees should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Federal permittees must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements. (c) Non - federal permittees must submit a pre - construction notification to the district engineer if the authorized activity may have the potential to cause effects to any historic properties listed, determined to be eligible for listing on, or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, including previously unidentified properties. For such activities, the pre - construction notification must state which historic properties may be affected by the proposed work or include a vicinity map indicating the 3 • • location of the historic properties or the potential for the presence of historic properties. Assistance regarding information on the location of or potential for the presence of historic resources can be sought from the State Historic Preservation Officer or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, as appropriate, and the National Register of Historic Places (see 33 CFR 330.4(g)). The district engineer shall make a reasonable and good faith effort to carry out appropriate identification efforts, which may include background research, consultation, oral history interviews, sample field investigation, and field survey. Based on the information submitted and these efforts, the district engineer shall determine whether the proposed activity has the potential to cause an effect on the historic properties. Where the non - Federal applicant has identified historic properties which the activity may have the potential to cause effects and so notified the Corps, the non - Federal applicant shall not begin the activity until notified by the district engineer either that the activity has no potential to cause effects or that consultation under Section 106 of the NHPA has been completed. (d) The district engineer will notify the prospective permittee within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre - construction notification whether NHPA Section 106 consultation is required. Section 106 consultation is not required when the Corps determines that the activity does not have the potential to cause effects on historic properties (see 36 CFR §800.3(a)). If NHPA section 106 consultation is required and will occur, the district engineer will notify the non - Federal applicant that he or she cannot begin work until Section 106 consultation is completed. (e) Prospective permittees should be aware that section 110k of the NHPA (16 U.S.C. 470h -2(k)) prevents the Corps from granting a permit or other assistance to an applicant who, with intent to avoid the requirements of Section 106 of the NHPA, has intentionally significantly adversely affected a historic property to which the permit would relate, or having legal power to prevent it, allowed such significant adverse effect to occur, unless the Corps, after consultation with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), determines that circumstances justify granting such assistance despite the adverse effect created or permitted by the applicant. If circumstances justify granting the assistance, the Corps is required to notify the ACHP and provide documentation specifying the circumstances, explaining the degree of damage to the integrity of any historic properties affected, and proposed mitigation. This documentation must include any views obtained from the applicant, SHPO/THPO, appropriate Indian tribes if the undertaking occurs on or affects historic properties on tribal lands or affects properties of interest to those tribes, and other parties known to have a legitimate interest in the impacts to the permitted activity on historic properties. 19. Designated Critical Resource Waters. Critical resource waters include, NOAA - designated marine sanctuaries, National Estuarine Research Reserves, state natural heritage sites, and outstanding national resource waters or other waters officially designated by a state as having particular environmental or ecological significance and identified by the district engineer after notice and opportunity for public comment. The district engineer may also designate additional critical resource waters after notice and opportunity for comment. (a) Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States are not authorized by NWPs 7, 12, 14, 16, 17, 21, 29, 31, 35, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 49, and 50 for any activity within, or directly affecting, critical resource waters, including wetlands adjacent to such waters. (b) For NWPs 3, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, 19, 22, 23, 25, 27, 28, 30, 33, 34, 36, 37, and 38, notification is required in accordance with general condition 27, for any activity proposed in the designated critical resource waters including wetlands adjacent to those waters. The district engineer may authorize activities under these NWPs only after it is determined that the impacts to the critical resource waters will be no more than minimal. 20. Mitigation. The district engineer will consider the following factors when determining appropriate and practicable mitigation necessary to ensure that adverse effects on the aquatic environment are minimal: (a) The activity must be designed and constructed to avoid and minimize adverse effects, both temporary and permanent, to waters of the United States to the maximum extent practicable at the project site (i.e., on site). (b) Mitigation in all its forms (avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing, or compensating) will be required to the extent necessary to ensure that the adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. (c) Compensatory mitigation at a minimum one - for -one ratio will be required for all wetland losses that exceed 1/10 acre and require pre - construction notification, unless the district engineer determines in writing that some other form of mitigation would be more environmentally appropriate and provides a project - specific waiver of this requirement. For wetland losses of 1 /10 acre or less that require pre - construction notification, the district engineer may determine on a case -by -case basis that compensatory mitigation is required to ensure that the activity results in minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. Since the likelihood of success is greater and the impacts to potentially valuable uplands are reduced, wetland restoration should be the first compensatory mitigation option considered. (d) For losses of streams or other open waters that require pre - construction notification, the district engineer may require compensatory mitigation, such as stream restoration, to ensure that the activity results in minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. 4 • • (e) Compensatory mitigation will not be used to increase the acreage losses allowed by the acreage limits of the NWPs. For example, if an NWP has an acreage limit of 1/2 acre, it cannot be used to authorize any project resulting in the loss of greater than 1/2 acre of waters of the United States, even if compensatory mitigation is provided that replaces or restores some of the lost waters. However, compensatory mitigation can and should be used, as necessary, to ensure that a project already meeting the established acreage limits also satisfies the minimal impact requirement associated with the NWPs. (f) Compensatory mitigation plans for projects in or near streams or other open waters will normally include a requirement for the establishment, maintenance, and legal protection (e.g., conservation easements) of riparian areas next to open waters. In some cases, riparian areas may be the only compensatory mitigation required. Riparian areas should consist of native species. The width of the required riparian area will address documented water quality or aquatic habitat loss concerns. Normally, the riparian area will be 25 to 50 feet wide on each side of the stream, but the district engineer may require slightly wider riparian areas to address documented water quality or habitat loss concerns. Where both wetlands and open waters exist on the project site, the district engineer will determine the appropriate compensatory mitigation (e.g., riparian areas and/or wetlands compensation) based on what is best for the aquatic environment on a watershed basis. In cases where riparian areas are determined to be the most appropriate form of compensatory mitigation, the district engineer may waive or reduce the requirement to provide wetland compensatory mitigation for wetland losses. (g) Permittees may propose the use of mitigation banks, in -lieu fee arrangements or separate activity- specific compensatory mitigation. In all cases, the mitigation provisions will specify the party responsible for accomplishing and/or complying with the mitigation plan. (h) Where certain functions and services of waters of the United States are permanently adversely affected, such as the conversion of a forested or scrub -shrub wetland to a herbaceous wetland in a permanently maintained utility line right -of -way, mitigation may be required to reduce the adverse effects of the project to the minimal level. 21. Water Quality. Where States and authorized Tribes, or EPA where applicable, have not previously certified compliance of an NWP with CWA Section 401, individual 401 Water Quality Certification must be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 330.4(c)). The district engineer or State or Tribe may require additional water quality management measures to ensure that the authorized activity does not result in more than minimal degradation of water quality. 22. Coastal Zone Management. In coastal states where an NWP has not previously received a state coastal zone management consistency concurrence, an individual state coastal zone management consistency concurrence must be obtained, or a presumption of concurrence must occur (see 33 CFR 330.4(d)). The district engineer or a State may require additional measures to ensure that the authorized activity is consistent with state coastal zone management requirements. 23. Regional and Case -By -Case Conditions. The activity must comply with any regional conditions that may have been added by the Division Engineer (see 33 CFR 330.4(e)) and with any case specific conditions added by the Corps or by the state, Indian Tribe, or U.S. EPA in its section 401 Water Quality Certification, or by the state in its Coastal Zone Management Act consistency determination. 24. Use of Multiple Nationwide Permits. The use of more than one NWP for a single and complete project is prohibited, except when the acreage loss of waters of the United States authorized by the NWPs does not exceed the acreage limit of the NWP with the highest specified acreage limit. For example, if a road crossing over tidal waters is constructed under NWP 14', with associated bank stabilization authorized by NWP 13, the maximum acreage loss of waters of the United States for the total project cannot exceed 1/3 -acre. 25. Transfer of Nationwide Permit Verifications. If the permittee sells the property associated with a nationwide permit verification, the permittee may transfer the nationwide permit verification to the new owner by submitting a letter to the appropriate Corps district office to validate the transfer. A copy of the nationwide permit verification must be attached to the letter, and the letter must contain the following statement and signature: "When the structures or work authorized by this nationwide permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred, the terms and conditions of this nationwide permit, including any special conditions, will continue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this nationwide permit and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below." 5 • • (Transferee) (Date) 26. Compliance Certification. Each permittee who received an NWP verification from the Corps must submit a signed certification regarding the completed work and any required mitigation. The certification form must be forwarded by the Corps with the NWP verification letter and will include: (a) A statement that the authorized work was done in accordance with the NWP authorization, including any general or specific conditions; (b) A statement that any required mitigation was completed in accordance with the permit conditions; and (c) The signature of the permittee certifying the completion of the work and mitigation. 27. Pre - Construction Notification. (a) Timing. Where required by the terms of the NWP, the prospective permittee must notify the district engineer by submitting a pre - construction notification (PCN) as early as possible. The district engineer must determine if the PCN is complete within 30 calendar days of the date of receipt and, as a general rule, will request additional information necessary to make the PCN complete only once. However, if the prospective permittee does not provide all of the requested information, then the district engineer will notify the prospective permittee that the PCN is still incomplete and the PCN review process will not commence until all of the requested information has been received by the district engineer. The prospective permittee shall not begin the activity: (1) Until notified in writing by the district engineer that the activity may proceed under the NWP with any special conditions imposed by the district or division engineer; or (2) If 45 calendar days have passed from the district engineer's receipt of the complete PCN and the prospective permittee has not received written notice from the district or division engineer. However, if the permittee was required to notify the Corps pursuant to general condition 17 that listed species or critical habitat might affected or in the vicinity of the project, or to notify the Corps pursuant to general condition 18 that the activity may have the potential to cause effects to historic properties, the permittee cannot begin the activity until receiving written notification from the Corps that is "no effect" on listed species or "no potential to cause effects" on historic properties, or that any consultation required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (see 33 CFR 330.4(0) and/or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation (see 33 CFR 330.4(g)) is completed. Also, work cannot begin under NWPs 21, 49, or 50 until the permittee has received written approval from the Corps. If the proposed activity requires a written waiver to exceed specified limits of an NWP, the permittee cannot begin the activity until the district engineer issues the waiver. If the district or division engineer notifies the permittee in writing that an individual permit is required within 45 calendar days of receipt of a complete PCN, the permittee cannot begin the activity until an individual permit has been obtained. Subsequently, the permittee's right to proceed under the NWP may be modified, suspended, or revoked only in accordance with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR 330.5(d)(2). (b) Contents of Pre - Construction Notification: The PCN must be in writing and include the following information: (1) Name, address and telephone numbers of the prospective permittee; (2) Location of the proposed project; (3) A description of the proposed project; the project's purpose; direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the project would cause; any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permit(s) used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity. The description should be sufficiently detailed to allow the district engineer to determine that the adverse effects of the project will be minimal and to determine the need for compensatory mitigation. Sketches should be provided when necessary to show that the activity complies with the terms of the NWP. (Sketches usually clarify the project and when provided result in a quicker decision.); (4) The PCN must include a delineation of special aquatic sites and other waters of the United States on the project site. Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps. The permittee may ask the Corps to delineate the special aquatic sites and other waters of the United States, but there may be a delay if the Corps does the delineation, especially if the project site is large or contains many waters of the United States. Furthermore, the 45 day period will not start until the delineation has been submitted to or completed by the Corps, where appropriate; (5) If the proposed activity will result in the loss of greater than 1 /10 acre of wetlands and a PCN is required, the prospective permittee must submit a statement describing how the mitigation requirement will be satisfied. As an alternative, the prospective permittee may submit a conceptual or detailed mitigation plan. (6) If any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, or if the project is located in designated critical habitat, for non - Federal applicants the PCN must include the name(s) of those endangered or threatened species that might be affected by the proposed work or utilize the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the proposed work. Federal applicants must provide documentation demonstrating compliance with the Endangered Species Act; and (7) For an activity that may 6 • • affect a historic property listed on, determined to be eligible for listing on, or potentially eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic Places, for non - Federal applicants the PCN must state which historic property may be affected by the proposed work or include a vicinity map indicating the location of the historic property. Federal applicants must provide documentation demonstrating compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. (c) Form of Pre - Construction Notification: The standard individual permit application form (Form ENG 4345) may be used, but the completed application form must clearly indicate that it is a PCN and must include all of the information required in paragraphs (b)(1) through (7) of this general condition. A letter containing the required information may also be used. (d) Agency Coordination: (1) The district engineer will consider any comments from Federal and state agencies concerning the proposed activity's compliance with the terms and conditions of the NWPs and the need for mitigation to reduce the project's adverse environmental effects to a minimal Ievel. (2) For all NWP 48 activities requiring pre - construction notification and for other NWP activities requiring pre - construction notification to the district engineer that result in the loss of greater than 1/2 -acre of waters of the United States, the district engineer will immediately provide (e.g., via facsimile transmission, overnight mail, or other expeditious manner) a copy of the PCN to the appropriate Federal or state offices (U.S. FWS, state natural resource or water quality agency, EPA,. State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO), and, if appropriate, the NMFS). With the exception of NWP 37, these agencies will then have 10 calendar days from the date the material is transmitted to telephone or fax the district engineer notice that they intend to provide substantive, site - specific comments. If so contacted by an agency, the district engineer will wait an additional 15 calendar days before making a decision on the pre - construction notification. The district engineer will fully consider agency comments received within the specified time frame, but will provide no response to the resource agency, except as provided below. The district engineer will indicate in the administrative record associated with each pre - construction notification that the resource agencies' concerns were considered. For NWP 37, the emergency watershed protection and rehabilitation activity may proceed immediately in cases where there is an unacceptable hazard to life or a significant loss of property or economic hardship will occur. The district engineer will consider any comments received to decide whether the NWP 37 authorization should be modified, suspended, or revoked in accordance with the procedures at 33 CFR 330.5. (3) In cases of where the prospective permittee is not a Federal agency, the district engineer will provide a response to NMFS within 30 calendar days of receipt of any Essential Fish Habitat conservation recommendations, as required by Section 305(b)(4)(B) of the Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. (4) Applicants are encouraged to provide the Corps multiple copies of pre - construction notifications to expedite agency coordination. (5) For NWP 48 activities that require reporting, the district engineer will provide a copy of each report within 10 calendar days of receipt to the appropriate regional office of the NMFS. (e) District Engineer's Decision: In reviewing the PCN for the proposed activity, the district engineer will determine whether the activity authorized by the NWP will result in more than minimal individual or cumulative adverse environmental effects or may be contrary to the public interest. If the proposed activity requires a PCN and will result in a loss of greater than 1 /10 acre of wetlands, the prospective permittee should submit a mitigation proposal with the PCN. Applicants may also propose compensatory mitigation for projects with smaller impacts. The district engineer will consider any proposed compensatory mitigation the applicant has included in the proposal in determining whether the net adverse environmental effects to the aquatic environment of the proposed work are minimal. The compensatory mitigation proposal may be either conceptual or detailed. If the district engineer determines that the activity complies with the terms and conditions of the NWP and that the adverse effects on the aquatic environment are minimal, after considering mitigation, the district engineer will notify the permittee and include any conditions the district engineer deems necessary. The district engineer must approve any compensatory mitigation proposal before the permittee commences work. If the prospective permittee elects to submit a compensatory mitigation plan with the PCN, the district engineer will expeditiously review the proposed compensatory mitigation plan. The district engineer must review the plan within 45 calendar days of receiving a complete PCN and determine whether the proposed mitigation would ensure no more than minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. If the net adverse effects of the project on the aquatic environment (after consideration of the compensatory mitigation proposal) are determined by the district engineer to be minimal, the district engineer will provide a timely written response to the applicant. The response will state that the project can proceed under the terms and conditions of the NWP. If the district engineer determines that the adverse effects of the proposed work are more than minimal, then the district engineer will notify the applicant either: (1) That the project does not qualify for authorization under the NWP and instruct the applicant on the procedures to seek authorization under an individual permit; (2) that the 7 • • project is authorized under the NWP subject to the applicant's submission of a mitigation plan that would reduce the adverse effects on the aquatic environment to the minimal level; or (3) that the project is authorized under the NWP with specific modifications or conditions. Where the district engineer determines that mitigation is required to ensure no more than minimal adverse effects occur to the aquatic environment, the activity will be authorized within the 45 -day PCN period. The authorization will include the necessary conceptual or specific mitigation or a requirement that the applicant submit a mitigation plan that would reduce the adverse effects on the aquatic environment to the minimal level. When mitigation is required, no work in waters of the United States may occur until the district engineer has approved a specific mitigation plan. 28. Single and Complete Project. The activity must be a single and complete project. The same NWP cannot be used more than once for the same single and complete project. C. Corps Seattle District Regional General Conditions 1. Aquatic Resources Requiring Special Protection. The following restrictions apply to activities in Washington State requiring Department of the Army authorization: (a) Activities resulting in a loss of waters of the United States in a mature forested wetland, bog, bog -like wetland, aspen - dominated wetland, or alkali wetland are not authorized by NWP, except the following NWPs: NWP 3 — Maintenance NWP 20 — Oil Spill Cleanup NWP 32 — Completed Enforcement Actions NWP 38 — Cleanup of Hazardous and Toxic Waste NWP 47 — Pipeline Safety Program Designated Time Sensitive Inspections and Repairs (b) For activities in or affecting a mature forested wetland, bog, bog -like wetland, wetland in a dunal system along the Washington coast, vernal pool, aspen - dominated wetland, alkali wetland, camas prairie wetland, or marine water with eelgrass beds (except for NWP 48) and not prohibited by the preceding general regional condition 1.a., the permittee must submit a pre - construction notification to the District Engineer in accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition 27 (Pre - Construction Notification). 2. Access. You must allow representatives of this office to inspect the authorized activity at any time deemed necessary to ensure that the work is being, or has been, accomplished in accordance with the terms and conditions of your permit. 3. Commencement Bay. Activities requiring Department of the Army authorization and located in the Commencement Bay Study Area are not authorized by the following NWPs: NWP 12 NWP 13 NWP 14 NWP 23 NWP 29 NWP 39 NWP 40 NWP 41 NWP 42 NWP 43 - Utility Line Activities (substations) — Bank Stabilization - Linear Transportation Projects — Approved Categorical Exclusions - Residential Developments - Commercial and Institutional Developments - Agricultural Activities - Reshaping Existing Drainage Ditches — Recreational Facilities - Stormwater Management Facilities 4. Bank Stabilization. All bank stabilization projects require pre - construction notification to the District Engineer in accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition 27 (Pre - Construction Notification). Each notification must include a planting plan using native riparian plant species unless the applicant demonstrates that a planting plan is not appropriate or not practicable. Each notification must also include the following information, except as waived by the District Engineer: 8 • • (a) Need for the work, including the cause of the erosion and the threat posed to structures, infrastructure, and/or public safety. (b) Current and expected post - project sediment movement and deposition patterns in and near the project area. (c) Current and expected post- project habitat conditions, including the presence of fish, wildlife and plant species in the project area. (d) Demonstration that the proposed project incorporates the least environmentally damaging practicable bank protection methods. These methods include, but are not limited to, the use of bioengineering, biotechnical design, root wads, large woody debris, native plantings, and beach nourishment in certain circumstances. If rock must be used due to site erosion conditions, explain how the bank stabilization structure incorporates elements beneficial to fish. (e) Assessment of the likely impact of the proposed work on upstream, downstream and cross - stream properties (at a minimum the area assessed should extend from the nearest upstream bend to the nearest downstream bend of the watercourse). Discuss the methodology used for determining effects. NOTE: Information on designing bank stabilization projects can be found in the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Integrated Streambank Protection Guidelines (http : / /www.wdfw.wa.gov /hab /ahg /ispgdoc.htm); King County's Reconnaissance Assessment of the State of the Nearshore Ecosystem (http : / /dnr.metrokc.gov /w1r /watersheds /puget /narshore /sonr.htm); and three technical (white) papers — Marine and Estuarine Shoreline Modification Issues, Ecological Issues in Floodplains and Riparian Corridors, and Over-Water Structures: Marine, Freshwater, and Treated Wood Issues (http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/ahg/akewhite.htm). 5. Cultural Resources and Human Burials. Permittees must immediately stop work and notify the District Engineer within 24 hours if, during the course of conducting authorized work, human burials, cultural resources, or historic properties, as identified by the National Historic Preservation Act, are discovered and may be affected by the work. Failure to stop work in the area of discovery until the Corps can comply with the provisions of 33 CFR 325 Appendix C, the National Historic Preservation Act, and other pertinent laws and regulations could result in a violation of state and federal laws. Violators are subject to civil and criminal penalties. 6. Essential Fish Habitat. An activity which may adversely affect essential fish habitat, as identified under the Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), may not be authorized by NWP until essential fish habitat requirements have been met by the applicant and the Corps. Non - federal permittees shall notify the District Engineer if essential fish habitat may be affected by, or is in the vicinity of, a proposed activity and shall not begin work until notified by the District Engineer that the requirements of the essential fish habitat provisions of the MSA have been satisfied and the activity is authorized. The notification must identify the type(s) of essential fish habitat (i.e., Pacific salmon, groundfish, and/or coastal- pelagic species) managed by a Fishery Management Plan that may be affected. Information about essential fish habitat is available at hitp: / /wtitiw. n wr, noaa.go v/ 7. Vegetation Protection and Restoration. Permittees must clearly mark all construction area boundaries before beginning work and minimize the removal of native vegetation in riparian areas and wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Areas subject to temporary vegetation removal in wetlands or riparian areas during construction shall be replanted with appropriate native species by the end of the first planting season following the disturbance except as waived by the District Engineer. D. Corps Regional Specific Conditions for this NWP: None E. State 401 Certification General Conditions 1. For in -water construction activities. Individual 401 review is required under this condition for projects or activities authorized under NWPs that will cause, or be likely to cause or contribute to an exceedence of a State water quality standard (WAC 173 -201A) or sediment management standard (WAC 173 -204). State water quality standards can be located on Ecology's website: http : / /www.ecy.wa.gov /programs /wq /swgs /. Sediment management standards can be located on Ecology's website: http: / /www. ecy. wa. gov/biblio /wac 173204. htntl. Information is also available by contacting Ecology's Federal Permit staff. 9 • • 2. Projects or Activities Discharging to Impaired Waters. Individual 401 review is required by this condition for projects or activities authorized under NWPs if the project or activity may result in further exceedences of a specific parameter the waterbody is listed for on the state's list of impaired waterbodies (the 303(d) list). The current 303(d) listed waterbodies can be identified using search tools available on Ecology's website: http: / /www.ecv.wa.gov/ programs /wq/303d/2002 /2002- index.html or by contacting Ecology's Federal Permit staff. 3. Notification. For projects or activities that will require individual 401 review, applicants must provide Ecology with the written documentation provided to the Corps (as described in Corps Nationwide Permit General Condition 27, Pre - Construction Notification), including, when applicable: (a) A description of the project, including site plans, project purpose, direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the project would cause, any other Department of the Army permits used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity. (b) Delineation of special aquatic sites and other waters of the United States. Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps and shall include Ecology's Wetland Rating form. Note: Forms are available at Ecology's Wetlands website: http://mw.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/index.html or by contacting Ecology's Federal Permit staff. (c) Coastal Zone Management Program "Certification of Consistency" Form if the project is located within a coastal county (Clallam, Grays Harbor, Island, Jefferson, King, Kitsap, Mason, Pacific, Pierce, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, Thurston, Wahkiakum, and Whatcom counties). Note: Forms are available at the Army Corps of Engineers website: http: / /www.nws.usace.armvmil or by contacting Ecology's Federal Permit staff (d) Other applicable requirements of Corps Nationwide Permit General Condition 27, Corps Regional Conditions, or notification conditions of the applicable NWP. Ecology's review time shall not begin until the applicable documents noted above have been provided to Ecology and Ecology has received a copy of the fmal Nationwide Permit verification letter from the Corps. 4. Aquatic resources requiring special protection. Certain aquatic resources are unique, difficult -to- replace components of the aquatic environment in Washington State. Activities that would affect these resources must be avoided to the greatest extent possible. Compensating for adverse impacts to high value aquatic resources is typically difficult, prohibitively expensive, and may not be possible in some landscape settings. Individual 401 review is required for activities in or affecting the following aquatic resources (and not prohibited by Regional Condition 1), except for: NWP 20 — Oil Spill Cleanup NWP 32 — Completed Enforcement Actions NWP 38 — Cleanup of Hazardous Waste NWP 47 — Pipeline Safety Program Repair (a) Wetlands with special characteristics (as defined m the Washington State Wetland Rating Systems for western and eastern Washington, Ecology Publication #s04 -06 -025 and #04 -06 -015): • estuarine wetlands • Natural Heritage wetlands • Bogs • old- growth and mature forested wetlands • wetlands in coastal lagoons • interdunal wetlands • vernal pools • alkali wetlands (b) Bog -like wetlands, aspen - dominated wetlands, camas prairie wetlands, and marine water with eelgrass beds (except for NWP 48). (c) Category I wetlands (d) Category II wetlands with a habitat score >29 points. 10 • • 5. Mitigation. 401 Certification is based on adequate compensatory mitigation being provided for wetland and other water quality- related impacts of projects or activities authorized under the NWP Program. Mitigation plans submitted for Ecology review and approval shall be based on the guidance provided in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Parts 1 and 2 (Ecology Publication #s06 -06 -01 la and #06- 06 -011b) and shall, at a minimum, include the following: (a) A description of the measures taken to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and other waters of the U.S. (b) The nature of the proposed impacts (i.e., acreage of wetlands and functions lost or degraded) (c) The rationale for the mitigation site that was selected (d) The goals and objectives of the compensatory mitigation project (e) How the mitigation project will be accomplished, including proposed performance standards for measuring success and the proposed buffer widths (f) How it will be maintained and monitored to assess progress towards goals and objectives. Monitoring will generally be required for a minimum of five years. For forested and scrub -shrub wetlands, 10 years of monitoring will often be necessary. (g) How the compensatory mitigation site will be legally protected for the long -term. Refer to Wetland Mitigation in Washington State — Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Ecology Publication #06- 06 -01 lb) for guidance on developing mitigation plans. Ecology encourages the use of alternative mitigation approaches, including advance mitigation and other programmatic approaches, such as mitigation banks and programmatic mitigation areas at the local level. If you are interested in proposing use of an alternative mitigation approach, consult with the appropriate Ecology regional staff person. (see http: //www.ecy.wa.gov/ programs /sea /wetlands /contacts.htm) For information on the state wetland mitigation banking program go to: http: / /www. ecy. wa. gov /programs /sea/wetlands /mitigation /banking /index. html 6. Temporary Fills. Individual 401 review is required for any project or activity with temporary fill in wetlands or other waters of the State for more than 90 days, unless the applicant has received written approval from Ecology. 7. Mill Creek Special Area Management Plan. This condition applies to all NWPs within the boundaries described in the Mill Creek Special Area Management Plan (SAMP), King. County, Washington, dated April 2000 (SAMP). The boundaries of the SAMP encompass all sub - basins and tributaries drained by Algona Creek, Auburn Creek, Bingaman Creek, Midway Creek, Mill Creek, and Mullen Slough. The area is bounded roughly on the south by 8th Avenue N in Algona and 4th Street NE in Auburn, on the east and north by the Ordinary High Water Mark of the Green River, and on the west by the plateau that parallels Interstate 5 above the Green River valley. Individual 401 review is required for projects or activities authorized under the NWPs unless: (a) The project or activity will result in fill- related impacts to only wetlands designated as developable under Alternative #8, as shown on Figure 4 -8 of the SAMP. (b) Compensatory mitigation for such impacts is onsite and/or within the areas designated on Figure 3 -3, "Maximum Areas for Restoration by Target Habitat Type," in the SAMP Aquatic Resources Restoration Plan (April 2000). (c) Mitigation plans comply with the requirements of the SAMP and, in general, with the guidance in the interagency Wetland Mitigation in Washington State (March 2006; Ecology publications #06- 06 -011a and #06-06 - 011b). Note: You can download the SAMP and Aquatic Resources Restoration Plan at http:/h www .nws.usace.army.mil/PublicMenu/ Menu. cfin ?sitename = REG&pagename =Mill Creek SAMP. 8. State Certification for PCNs not receiving 45 -day response. In the event the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers does not respond to a complete pre- construction notification within 45 days, the applicant must contact Ecology for Individual 401 review. F. State 401 Certification Specific Conditions for this NWP Certified 11 • • G. EPA 401 Certification General Conditions In order for any NWP authorization to be valid in Washington State, permittees must comply with all applicable 401 Certification general conditions. EPA 401 Certification general conditions apply to all NWP authorizations involving Section 404 activities on Native American Indian Tribal lands (excluding the tribal lands of the Chehalis Tribes, Port Gamble S'Klallum Tribe, Kalispel Tribe, Makah Indian Tribe, Puyallup Tribe, Spokane Tribe, and Tulalip Tribe) and Federal land with exclusive jurisdiction within Washington State. A. Special Aquatic Sites. Any activities in the following types of wetlands and waters of the U.S. will need to apply for an individual 401 certification: Mature forested wetlands; bogs; bog -like wetlands; wetlands in dunal systems along the Washington coast; vernal pools; aspen - dominated wetlands; alkali wetlands; camas prairie wetlands; salt marshes; or marine water with eelgrass beds. B. Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls. An individual 401 certification is based on the project or activity meeting established turbidity levels. EPA will be using as guidance the state of Washington's water quality standards [WAC 173 -201a] and sediment quality standards [WAC 173 -204]. Projects or activities that are expected to exceed these levels or that do exceed these levels will require an individual 401 certification. C. Compliance with Stormwater Provisions. Individual 401 certification is required for projects or activities not designed in accordance with Ecology's most recent stormwater manual or Ecology approved equivalent manual. D. Compliance with requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. For projects and activities requiring coverage under an NPDES permit, certification is based on compliance with the requirements of that permit. Projects and activities not in compliance with NPDES requirements will require individual 401 certification. E. Projects or Activities Discharging to Impaired Waters. Individual 401 certification is required for projects or activities authorized under NWPs if the project will discharge to a waterbody on the list of impaired waterbodies (the 303(d) List) and the discharge may result in further exceedence of a specific parameter the waterbody is listed for. EPA may issue 401 certification for projects or activities that would result in further exceedence or impairment if mitigation is provided that would result in a net decrease in listed contaminants or less impairment in the waterbody. This determination would be made during individual 401 certification review. F. Notification. For projects requiring individual 401 certification, applicants must provide EPA with the same documentation provided to the Corps (as described in Corps National General Condition 27, Pre - Construction Notification), including, when applicable: (a) A description of the project, including site plans, project purpose, direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the project would cause, any other U.S. Department of the Army permits used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity. (b) Delineation of special aquatic sites and other waters of the United States. Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps. (c) A statement describing how the mitigation requirement will be satisfied. A conceptual or detailed mitigation or restoration plan may be submitted. (d) Other applicable requirements of Corps National General Condition 27, Corps Regional Conditions, or notification conditions of the applicable NWP. A request for individual 401 review is not complete until EPA receives the applicable documents noted above and EPA has received a copy of the final authorization letter from the Corps providing coverage for a proposed project or activity under the NWP Program. G. Mitigation. An individual 401 certification is based on adequate compensatory mitigation being provided for wetland and other water quality- related impacts of projects or activities authorized under the NWP Program. Mitigation plans submitted shall be based on the Joint Agency guidance provided in Wetland Mitigation in 12 • • Washington State, Parts 1 and 2 (Ecology Publication #06-06-011a and #06- 06 -011b) and shall, at a minimum, include the following: I. A description of the measures taken to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and other waters of the U.S. 2. The nature of the proposed impacts (i.e., acreage of wetlands and functions lost or degraded). 3. The rationale for the mitigation site that was selected. 4. The goals and objectives of the compensatory mitigation project. 5. How the mitigation project will be accomplished, including proposed performance standards for measuring success and the proposed buffer widths. 6. How it will be maintained and monitored to assess progress towards goals and objectives. Monitoring will generally be required for a minimum of five years. For forested and scrub -shrub wetlands, 10 years of monitoring will often be necessary. 7. How the compensatory mitigation site will be legally protected for the long -term. H. Temporary Fills. An individual 401 certification is required for any activity where temporary fill will remain in wetlands or other waterbodies for more than 90 days. The 90 day period begins when filling activity starts in the wetland or other waterbody. H. EPA 401 Certification Specific Conditions for this NWP Denied without prejudice. Individual 401 certification required. I. Spokane Tribe of Indians 401 Certification General Conditions Specific to the Reservation and the Tribal Water Quality Standards, the applicant must comply with the following when there could be a discharge to waters of the Spokane Indian Reservation: 1. The applicant shall be responsible for achieving compliance with the Spokane Tribal Water Quality Standards. 2. The applicant shall submit copies of applications materials to the Spokane Tribal Water Control Board for review and approval at the same time they are submitted to Army Corps of Engineers and prior to any disturbance activities. 3. The applicant shall comply with all Spokane Tribal Integrated Resource Management Plan (IRMP) guidelines for land use activities and disturbances. 4. The applicant shall allow the Tribal Water Control board and Interdisciplinary Team to inspect the area in question and adopt recommendations made throughout its operation. 5. Monitoring of the discharge shall occur at a level indicated by EPA and the Tribe, are subject to change, and shall be submitted to both entities. 13 • J. Tribal 401 Certification Specific Conditions for this NWP Denied without prejudice by the Chehalis, Kalispel, Makah, Port Gamble S'Klallum, Puyallup, and Tulalip tribes. Certified subject to general conditions by the Spokane Tribe. K. CZM Consistency Response Specific Conditions for this NWP Concur L. ADDITIONAL LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF NWPs 1. District Engineers have authority to determine if an activity complies with the terms and conditions of an NWP. 2. NWPs do not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local permits, approvals, or authorizations required by law. 3. NWPs do not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges. 4. NWPs do not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others. 5. NWPs do not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project. :161 US Army Corps of Engineers ® Seattle district • • CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT Permit Number: NWS -2008- 0599 -NO Name of Permittee: Jeff Foley Date of Issuance: Upon completion of the activity authorized by this permit, please check the applicable boxes below, sign this certification, and return it to the following address: Department of the Army U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, Regulatory Branch Post Office Box 3755 Seattle, Washington 98125 -3755 Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers representative. If you fail to comply with the terms and conditions of your authorization, your project is subject to suspension, modification, or revocation. ❑ The work authorized by the above - referenced permit has been completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The mitigation required (not including monitoring) by the above - referenced ❑ permit has been completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. Signature of Permittee FOLEY SHORT PLAT WETLAND AND WATERCOURSE SENSITIVE AREA STUDY Tukwila, Washington Prepared for: City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 JEF00000 -0001 Prepared by: DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 415 - 118th Avenue SE Bellevue, Washington 98005 -3518 D D OD A V I D EVANS A N D A S S O C I A T E S I N C. February 2008 FOLEY SHORT PLAT WETLAND AND WATERCOURSE SENSITIVE AREA STUDY Tukwila, Washington Prepared for: City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 JEF00000 -0001 Prepared by: Jim Shannon Biologist DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 415 - 118th Avenue SE Bellevue, Washington 98005 -3518 February 2008 RECEIVED cm( TI HKW/LA APR 1,5 2008 PERMIT CENTEh TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 SPECIAL STUDY METHODS 2 1.1 Preliminary Resource Review 2 1.2 On -Site Investigation 2 3.0 RESULTS 3 1.3 Preliminary Resource Review 3 1.4 On -Site Investigation 3 1.5 Wetlands 4 1.6 Watercourses 4 4.0 REGULATION 5 1.7 Wetlands 5 1.8 Watercourses 5 5.0 FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT 6 6.0 HAZARDS, RISKS, AND IMPACTS 7 7.0 AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURES 8 8.0 MITIGATION PLAN 9 9.0 REFERENCES 10 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Ecology classification and approximate size of Wetland A. 6 APPENDICES Appendix A: Appendix B: Appendix C: Appendix D: Appendix E: Vicinity Map Conceptual Mitigation Plan Photographs Wetland Data Forms Washington Wetland Classification System Rating Forms P: \j\JEF000000001 \0600INFO \EP \EP37 Wetlands \Report dots \Foley Sensitive Area Study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4-Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page i This page left intentionally blank P: \i\JEF000000001 \06001NFO \EP \EP37 Wetlands \Report docs \Foley Sensitive Area Study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION At the request of Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann (applicant), David Evans and Associates Inc. (DEA) has conducted a wetland and watercourse special study for the Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat (Foley Short Plat). The Foley Short Plat, King County parcel # 1523049035, is located at 14011 Macadam Road South (Appendix A). The property is located in the City of Tukwila (City), King County, Washington, in Township 23 N, Range 04 E, Section 15. The parcel is a developed 1.68 -acre property with two existing structures (i.e. a house and a barn). This wetland and watercourse special study was conducted to obtain a "special permission" for a sensitive area ordinance deviation (i.e. wetland buffer reduction) pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code (City Code) 18.45.040. Specifically, the applicant requests a 50 percent buffer reduction on Wetland A from 50 feet to 25 feet. The applicant would also request a setback waiver from 10 feet to five feet from the Wetland A buffer. Adjacent land uses and ownership include residential areas and forested hillsides. The property is located to the west of Macadam Road South. Most of the land use west of Macadam Road South is a forested hillside and a few residential lots. I -5 is located to the east of Macadam Road South. The proposed project would create a 4 -lot short plat within the existing parcel. A new entrance and associated driveway off of Macadam Road South are also proposed (Appendix B -Sheet 3). Construction of the driveway will require the removal of 2,000 cubic yards of fill from the site. The existing house (Lot 2) and barn (Lot 4) would remain and two new houses are proposed (Lot 1 and Lot 3). A retaining wall is proposed to achieve the grading requirements to access the future house in Lot 4 (existing barn). The applicant proposes to use the existing concrete foundation of the barn for a proposed house in Lot 4. The barn currently encroaches into a wetland buffer (Wetland A). Mitigation is proposed in this report and will enhance Wetland A and its associated buffer habitat. The applicant proposes to enhance Wetland A and its buffer with native wetland and upland plant species. This mitigation would be monitored for five years as required by City code. p:\ j \jefo00000001 \0600info \ep \ep37 wetlands \report does \foley sensitive area study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page 1 2.0 SPECIAL STUDY METHODS Methods used for the site reconnaissance included a preliminary resource review and an on- site visit. 1.1 Preliminary Resource Review A review of existing resource information was conducted for the site vicinity in order to identify known wetlands and streams. Resources reviewed include the following: • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWT), Des Moines Quadrangle, 1:24,000 1988 • King County Wetland and Streams GIS data, King County, Washington, 2006 • Soil Survey — King County Area, Washington • King County — Assessor Property Characteristics Report and Districts and Development Conditions Report accessed through King County GIS Center • City of Tukwila — Stream map and buffer provided by the City 1.2 On -Site Investigation DEA biologists inspected the site on March 8, 2007, to document any wetlands or streams on the property. Weather during the site visit was overcast with light rainfall, and rain had fallen during the two previous days. Wetland presence or absence was determined according to methods established in the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1997) which is consistent with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Wetland classes were determined according to the USFWS Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States manual (Cowardin 1979). p:\ j\jefo00000001 \O600info \ep \ep37 wetlands \report dots \foley sensitive area study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page 2 3.0 RESULTS 1.3 Preliminary Resource Review The NWI Des Moines Quadrangle depicts no streams or wetlands on or adjacent to the property. The King County wetland and streams GIS data show no streams or wetlands on or adjacent to the property. Data from the Soils Survey for King County Washington were not available for the Tukwila area. The King County Districts and Development report describes this parcel as within the Duwamish River drainage basin in the Duwamish -Green River watershed, water resource inventory area (WRIA) 9. The aforementioned report describes no wetlands occurring on the parcel. The stream map provided by the City identifies a Type 4 watercourse with a 50 -foot buffer crossing the property from the northwest to the northeast, west of the existing barn, and traveling offsite across the southern property boundary. 1.4 On -Site Investigation The parcel is composed of mixed conifer /deciduous forest on the undeveloped slope to the west, and disturbed areas graded for the existing structures (Appendix C, Photographs 1 -3). The property currently contains one residential home built in the 1920s, one barn, and the existing gravel driveway that enters the property from the southeast corner. South of the barn is a broad flat area that was likely used for grazing livestock. The vegetation on the property east of the slope is degraded and composed primarily of invasive species including Himalayan blackberry (Rebus discolor), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens). Other species on the property include red alder (Alnus rubra), bluegrass species (Poa sp.), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), and several small planted western red cedars (Thuja plicata) east of the existing residence. The vegetation on the slope that rises on the western portion of the property is dominated by big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), western hemlock (Tsuga heterohylla), Oregon grape (Mahonia nervosa), sword fern (Polystichum munitum), beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), and holly (Ilex aquifolium). Invasive English Ivy (Hedera helix) is present throughout the forest floor and exists on many of the trees in this area. Observations made by DEA indicate that hydrology on the site has been altered over time. Cuts made into the slope in order to flatten and develop the area for housing and grazing exposed subsurface flows. These exposed subsurface flows appear to have been managed by p:\ j\jefo00000001 \O600info \ep \ep37 wetlands \report docsVoley sensitive area study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page 3 the excavation of a ditch, which transported waters to the south beyond the parcel boundary (Appendix C, Photograph 4). The ditch appears to have flowed into an existing stream that begins in a small seep - wetland south of the property line. The ditch on the property was not maintained and over time ceased to transport waters south along the toe of slope. Additional observations indicate attempts to drain the exposed flows with French drains. An existing French drain directs waters accumulated under the driveway to a ditch that flows to a catch basin along Macadam Road. 1.5 Wetlands Two wetlands were delineated on the property (Appendix D). Both of these wetlands occur along the toe of slope at the western edge of the developed portion of the property. These wetlands are considered palustrine scrub /shrub wetlands, with hydrology provided by seeps at the slope break. These wetlands are rarely inundated with water and are often only saturated to the surface. The presence of hydrology, predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, and the presence of hydric soils qualify these areas as wetland. Both wetlands are disturbed due to the proximity to human activities that have altered the site including grazing, gravel stockpiling, and the presence of invasive species. Wetland A occurs south of the existing barn on the property in L -4 (Appendix C, Photographs 5 and 6). Vegetation in this wetland includes red alder, Himalayan blackberry, creeping buttercup, and velvet grass. The wetland data plot contained gleyed (4 /10Y) silty clay soil with reddish brown mottles (5YR 4/4) from 4 to 16 inches and qualifies as hydric. Waters enter this wetland from cuts made for the ditch at the slope break, and the delineated areas were saturated to the surface during the March 6 field visit. Wetland B occurs near the northwest extent of the driveway at the base of the slope in L -1 (Appendix C, Photograph 7). This wetland is less than 1,000 square feet in size and has a connection to the remnant portion of the excavated ditch that no longer extends to the area of Wetland A. Vegetation in this wetland includes red alder, Himalayan blackberry, creeping buttercup, and reed canary grass. The wetland data plot contained very dark grey (10YR 3/1) soils with strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) mottles from 4 to 16 inches and qualified as hydric. 1.6 Watercourses DEA delineated the top of spoils and centerline for the excavated ditch identified on the property (Appendix C, Photograph 4). The ditch picks up seepage from the hillside and the waters infiltrate. The spoils and ditch become less pronounced as it travels to the south and was considered terminated when the lowest part of the ditch was not distinguishable. p:\ efo00000001\0600info \ep \ep37 wetlands \report docs \foley sensitive area study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page 4 The ditch contained no gravel or sand substrate. Substrate was similar to the soils in the area and covered with leaves that showed no indication of water stains. DEA identified an automobile battery and muffler within the excavated ditch. Field observations indicated that this ditch formerly connected to the area at the toe of slope in Wetland A. 4.0 REGULATION City Code regulates development parameters around sensitive areas and their buffers through Chapter 18.45. The terms "watercourse" and "wetland" are defined by sections 18.06.918 and 18.06.922, respectively. Designations, ratings, and buffers for wetlands are detailed in section 18.45.080; uses, alterations, and mitigation are outlined in section 18.45.090. Watercourse designations, ratings, and buffers are provided in section 18.45.100; uses, alterations, and mitigation procedures are listed in section 18.45.110. 1.7 Wetlands Wetland A is considered a Type 3 wetland, which requires a 50 -foot buffer and a building setback of 10 feet (Appendix C). City Code defines a Type 3 wetland as "...those wetlands that are greater than 1,000 square feet and less than one acre in size with two or fewer wetland classes." Wetland B does not fit the description provided for a Type 3 wetland above because it is less than 1,000 square feet in size. City Code does not provide a standard buffer width in section 18.45.080(B) for wetlands less than 1,000 square feet. Wetland B occurs in L -4 at the toe of the slope and will not be impacted by this project. Because there is no impact to Wetland B and its buffer is not regulated by the City, there will be no further discussion of Wetland B in this document. 1.8 Watercourses The watercourse mapped by the City as occurring on site does not appear to fulfill the definition provided in City Code section 18.06.920. The definition describes a watercourse as "...generally consisting of a channel with a bed and banks or sides substantially throughout its length along which water flows naturally." During the site visit, DEA did not delineate the entire length of the watercourse depicted by the City due to the lack of bed and bank. No natural surface flows were identified, and indications of past flows were absent. The current status of the watercourse according to the City is a Type 4 stream with a 50 -foot buffer and a 10 -foot building setback. p:\ j \jefo00000001 \0600info \ep \ep37 wetlands \report dots \foley sensitive area study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page 5 5.0 FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT The Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Ecology 2004) was used for the functional assessment of Wetlands A (Appendix E). This methodology has been developed to evaluate wetland values based on the functions provided. Using the rating system Wetland A was classified as a Category IV slope wetland scoring 20 points (Table 1). Table 1. Ecology classification and approximate size of Wetland A. Ecology Classification Water Size HGM Quality Hydrologic Habitat Total Ecology (approx. Wetland Type Score Score Score Score Category sq ft) A S 4 3 13 20 IV 1,347 Wetland A provides minimal water quality function (4 points) and minimal hydrologic function (3 points). The primary function provided by Wetland A is wildlife habitat (13 points). Currently the habitat of Wetland A is degraded. An existing fence as well as a pasture area contributes to the degraded condition of the wetland and its buffer. Himalayan blackberry, an invasive plant species, is present in the wetland and its buffer. Fish use does not occur on -site. Wetland A has no standing water and therefore no fish use. Wildlife use of the property is likely fairly extensive and provides habitat for an array of wildlife. The property is within a forested corridor that runs from 144th Street to the end of Macadam Road South. Although the corridor has been encroached upon by various developments, it still provides suitable habitat for wildlife. The parcel includes a forested hill that provides cover, forage, and breeding opportunities for amphibians, birds, and small mammals. Efforts to enhance wildlife habitat within the buffers of Wetland A would further improve the primary function of these wetlands. p,\ jYjefo00000001\O600info \ep\ep37 wetlands \report dots \foley sensitive area study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page 6 6.0 HAZARDS, RISKS, AND IMPACTS There will be no permanent hazards, risks, or impacts to wetlands or watercourses from this project. We are not proposing to fill or drain any wetlands on -site. The hydrology of the wetlands comes from the hillside slope where no impacts will occur. Temporary impacts to Wetland A and its buffer are anticipated during the installation of the mitigation plan. These temporary impacts include human disturbance while installing enhancement plants. All disturbed areas will be reseeded with a native upland hydroseed mix. The mitigation plan calls for vegetation enhancement of Wetland A and its associated buffer. Wetland A and its buffer currently lack a diversity of vegetation. An increase in vegetation diversity and density will add to the habitat value of Wetland A and its buffer. Storm water runoff during construction will be managed with a temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) plan. This TESC plan will include the installation of a silt fence around the buffer of Wetland A to minimize the potential of any sediment from project construction that may enter the wetland. Storm water runoff from the new and existing impervious surfaces is projected for on -site infiltration in the access /utility easement under the driveway arca. If further investigation indicates unsuitable soils at depths required for an infiltration trench, then runoff would be treated in an alternative manner. p:\ j\jefo00000001 \0600info \ep \ep37 wetlands \report docs\foley sensitive area study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page 7 7.0 AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURES The original plan has avoided filling any wetlands on -site. New areas of disturbance were avoided by using the existing footprint of the barn as a location for one of the houses. Currently the barn is located in the Wetland A buffer. The proposal avoids building any structures on the slope of the western half of the parcel. This portion of the parcel is densely vegetated and will remain undeveloped. We propose to install a temporary silt fence around the perimeter of Wetland A buffer and Wetland B during construction. This will minimize potential impacts to these areas. Also, before construction begins a split rail fence will be installed around the eastern edge of Wetland A buffer. This fence will also have sensitive area signage to deter trespass into Wetland A and its buffer. p:\ j \jefo0000000110600info\ep \ep37 wetlands \report dots \foley sensitive area study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page 8 8.0 MITIGATION PLAN Buffer reductions for wetlands are allowed under City Code section 18.45.080(G) for both wetlands and watercourses. The applicant requests a buffer reduction for Wetland A from 50 to 25 feet and a setback waiver from 10 to 5 feet. The wetland buffer reduction would only occur on the south and east sides of Wetland A. The forested buffer north and west of Wetland A buffer would remain at 50 feet. Without the requested buffer reduction mitigation required for the proposed project, at a 1 to 1 ratio, would be approximately 3,000 square feet. However, with the buffer reduction only 581 square feet of Wetland A buffer will be impacted (i.e. a proposed house using the footprint of the existing barn). To compensate for the buffer reduction and mitigate for the impact of using the footprint of the existing barn we propose to enhance 2,749 square feet of Wetland A buffer with native upland plants and enhance 1,347 square feet of Wetland A with native wetland plants (Appendix B). Appendix B contains the objectives, performance standards, monitoring, and maintenance of the proposed mitigation. These enhancement plantings will be monitored once a year in the late summer for five years from installation. An annual report will be delivered to the City of Tukwila for review. p:\ j \jefo00000001 \0600info \ep \ep37 wetlands \report docsVoley sensitive area study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page 9 9.0 REFERENCES Cowardin, L.M., and 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. FWS /OBS 79/31. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y -87 -1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. March. Publication 96 -94. . 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. Publication No. 04 -06 -025. Ecology, Olympia, Washington. United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil Survey of the King County Area. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C. ,p:\ j \jefo00000001\0600info \ep \ep37 wetlands\report docs\foley sensitive area study_022508.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Page 10 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: VICINITY MAP 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 N Highway Street n Parcel Boundary City of Tukwilla A Foley Short Flat Vicinity Map JEF00000 -0001 February 2008 Appendix A e DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCI AT ES iwc. APPENDIX B: CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION PLAN Cn 0 L. 0 0 0 EF000000001 \0400CA0\ o 02/22/08 2:55pm — \ A PORTION OF THE S.E.1 /4 OF THE N.W.1 /4 OF SECTION 31, T27N, R5E, WM House 114011 1 \f2OC RETAIN G WALL =ACK FROM EX. FOOTINGS SEMENT RETAINING WALL WETLAND A CITY OF TUKWILA MITIGATION SUMMARY WETLAND BUFFER IMPACT PROPOSED MITIGATION WETLAND BUFFER IMPACT: 581 S.F. 0 1:5 BUFFER 2749 S.F. (0.06 AC) ENHANCEMENT TOTAL WETLAND BUFFER IMPACT = 581 S.F. ADDITIONAL WETLAND A ENHANCEMENT 1347 S.F. (0.03 AC) TOTAL MITIGATION PROVIDED = 4096 S.F. (0.09 AC) LEGEND: INDEX: MMGATION SUMMARY SHEET MMGATION REPORT SHEET MIIIGAT1ON LANDSCAPE PLAN MMGATION DETAILS 25' WETLAND BUFFER WETLAND BUFFER IMPACT EXISTING WETLAND A EXISTING WETLAND 'A' BOUNDARY EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING ACCESS ROAD BOUNDARY PROPOSED PARCEL BOUNDARY PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR PROPOSED FEATURE PROPOSED ROCK WALL WETLAND BUFFER BOUNDARY SENSITIVE AREA SIGN (to be ploced approximately every 50') 0 20 40 80 SCALE: "1".=---20' PERMIT SUBMITTAL- NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SHEET 1 of 4 2 of 4 3of4 4 of 4 0 ID CO Q W0 20 0< 0 z REVISIONS: APPD. DATE: 2 -1B -08 DESIGN: IRS DRAWN: TRS MELTED: JCGA REVISION NUMBER: SCALE: 1..20' PROJECT NUMBER: J -0001 DRAWING FILE: JEF0_0001 J,11 SHEET NO. 1 OF 4 c 0 L.1 LJ 0 0 0 EN > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O O O O E co N a3 0 N 0 0 1.0 MITIGATION PLAN OVERVIEW .1.1 UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS TO WETLAND BUFFER Construction of the project will result in unavoidable impact to 581 SF (0.013 AC) of Category IV wetland buffer. The impacted wetland buffer is currently disturbed and degraded.. 1.2 MITIGATION APPROACH WETLAND BUFFER IMPACT Mitigation for impacts to 581 SF of wetland buffer will be accomplished by wetland and wetland buffer enhancement. Enhancement area is based on a 1:1 mitigation ratio established by the City of Tukwila. A total of 2.749 SF (0.06 AC) of enhancement will occur in the wetland buffer to improve the existing degraded nature. This amounts to a 1:5 ratio of wetland buffer enhancement. An additonal 1,347 SF (0.03 AC) of enhancement will occur in degraded Wetland A. A total of 4,096 SF (0.13 AC) of enhancement will be provided in the mitigation area. The 1:5 ratio is proposed because a buffer reduction from 50' to 25' is also proposed with this project. The mitigation areas shall be cleared of all invasive weeds and planted with native trees and shrubs that will provide greater plant diversity and wildlife habitat value. 2.0 MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 1. Replace lost functions from impacts to 581 SF of Category IV wetland buffer by enhancing 2,749 SF of Category IV Welland A buffer. Enhancement will occur by removing invasive weeds and installing native trees and shrubs. 2. Replace degraded functions from 1.347 SF of degraded Category IV wetland A by enhancing 1,347 SF. Enhancement will occur by removing invasive weeds and instating native trees and shrubs. 3.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Performance standards have been established that correspond to the stated mitigation goals and objectives. These standards are the primary factors that shall be used to judge the success of the mitigation project. It shall be exceedingly important to evaluate the development of the mitigation plan over the entire monitoring period when determining whether each individual standard has been met or not. While specific performance criteria provide important benchmarks and shall help to direct maintenance and contingency efforts, the success of mitigation must be measured against the goals and objectives of the overall mitigation plan. By monitoring the project and comparing monitoring results to performance standards, a determination can be mode for the need to implement maintenance efforts or the contingency plan. Performance standards are identified in the table below. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 4.0 MONITORING PLAN Mitigation monitoring shall be conducted by a Wetland Biologist for five (5) years which includes the installation inspection (one year warranty inspection). The objective of the monitoring program shall be to assess revegetation success. Reports describing monitoring results shall be submitted to the City of Tukwila by December 31 of years 1 through 5. The monitoring results shall be related to the performance standards and if warranted, recommendations shall be mode based on these flndings. 4.1 ESTABUSHMENT OF SENSITIVE AREAS Encroachment into sensitive areas shall be monitored during each annual visit. The sensitive areas shall be inspected for clearing, trash dumping and other unauthorized disturbances. Any encroachments in the sensitive areas shall be noted and directed to the City's attention. 4.2 VEGETATION ESTABUSHMENT All mitigation plantings shot be monitored for 5 years and shall include a total survival count. Overview photographs shall be taken from established photopoints. All planted trees and shrubs shall be evaluated in years 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 to document vegetation development. The monitoring shall be a complete census of plantings. 4.3 MITIGATION MAINTENANCE If necessary, maintenance actions shall be recommended by the monitoring biologist. Maintenance within the mitigation areas shall be performed by the landscape contractor during the one year warranty period. Following the one year warranty period, maintenance shall be performed as necessary to ensure mitigation goals and objectives are met. Implementation of maintenance actions is the responsibility of the project proponent (Jeff Foley). 5.0 MITIGATION SEQUENCING Construction of the mitigation sites shall generally include: 1. A pre - construction meeting; 2. Marking limit of work for mitigation boundaries; 3. Removal of invasive species and installation of plants as specified; 4. Post - construction meeting between all involved parties; 5. Removal of limit of work demarcations; 6. Implementation of monitoring program; 7. On -going maintenance as necessary. MONITORING METHODS 1. 100 percent survival of all installed native trees and shrubs one -year post installation. 2. Planted and volunteer tree and shrub species shall achieve: Year 1 - 100X survival; Year 3 - 90% survival; Year 5 - 75% survival. 3. At the end of the monitoring period, the following species will comprise <10% of the total vegetative cover in the mitigation areas; Himalayan blackberry, reed canarygrass, Scots broom, morning glory. Japanese knotweed, or any other invasive species as determined by the biologist. 4. At least 1 native tree species and 4 native shrub species shall be established in the mitigation area. 1. Total plant count of installed trees and shrubs shall determine one year warranty and performance standards for years 1 -5. Photographic documentation shall occur from established photopoints to provide additional documentation of plant success in each monitoring year. MONITORING INTERVAL Years 1. 2, 3, 4 and 5 (Wetland and buffer vegetation) Years 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 (Wetland and wetland buffer) PERMIT SUBMITTAL- NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 5.1 PRE - CONSTRUCTION MEETING A pre - construction meeting shall be held on -site between the project engineer. all necessary construction contractors (general and landscape contractors), and Wetland Biologist and or Landscape Architect. During this meeting, site conditions. permit, specifications, and the mitigation plans shall be reviewed. This shall assist all involved parties in understanding the intent, specifications, and requirements of the mitigation plan. 5.2 MARKING OF CONSTRUCTION UMITS FOR MITIGATION AREA BOUNDARIES The limit of work boundaries of the mitigation areas shall be marked in the field prior to preliminary site preparation, earthwork, or planting by the contractor. Boundaries shall be marked by installing orange temporary construction fencing to clearly delineate the mitigation area. 5.3 PLANTING PLAN All mitigation plants shall be native species. See plant schedule on Sheet 3 of 4. 5.4 POST - CONSTRUCTION MEETING A post - construction site review of the completed work shall be conducted between the Landscape Architect / Wetland Biologist and the contractor to verify that the plan was properly implemented. This field meeting shall identify any discrepancies between the plan and the field plantings and if necessary, propose corrective measures. If the plan was properly implemented, the monitoring period shall commence. 6.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION The Wetland Biologist or Landscape Architect (construction observer) shall be on -site periodically during the implementation of the mitigation area to review the plant installation. The responsibilities of the construction observer(s) shall include: responding to contractor questions regarding unique construction or planting techniques; review of construction materials and nursery stock. and review of plant locations. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to verify that plan specifications have been met. 7.0 CONTINGENCY PLAN The contingency plan shall provide remediation for the mitigation goals that have not been met. If the desired mitigation goals, as measured by the monitoring program and performance standards, have not been met and cannot be achieved through routine maintenance, then a determination by the City of Tukwila and the project proponent may be made to require submittal of a contingency plan. After written approval by the City, a contingency plan shall be implemented that compensates for the failed goals of the approved mitigation plan. If the contingency plan is substantial, the City shall extend the monitoring period. 8.0 PERFORMANCE SECURITY Certificate of occupancy shall not be complete until the mitigation plan is installed, inspected, approved and bonded. In order to ensure that the mitigation is properly implemented, including monitoring and contingencies, the project proponent (Jeff Foley) shall provide o Performance Bond following King City procedures. The total cost. plus contingency fees, shall be the amount of the Performance Bond. The Performance Bond shall become effective following installation and approval by the City. MITIGATION COST ESTIMATE: BOND ESTIMATE (Includes labor, materials, maintenance and monitoring for5„ysars,, 30% contingency aniT" mobilization) TOTAL COST ESTIMATE $ 12,102.00 B. THE PERFORMANCE BOND (120% OF A) IS ESTIMATED TO BE $ 14,522.00 Fq- J o- Z W (LL' ;z _ � O a co z U g m Q VJ ez mar V•Z mEQ L Wm r V m Z W NON co CD 0 r 20 m ='e >u,' <to m et 0 < °ma n To Z REVISIONS: APPD. DATE: 2 -18 -08 DESIGN: TRS DRAWN: TRS CHECKED: JCGA REVISION NUMBER: SCALE: PROJECT NUMBER: JEF00000 -0001 DRAWING FILE: JEFO_0001J,12 SHEET NO. 2 OF 4 Foley Short Plat Photo 1. The interior of wetland A looking north toward the existing barn. Photo 2. Wetland A looking south from the barn. The flag in the foreground is a data plot. The wetland boundary runs parallel to the red alders. 1 of 2 Foley Short Plat Photo 3. The existing gravel driveway and barn looking southeast. Photo 4. The termination of the delineated ditch is located at the hanging flag at the end of the row of pin flags. 2 of 2 jema 02/22/08 2:56pm — P:\ j\ JEF000000001 \0400CAD \ver2004 \JEFO1_M -3.dwg A PORTION OF THE S.E.1 /4 OF THE N.W.1/4 OF SECTION 31, T27N, R5E, WM PLANT SCHEDULE BOTANICAL NAME TREES Pseudotsuga menzies6 Tsuga heterophyllo SHRUBS /GROUNDCOVERS Acer circinatum Cornus sericeo Holodiscus discolor Lonicera involucrata Symphoricarpos albus Rosa nutkana Mahonia aquifolium Safx scouleriana Sally losiandra COMMoN NAME 97E HUE .GAL SPACING QUANTITY Douglas Fa HT, 3' -4', BB 15' -20' 0.C. 3 Western Hemlock HT, 3' -4', 88 15' -20' 0.C. 2 Vine Maple HT, (-6', 5 GAL 10' 0.C. 6 Red Osier Dogwood HT 15' -24'. 2 GAL 8' 0.C. 9 Ocean Spray HT 15' -24 -, 2 GAL 8' 0.C. 6 Black Twinberry HT 15' -24 °, 2 GAL 6' 0.C. 7 Snowberry HT 15' -24'. 2 GAL 3' 0.C. 18 Nootka Rose HT 15 - -24'. 2 GAL 3' 0.C. 18 Tall Oregon Grope HT 15 ° -24°, 2 GAL 3' 0.C. 26 Scouler Willow UVE STAKES 24' 0.C. 48 Pacific Mow UVE STAKES 24' 0.C. 64 NOTE Each willow symbol is equal to 16 live stakes BUFFER HYDROSEED MIX KIND/VARIETY X BY WEIGHT MIN. X GERM BARCLAY PERENNIAL RYEGRASS RED CREEPING FESCUE HARD FESCUE 70% 20% 10% 90X 90% 90% APPUCATION RATE: 120 LBS /ACRE CANFOR WOOD CELLULOSE ECO —F1BER MULCH: 2 000 LBS /ACRE NUTRICULTURE SEED STARTER FERTIUZER (16- 45 -7)_ 200 LBS /ACRE CANFOR ECO —TAC GUAR TACKIFIER: 60 LBS /ACRE STAY MOIST MOISTURE RETENTION AGENT 60 LBS /ACRE LEGEND: 25' WETLAND BUFFER EXISTING WETLAND A EXISTING WETLAND 'A' BOUNDARY EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING ACCESS ROAD BOUNDARY PROPOSED PARCEL BOUNDARY PROPOSED CONTOUR MINOR PROPOSED CONTOUR MAJOR PROPOSED FEATURE PROPOSED ROCK WALL WETLAND BUFFER BOUNDARY PLANTING NOTES= 1. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE CLEARED AND GRUBBED OF INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES. WETLAND AREA SHALL BE GRUBBED BY HAND. 2. ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL CONFORM TO THE AMERICAN NURSERY LANDSCAPE ASSOCIATION (ANLA) STANDARDS FOR NURSERY STOCK (ANSI Z 60.1 -2004) FOR GRADE AND SIZE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON PLAN. 3. SUBSTITUTIONS SHALL BE AUTHORIZED BY THE OWNER /LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. IF PLANTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE, CONTACT THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR SOURCES OR SUBSTITUTIONS TO BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 4. PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE INSPECTED AT THE NURSERY, OR PROJECT SITE. BY THE OWNER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 5. FAILURE TO MEET SPECIFICATIONS OF MATERIALS AND OF INSTALLATION METHODS AFTER TWO INSPECTIONS SHALL SUBJECT THE CONTRACTOR TO INSPECTION FEES, PAID TIME AND MATERIALS AT THE STANDARD RATE BY THE CONTRACTOR. 6. IN THE EVENT OF VARIATION BETWEEN THE PLANT SCHEDULE AND THE NUMBER OF PLANTS SHOWN IN THE PLANS, THE PLANS SHALL CONTROL. 7. ALL TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND AS SHOWN IN THE THE PLANTING DETAILS. 8. WETLAND BUFFER PLANTING PITS SHALL BE AMENDED WITH CEDAR GROVE 2 -WAY TOPSOIL MIX (OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT). WETLAND PLANTING PITS SHALL BE AMENDED WITH CEDAR GROVE COMPOST (OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT). BACKFILL PLANT PITS WITH 3 PARTS EXISTING NATIVE SOIL BACKFILL TO 1 PART SPECIFIED AMENDMENT. REMOVE EXCESS EXISTING SOIL FROM SITE. 9. ALL PLANT PITS SHALL RECEIVE MULCH RINGS: 3° DEEP X APPROXIMATELY TWICE THE ROOTBALL DIAMETER. BUFFER PLANTING PITS SHALL BE BARK MULCH AND WETLAND PLANTING PITS SHALL BE COMPOST MULCH. 10. BUFFER PLANTING AREA SHALL BE SEEDED WITH SPECIFIED HYDROSEED MIX. 11. CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY TIME RELEASE FERTILIZER TO PLANT PITS (OSMOCOTE TM OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) PER MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS. NO FERTILIZER SHALL BE PLACED IN WETLANDS. 12. CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL THE OWNER /LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO THE PLANTING INSTALLATION TO INSPECT THE METHOD AND LAYOUT OF PLANTING USED BY THE CONTRACTOR. 13. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE OF THE PLANTING AREAS DURING THE INSTALLATION, AND WARRANTY PERIOD. 14. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL WARRANT ALL MATERIALS. AND WORKMANSHIP FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM FINAL ACCEPTANCE. 15. ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE WATERED BY THE CONTRACTOR THOROUGHLY WHEN PLANTED AND DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD. MAINTENANCE NOTES: 1. ALL PLANTS SHALL RECEIVE AT LEAST ONE INCH OF WATER PER WEEK DURING THE FIRST GROWING SEASON (MARCH 15 TO OCTOBER 15) FOLLOWING MITIGATION INSTALLATION. CONTRACTOR WILL WATER THE ENTIRE SITE WEEKLY, EXCLUDING SIGNIFICANT RAINY PERIODS. 2. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL PLANTS AND MATERIALS DURING INSTALLATION AND THE WARRANTY PERIOD. CONTRACTOR SHALL WARRANT ALL PLANT MATERIALS TO REMAIN ALIVE AND HEALTHY DURING THIS PERIOD. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE ALL DEAD OR UNHEALTHY PLANTS, PER PLANS AND AS IDENTIFIED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT/ BIOLOGIST DURING THE ONE YEAR WARRANTY INSPECTION. 3. ALL MITIGATION PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE MAINTAINED TWICE DURING THE FIRST YEAR BY WEED REMOVAL (IN EARLY APRIL /MAY AND SEPTEMBER /OCTOBER). ALL HIMALAYAN BLACKBERRY, EVERGREEN BLACKBERRY SCOT'S BROOM, JAPANESE KNOTWEED, REED CANARYGRASS, CLIMBING NIGHTSHADE, PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE, MORNING GLORY, VETCH, TANSY RAGWORT AND THISTLE SHALL BE REMOVED WITH ROOT CROWNS GRUBBED OUT. OTHER WEEDS TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE AS DIRECTED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT / WETLAND BIOLOGIST. PERMIT SUBMITTAL- NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 20 40 80 SCALE: 1"=20' a Oa.cs CO a_ sp6 ZQTv 2< M Z p 3 5 w n 6 E Q W u- J � Om LL 7 REVISIONS: APPD. DATE:. 2 -18 -08 DESIGN: IRS DRAWN: IRS CHECKED: JCGA REVISION NUMBER. SCALE: 1' =20' PROJECT NUMBER: JEF00000 -0001 DRAWING FILE: WRLC6_SBRP_WMA3 SHEET NO. 3 OF 4 jema 02/22/08 2:57pm — P:\ j\ JEF000000001 \0400CAD \ver2004 \JEFO1_M -4.dwg ROOT CROWN 1' -2' ABOVE PLANTING SOIL GRADE 3' BARK OR COMPOST MULCH (SEE 7 �'�)• Fc'i PLANTING NOTES SHEET 3), HOLD' BACK 4' FROM MAIN STEM SHRUB PLANTING 6' HIGH RIM BERM HYDROSEED W /SPECIFIED SEED MIX SEE PLANT SCHEDULE SHEET 3 FINISH GRADE PLANTING SOIL FERTILIZER PER PLANTING NOTES EXISTING SUBGRADE NOT TO SCALE ROOT CROWN 2 - -4- ABOVE PLANTING SOIL GRADE 3' BARK MULCH (SEE PLANTING NOTES SHEET 3), HOLD BACK 2' -3- FROM MAIN STEM 6' RIM BERM HYDROSEED W /SPECIFIED SEED MIX FINISH GRADE REMOVE ALL BURLAP AND WIRE BASKET FROM ROOT BALL PLANTING SOIL FERTILIZER PER PLANTING NOTES EXISTING SUBGRADE DECIDUOUS MULTI -STEM TREE PLANTING NOT TO SCALE 2X2 HARDWOOD STAKE DRIVEN TO REFUSAL (24- MIN.). SECURE TO TREE WITH PLASTIC LOCK STRIP. TOP OF STAKE TO POINT TO PREVAILING WIND. ROOT CROWN 2' -4- ABOVE GRADE 3' COMPOST OR BARK MULCH (SEE NOTES SHEET 3), HOLD BACK 2 - -3' INCHES FROM MAIN STEM 6' BERM HYDROSEED W /SPECIFIED SEED MIX PLANT SCHEDULE SHEET 3 FINISH GRADE REMOVE ALL BURLAP AND PARE BASKET FROM ROOT BALL PLANTING SOIL FERTIUZER PER PLANTING NOTES EVERGREEN TREE PLANTING NOT TO SCALE Sensitive Area Boundary Protection of this natural wetland area is in your care. Alteration or disturbance is prohibited by law. Please cell the City of Tukwila , Department of Community Development for more intomiation. STAKE TO PROTRUDE 8' -12- ABOVE FINISHED GRADE WITH A MINIMUM OF 2 LEAF NODES EXPOSED FINISHED GRADE USE CUTTINGS 20' MIN. SOIL CUT END TO A PONT FOR EASIER INSTALLATION 1-111 I ELI I I -11. LIVE STAKE PLANTING NOT TO SCALE PRE — PRINTED METAL SIGN CEDAR POST 1 11 =1l7-1 I H I I- SB4SfIIVE AREA SIGN CONCRETE FOOTING ATTACH SIGN TO POST WITH TWO 5/16 GALVANIZED LAG BOLTS WITH WASHERS (Tsai). NOTES: 1. THE SENSITIVE AREA SIGN SHALL BE POSTED AT THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE SENSITIVE AREA BUFFER, SETBACK AREA OR SETBACK TRACT AND THE BUILDING SETBACK AREA. 2. ONE SIGN SHALL BE POSTED PER LOT FOR EVERY 150 FEET OF SENSITIVE AREA BUFFER AND SHALL BE STATIONED IN A PROMINENT LOCATION, i.e.: AT THE CLOSEST POINT TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. SIGNS MAY ALSO BE ATTACHED TO FENCES. CUT TOP SQUARE FOR EASIER INSTALLATION, PROTECT TOP FROM SPUTTING. INSERT STAKE WITH BUDS POINTING UP TRIM OFF BRANCHES WITH CLEAN CUTS MIN. BURIAL 12' INTO SOIL NOT TO SCALE PERMIT SUBMITTAL- NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Photo 1 — Existing house, barn and driveway looking northwest. Forested siope in background. Photo 3 — Undeveloped siope to the west of buildings and driveway. Forested buffer of Wetland A. Photo 2 — The existing gravel driveway and barn looking southeast. Macadam Road in the background. Photo 4 — Ditch along the toe of the siope. The termination of the delineated ditch is Iocated near the barn. Wetlands\ Photos.do" Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4-Lo Short Plat Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study February 2008 Photo 5 — The interior of Wetland A looking north toward the existing barn. Photo 6 — Wetland A looking south toward the barn. The flag in the foreground is an upland data plot. The western wetland boundary runs parallel to the red alders. P: \jVEF000000001\0600INFO\EP \EP37 Wetlands \Pholos.doc Jeff Foley and Sharon Mann 4 -Lot Short Plat February 2008 Wetland and Watercourse Sensitive Areas Study APPENDIX D: WETLAND DATA FORMS DATA FORM 1 (Revised) Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manuall Project/Site: .l, e , / S1„.,4)(•-L, j Pt G t `� Applicant/owner: �(� , 10 �/ / LC, rGt1• �-�u v1 / investigator(s): 4 I V W Q4 _ Date: 3 /8'04 County: V, in State: ij pc v Sr IR: 16" 17% IV f Li d' Do Norrnal Circumstances exist on a site? c) no Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes Is the area a potential 'Problem Area? yes & Explanation of atypical or,problem area: Community ID: 5 S Transect ID: Plot ID: bp_ q CJ .t..d VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vine) Dominant Plant Species _ Stratum % cover Indicator _Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator 4 h US co bfc` S C) rA t Qc,,,, ,,,tu1.5 fe a Wo vit ) Of Is cam. d,t) ;c.x-._ - LO c (-4- ac; ci scok) ( 5 20 TAL 0 HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing in Physiological /reproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Wetland plant database ,2‹.._ Morphological adaptations Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Technical Literature Other (explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? p no . • ' Rationale for decision/Remarks: •HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? yes no Based on: _ soil temp (record temp ) Water Marks: yes no • on Sediment Deposits: yes no Drift Lines: yes no Drainage Patterns- yes�r,o other (explain) Dept. of inundation: tnpvi, inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in yes no Local Soil Survey: yes no Depth to free water in pit: inches FAC Neutral: yes no Water- stained Leaves yes no Depth to saturated soil: 0 inches Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gage data: _ Aerial photographs: Other: Other (explain): I, �^ v `Z Wetland Wetland hydrology. present? • no i 'Rationale for decision /Remarks: 1 1-1)dru%zy ;� d t — by S¢ePss G col i'v\ S�C��1a... Ai' tdfc ' �o 14_1C-� -d S�t. Q.GvwU c SU v`C�.. SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) co.icA.A c.10€1 Taxonomy (subgroup) Drainage Class Field observations confirm Yes No mapped type? Profile Description . Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix color ( Munsell moist) Mottle colors (Munsell moist) Mottle abundance size & contrast Texture, concretions, structure, etc. 'Drawing of soil profile (match description) o -LI A bYR 91z / 5,1- lQ . 1-1—R9 3r I /oY 6 y�►� Apr ..t. i•1 cis Y Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (check all that apply) Odor Moisture Regime Conditions or Low -C • u a ( =1) matrix Matrix chroma <_ 2 with mottles Concretions Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Streaking in Sandy Soils National/Local Hydric Soils List in remarks) Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Sulfidic High Organic Aquic Organic Reducing Listed on Gleyed Other (explain Hydric soils present? 40 no Rationale for decision/Remarks. Wetland Determination (circle) 410 no no Is the sampling point no y.. no within a wetland? Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soils present ?0 Wetland hydrology present? Rationale/Remarks: ke61. e..J a.il Jh el eAlh ta,,' cis` c.L. cc., t -icr) ba c, d06fcAc.ed NOTES: Revised 4/97, DATA FORM 1 (Revised) Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: Fo ie y S k o rl P I Gt Applicant/owner: Jeff iQ le ,� / 5 itaran MA 'In nn I Investigator(s): k . i i( " (p U hG t..e/' Date: 3/0 ?/0 7 County: k ,11/4.36=-. State: w A i S/T/R: 5 / 23 N L1 Do Normal Circumstances exist on a site? yes no Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes no Is the area a potential Problem Area? yes no Explanation of atypical or problem area: Community ID: ...5",s- Transect ID: — Plot ID: DP ) _ r A VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vine) Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species P0K Pree6s,� H yo F L CIrSluM oirtlensk N 5 FActt phakr;S G(U/IJ ;rl4r 'I /0 Fa(� Acow/(145 !'c /ens 14 15 FA( tJ u(tuS cirmen S � ) ��{ Cut (�tA rne). Cr..spus � 5 CA HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION % of dominants OBL, FACW, Check all indicators that apply Visual observation of plant species areas of prolonged inundation Morphological adaptations Technical Literature INDICATORS & FAC h v Physiological Wetland /reproductive adaptations plant database knowledge of regional plant communities (explain) & explain growing /saturation below: in _ Personal Other Ilydrophytic vegetation present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY yes no (record temp _) -h 4,, P ea e- y Is it the growing season? Based on: soil temp Water Marks: yes no on Sediment Deposits: yes no Drift Lines: yes no Drainage Patterns: yes no X other (explain) Dept. of inundation: Depth to free water in pit: Depth to saturated soil: ,one inched' inches inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. yes Local Soil Survey: yes no /lp,l a /gyp/) FAC Neutral: yes no Water- stained Leaves yes no Check all that apply & explain Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial photographs: below: — Other: Other (explain): _ — Wetland hydrology present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: • 0 O W ai"r r d f ; P '�'lnra t JY) IM p t.. SOILS Map Unit Name f) f a. d o 16 6 ►e Drainage Class (Series & Phase) Taxonomy (subgroup) Field observations confirm Yes No mapped type? Profile Description Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix color (Munsell moist) Mottle colors ( Munsell moist) Mottle abundance size & contrast Texture, concretions, structure, etc. Drawing of soil profile (match description) 0 - y q /o IA 3%2, — -- SA id c/ 1 /oam Li _r B (0 lie. iiik s ygVI/ s 0 f /06nY% Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (check all that apply) Odor Moisture Regime Conditions or Low - Chroma ( =1) matrix Matrix chroma 5 2 with mottles Concretions Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Streaking in Sandy Soils National/Local Hydric Soils List in remarks) Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Sulfidic _ _ High Organic Organic Aquic Reducing Listed on i( . Gleyed Other (explain Hydric soils present? es no Rationale for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) • no no is the sampling point yes no yes no within a wetland? Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soils present? Wetland hydrology present? Rationale/Remarks: I (� Q �- FrenJ e fz.+if, v`'ls"- t(rc `�evt4 ina !�rUInfir!� 1i1altro t 0 kyJto ,�' ' �1 NOTES: Revised 4/97 DATA FORM 1 (Revised) Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corns Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: Pokey Sift ?\t^t `1 Applicant/owner: ' T6 l Q/ / S tAck o ti., 4 c.. v A `/ �{� Investigator(s): i e K Y " 4U 0,�e. VI/ Date: I e Ic 7 County: 1/0.10 State: .! S/'T/R: I S / Z 3 IQ / �I r Do Normal Circumstances exist on the e? Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? - Is the area a potential Problem Area? Explanation of atypical or problem area: yelp- no no Community ID: S 5 Transect ID: ......-- • � Piot ID: P_, aLLA 6- yes yes VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vine) Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover -- Indicator Dominant Plant Species k.)\1.)0s 81'S(-0V S LICE VA Lu _ - Aku3 fo cci, s GO _AC..- LYNtPAL-01u Ctgv. S IA 20 flQOA) - P1,e, \t,V;5l,CO V4 i`CAte,. IA 10 RICO HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION % of dominants OBL, FACW, ' Check all indicators that apply • Visual observation of plant species areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Morphological adaptations Technical Literature INDICATORS & FAC 2/ 3 Physiological Wetland /reproductive adaptations plant database knowledge of regional plant communities (explain) & explain growing below: in x Personal _ _ Other Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY (record temp i no _ _ -_) Is it the growing season? Based on: soil temp Water Marks: yes no on Sediment Deposits: yes no Drift Lines: yes no _ Drainage Patterns: yes no other (explain) vt,.e p. ye r,✓ Dept. of inundation: Depth to free water in pit: Depth to saturated soil: inches ' inches inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. yes no Local Soil Survey: yes no 10 FAC Neutral: yes no Water - stained Leaves yes no Q Check all that apply & explain Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial photographs: below: Other: ___ - -- Other (explain): j 1 1( 1 i D`" , . c&Lii't ed ivy 10 Wetland hydrology present? 1 Rationale for decision/Remarks: tio no Fj 1 kydir0\19 .� .)fC -e4 f fov-N Seeps 0,, sI 'r€. - - • SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Not c,ia. le. k e. Taxonomy (subgroup) Drainage Class Field observations confirm Yes mapped type? No Profile Description Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix color (Mansell moist) )ors 3/2 Mottle colors (Munsell moist . Mottle abundance size & contrast /— Texture, concretions, structure, etc. 5��, 100, wk.- Drawing of soil profile - — (match description) o- W L)-- 1(ci 10 Y 3 I t 7,5y9 y/ ca(-w)"r, I.4t* cOrel ihe.^ t , I t O a w` Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (check all that apply) Odor Moisture Regime Conditions or Low -C a ( =1) matrix / Matrix chroma S 2 with mottles Concretions Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Streaking in Sandy Soils National/Local Hydric Soils List in remarks) Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Sulfidic High Organic Aquic Organic Reducing Listed on Gieyed Other (explain Hydric soils present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remar 1Ae,,,.),ay (c it...oely ,'k. Wetland Determination (circle) • es no • no Is the sampling point no no within a wetland? Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soils present? Wetland hydrology present? Rationale/Remarks: k- a,,,�1 - ,-E s b-e,.V a - I✓4,,G v, dofc ci.p8 , } 4_5 @ .skla NOTES: Revised #/973 DATA FORM 1 (Revised) Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: J Q/ cl - c- V\c t - Applicant/owner: Jc.� 'v`g / / S cov. r" tc�� / Investigator(s): V, f 1< Mu t, G v tA-k.. _ Date: 3 /ej (Cj- County: Z; SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Taxonomy (subgroup) c1k)c,cleAle Drainage Class Field observations confirm Yes No mapped type? Profile Description . Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix color ( Munsell moist) Mottle colors (Munsell moist) Mottle abundance size & contrast Texture, concretions, structure, etc. Drawing of soil .profile — (match description)' o_Li A /0 Ye3)Z s loo n... 1-1-1G4- S Jo re tI %Z 2,7S yk L � ± 5,' I L ioc . Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (check all that apply) Odor Moisture Regime Conditions or Low • t+; a ( =1) matrix Matrix chroma _< 2 with mottles Concretions Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Streaking in Sandy Soils National/Local Hydric Soils List . in remarks) Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Sulfidic High Organic Aquic Organic Reducing Listed on Gleyed Other (explain Hydric soils present? no Rationale for decision/Remar . Wetland Determination (circle) , no no Is the sampling point yes no yes no within a wetland? Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soils present? Wetland hydrology present? Rationale/Remarks: NOTES: Args -tt,± lny drn'G 1"), d icpb y - Ld,c.r . britct -. . v1U tart pC'QSQht . Revised 4/97, APPENDIX E: WASHINGTON WETLAND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM RATING FORMS Wetland name or number: Wetland A WETLAND RATING FORM — WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2 - Updated June 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Name of wetland (if known): Wetland A Date of site visit: 03/07 Rated by: Kirk Mougharner Trained by Ecology? Yes X No Date of training: 2/06 SEC: 15 TWNSHP: 23N RNGE: 04W Is S /T /R in Appendix D? Yes_ No X Map of wetland unit: Figure Estimated size =1,347 sq ft__ SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I II III IV X_ Category I = Score > =70 Category II = Score 51 =69 Category III = Score 30 =50 Category IV = Score < 30 Score for Water Quality Functions Score for Hydrologic Functions Score for Habitat Functions TOTAL score for Functions Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I II Does not Apply X Final Category (choose the "highest" category from above) Summary of basic information about the wetland unit 4 3 13 20 IV fWCe tla�x U n- rt a S pc, ia l hats�*� - raCterisi -Mud H M GIR O used tor gahng Estuarine Depressional Natural Heritage Wetland Riverine Bog Lake- fringe Mature Forest Slope _ X Old Growth Forest Flats _ Coastal Lagoon Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above X Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present Wetland Rating Form = Western Washington Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A Does the wetland unit being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. (in addition theprotechonrecommended, o "r ><ts `category) SPl . Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (T /E species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. X SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 19 of data form). SP3. Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? X X SP4. Does the wetland unit have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having special significance. X To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wetland Rating Form — Western Washington 2 Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington hydrologic criteria listed in each quest1on {do''no ra_ ted you probabl haves iunit with mu1hple ,HGM lasses. hydrologic cr`iteriam�questions 1 7 apply, and go to Question theentire unit bein this,�case ,.id° ntify vi 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)? NO — go to 2 YES — the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? YES — Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO = Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category 1 and 11 estuarine wetlands have changed (see p. ). 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source ( >90 %) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. NO — go to 3 YES — The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres (8 ha) in size; At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m)? NO — go to 4 YES — The wetland class is Lake - fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? _x_The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), _ x_The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. _ x_The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO - go to 5 YES — The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form — Western Washington 3 Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO - go to 6 YES — The wetland class is Riverine 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year. This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO — go to 7 YES — The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO — go to 8 YES — The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM clases. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1 -7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HJGM Nlasses withintthe wetland ,it being rate HGM Class to Om in Raring, Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake -fringe Lake - fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional Depressional + Lake - fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form — Western Washington 4 Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A �SSlope�Wetlads ��� p� a .,5,. `g ,k WAITER QUALITY FUNCTIONS Indicators that the wetland , ions toy ` � � » u111t��fL1I1Ci � , M, improve water uallt r . Points tonl 1 score er b per box) xti S S S S S S 1. Does the wetland unit have the s otential to improve water quality? (see p.64) S 1.1 Characteristics of average slope of unit: Slope isl% or less (a I% slope has a I foot vertical drop in elevation for every IOO ft horizontal distance) points = 3 Slope is 1% - 2% points = 2 Slope is 2% - 5% points = 1 Slope is greater than 5% points = 0 2 S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface (or duff layer) is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions) YES = 3 points NO = 0 points 0 S 1.3 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits the vegetation in the wetland. Dense vegetation means you have trouble seeing the soil surface (> 75% cover), and uncut fneans not grazed or mowed and plants are higher than 6 inches. Dense, uncut, herbaceous vegetation > 90% of the wetland area points = 6 Dense, uncut, herbaceous vegetation > 1/2 of area points = 3 Dense, woody, vegetation >'h of area points = 2 Dense, uncut, herbaceous vegetation > 1/4 of area points = 1 Does not meet any of the criteria above for vegetation points = 0 Aerial photo or map with vegetation polygons Figure Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above 1 2 i S S S 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p.67) multiplier 2 Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland. Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. — Grazing in the wetland or within 150ft — Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland — Tilled fields, logging, or orchards within 150 feet of wetland — Residential, urban areas, or golf courses are within 150 ft upslope of wetland — Other YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 TOTAL - Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from S 1 by S2 Add score to table on p. 1 4 Comments Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington 5 Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A Comments Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington 6 Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A „km” . i� ,--, -- sre mpin r� � ...tai . eve �=�'' '<5%xS` `' ,,.. :. ? Y " u These/�{//�uesiwns apl )to wetlandsio 4att HGM�classe, s N y „t( 4� W^l -'S +' lid iT, kY ll./,F � -• � � .1Yi�& �Q �% `� Yid' -e� �J.. y � - 1yO�11W fig, -z.� "Amat�4 .-� .41p � v ' � Vic r�`. + "(9nl le'core . kHABITaAT3FUNCTIONS 4Indicators4that. umtifunctionstto�provt deltmportant habttat per,axj ,��' b;;d;�H+f:rr. z�rta'Alt'.4.1c ,.,?",h tits:',{etf i' 7:1i§:'Fa?.�"e trs,,. :$' b.'aiz?r'wi 21,4 4 a'.d5ki�A /4"lk .)rs��: rK ?g#M 9';w"u.:. - ,636 - ti5 H 1. Does the wetland unit have the • otential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see p. 72) Figure Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin)- Size threshold for each class is 1/4 acre or tnore than 10% of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. Aquatic bed _X_ Emergent plants _X_ Scrub /shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover) Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover) If the unit has a forested class check if: _The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub - canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss /ground - cover) that each cover 20% within the forested polygon Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify. If you have: 4 structures or more points = 4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures points = 2 2 structures points = 1 1 structure points = 0 l H 1.2. Hydroperiods (see p. 73) Figure Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or 1/4 acre to count. (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods) Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points = 3 0 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present points = 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present point = 1 X_ Saturated only 1 type present points = 0 Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the Wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake fringe wetland = 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland = 2 points Map of hydroperiods H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (see p. 75) 2 Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft`. (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 List species below if you want to.: 5 - 19 species points = 1 < 5 species points = 0 Wetland Rating Form — Western Washington 7 Total for page: 3_ Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76) between Cowardin vegetation unvegetated areas (can include open water or Figure Decide from the diagrams classes (described in H 1.1), mudflats) is high, medium, below whether interspersion or the classes and low, or none. 0 . None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points 1 viliclio [riparian braided channels] High = 3 points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water the rating is always "high ". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (see p. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you put into the next column. _X_Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland ( >4in. diameter and 6 ft long). _X_Standing snags (diameter at the bottom > 4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft (1m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft 2 (10m) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning ( >30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least 'A acre of thin - stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated.(structures for egg- laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20% stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. H 1. TOTAL Score - potential for providing habitat 3 Add the scores from H1.1, H1.2, H1.3, H1.4, HI.S J Comments Wetland Rating Form — Western Washington Wetland name or number: Wetland A H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (see p. 80) Figure Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed." — 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no- grazing, no landscaping, no daily human use) Points = 5 — 100 m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 50% circumference. Points = 4 — 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water >95% circumference. Points = 4 — 100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water > 25% circumference, . Points = 3 3 X 50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for > 50% circumference. Points = 3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above — No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80ft) of wetland > 95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 — No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2 — Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1 Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference (e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points = 0 — Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points =1 Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads, paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES = 4 points (go to H 2.3) NO = go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake - fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? l YES = 2 points (go to H 2.3) NO = H 2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the wetland: within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a large field or pasture ( >40 acres) OR within 1 mi of a lake greater than 20 acres? YES = 1 point NO = 0 points Wetland Rating Form – Western Washington 9 Total for page: 4 Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (see p. 82) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft (100m) of the wetland unit? NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. These are DFW definitions. Check with your local DFW biologist if there are any questions. Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.8 ha (2 acres). Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft. Old - growth forests: (Old- growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi - layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 20 trees/ha (8 trees /acre) > 81 cm (32 in) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown cover may be Icss that 100 %; crown cover may be less that 100 %; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old - growth; 80 - 200 years old west of the Cascade crest. Prairies: Relatively undisturbed areas (as indicated by dominance of native plants) where grasses and /or forbs form the natural climax plant community. Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component of the stand is 25%. Urban Natural Open Space: A priority species resides within or is adjacent to the open space and uses it for breeding and/or regular feeding; and/or the open space functions as a corridor connecting other priority habitats, especially those that would otherwise be isolated; and/or the open space is an isolated remnant of natural habitat larger than 4 ha (10 acres) and is surrounded by urban development. Estuary/Estuary -like: Deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands, usually semi - enclosed by land but with open, partly obstructed or sporadic access to the open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff from the land. The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the open ocean by evaporation. Along some low- energy coastlines there is appreciable dilution of sea water. Estuarine habitat extends upstream and landward to where ocean- derived salts measure less than 0.5ppt. during the period of average annual low flow. Includes both estuaries and lagoons. Marine/Estuarine Shorelines: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones of beaches, and may also include the backshore and adjacent components of the terrestrial landscape (e.g., cliffs, snags, mature trees, dunes, meadows) that are important to shoreline associated fish and wildlife and that contribute to shoreline function (e.g., sand/rock/log recruitment, nutrient contribution, erosion control). If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points If wetland has 1 priority habitat = 1 point No habitats = 0 points Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4) 0 Wetland Rating Form — Western Washington 10 Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that 3 best fits) (see p. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields, or other development. points = 5 The wetland is Lake - fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake- fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile points = 5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within' mile, BUT the connections between them are disturbed points = 3 The wetland is Lake - fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake - fringe wetland within' mile points = 3 There is at least I wetland within 1/2 mile. points = 2 There are no wetlands within' mile. points = 0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores from H2.1,H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 1 1 TOTAL for H 1 from page 14 6 Total Score for Habitat Functions — add the points for H 1, H 2 and record the result on P. 1 13 Wetland Rating Form — Western Washington 11 Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. Category SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (see p. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? — The dominant water regime is tidal, — Vegetated, and — With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES = Go to SC 1.1 NO _x_ SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332 -30 -151? YES = Category I NO go to SC 1.2 Cat. I SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES = Category I NO = Category II — The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non - native plant species. If the non - native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10% of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual rating (1111). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. — At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un- grazed or un -mowed grassland. — The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Cat. I Cat. II Dual rating VII Wetland 'Rating Form Western Washington 12 Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland unit being rated in a Section /Township /Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? (this question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP /DNR) S/T/R information from Appendix D _ or accessed from WNHP/DNR web siie _X= YES — contact WNHP /DNR (see p. 79) and go to SC 3.2 NO _X_ SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES = Category I NO _X_ Cat. 1 SC 3.0 Bogs (see p. 87) Does the wetland unit (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog: If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. 1. Does the unit have organic soil horizons (i.e. layers of organic soil), either peats or mucks, that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? Yes - gotoQ.3 No -go to Q.2 2. Does the unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock; or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? Yes - go to Q. 3 No = Is not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit have more than 70% over of mosses at ground level, AND other plants, if present, consist of the "bog" species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes = Is a bog for purpose of rating No - go to Q. 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16" deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog" plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 1. Is the unit forested (> 30% cover) with sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine, WITH any of the species (or combination of species) on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (> 30% coverage of the total shrub /herbaceous cover)? 2. YES = Category I No_X_ Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Wetland Rating Form — Western Washington 13 Version 2 Wetland name or number: Wetland A Wetland Rating Form — Western Washington 14 Wetland name or number: Wetland A SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (see p. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES - go to SC 6.1 NO X not an interdunal wetland for rating If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula- lands west of SR 103 • Grayland- Westport- lands west of SR 105 • Ocean Shores - Copalis- lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is once acre or larger? YES = Category II NO — go to SC 6:2 SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES = Category III Cat. II Cat. III Categor of wetlandlb isedson Sp ec 1 Characte shcs ,. �g Y Py 93` u f `ffi� i°''t(' .F .,'""?s Y�j��ti��n��4 '°Wt`'.$'s^£'�;#�.8t'�Cifi �`�!fk� R�� �Ni"'� - - fi.� `� -�r>A �>�"# Choose theme highest, =rating of wetland falls, into „several categories; and`recordion , I z,g you an veered NO foriall types -enter ,NotiApplicable on p*1 .;.: _, ` , N/A Wetland Rating Form = Western Washington 15 Version 2 pEOENEr'„,A CR" APR 15 2r PERMIT ctN't', SEP -17 -2008 07:53 AM FFOIEw A !, 5� S 1 °- 53(ol CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (106) 431 -3670 FAX (106) 431 -3665 E-mail: tukplan@ci.tulcwila,wa.us 12244740 SPECIAL PERMISSION DIRECTOR P.01 FOR STAFF USE ONLY Per MI& Phu 7)pe: ASP Planner: 112-Gbe.C.C�V0 File Number: L.00-0(94 Application Complete (Date: Application Incomplete (Date: ) ) Project File Number. Other File Numbers: E 01 " 01 59P NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: L01 00 1 s►f+9R-T to i•47- LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest in : (ion, qe3 LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). ,5'Z 3oygo35 DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the owner/applicant in meetings with City staff, • bas 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: 6 •c7 Phone: (0 & E-mail: Signature: -3'A/ ,A. FAX: 19r & 0 29- 7 % yo r .78 %.%.� r _ Date: q RECEIVED SEP 2 2 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT gbk 09/12/08 2:21pm — P: \j \JEF000000001 \0400CAD \Off site Jefo mitigation \JEF01_M -1.dwg #17659 0.20 south & 0.13' east of cola. position. Found rebar w /clip #15023 0.05' south & 0.15' east of cafe. position. CITY OF TUKWILA MITIGATION SUMMARY WETLAND IMPACT (FROM DEVELOPMENT) PROPOSED OFF —SITE MITIGATION IMPACT WETLAND 'A' : 1,347 S.F. 0 3:1 enhancement 1,000 S.F. (0.02 AC) CO 1.5:1 creation 1,520 S.F. (0.04 AC) TOTAL WETLAND IMPACT = 1,347 S.F. MITIGATION REQUIRED = 2,520 S.F. (0.06 AC) TOTAL WETLAND MITIGATION PROVIDED = 2,520 S.F. (0.06 AC) LEGEND: • INDEX: WETLAND MITIGATION SUMMARY SHEET WETLAND MMGATION SPECIFICATIONS WETLAND MITIGATION SPECIRCAIIONS OFF -SITE MT11GA11ON GRADING PLAN OFF —SITE MMGAT1ON PLANTING PLAN MTT1GA11ON PLANTING DETAILS STREAM BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLAN EXISTING WETLAND WETLAND IMPACT ki0 20 40 80 SCALE: 1"=20' SHEET 1 of 7 2 of 7 3 of 7 4 of 7 5 of 7 6 of 7 7 of 7 RECEIVED SEP 2 2 2008 I.L.. 22 g86 z . p3 �nut z Q � J 0 LL 0 z 00 ZW >< W U oa <0 co 0 Q0 REVISIONS: APPD. DATE: SEPTEMBER 11, 2008 DESIGN: GBK DRAWN: G8K CHECKED: JCGA REVISION NU!®ER SCALE: 1..20' PROJECT NUMBER: JEF00000-00171 DRAWING FELE: JEFO_0001_M1 SHEET NO. WM OF 7 1 0 Id 0 0 E 0 to 0 o `0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 w i 0. E 0' 0) 0 co m 0 s rn PART 7 — PLANT INSTALLATIO ont. MULCH ALL PLANT PETS SHALL RECEIVE MULCH RINGS TO A 3° DEPTH X 18° DIAMETER. MULCH AROUND PLANTINGS SHALL CONSIST OF GROUND FIR OR HEMLOCK BARK, HOG FUEL, OR APPROVED EQUAL, FREE FROM WEED, SEEDS, SAWDUST AND SHALL NOT CONTAIN SALTS, OR OTHER COMPONENTS DETRIMENTAL TO PLANT UFE. SIZE RANGE OF MULCH SHALL BE FROM 1/2 INCH TO 1 -1/4 INCHES WITH A MAXIMUM OF 20 PERCENT PASSING A 1/2 -INCH SCREEN. STAKING DECIDUOUS TREES SHALL BE STAKED WITH AT LEAST ONE STAKE, 1/3 THE HEIGHT OF THE TREES. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE STAKES AT THE END OF THE ONE -YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD. EMERGENT PLANTING AREAS • EMERGENTS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER PLANTING DETAIL (SEE SHEET WM -7). PART 8 — WOOD FENCE AND INFORMATIVE SIGNS FENCING AND INFORMATIVE SIGN INSTALLATION SPUR -RAIL CEDAR FENCING SHALL CONFORM WITH CITY STANDARDS AS PER DETAIL SHOWN ON SHEET WM -7 UPON COMPLETION OF PLANTING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL. ATTACH NGPA SIGNS TO THE FENCE POSTS AND INSTALL ALONG THE NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION AREA (NGPA) BOUNDARY AT 100 -FOOT INTERVALS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPPLY AND INSTALL THE NGPA SIGNS UPON CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION OF THE FENCE. CLEAN -UP LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REMOVAL OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND DEBRIS FROM THE SITE FOLLOWING INSTALLATION OF PLANT MATERIALS AND FENCE CONSTRUCTION. PART 9 — WARRANTY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL WARRANT CRAFTSMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR THIS PROJECT FOR A PERIOD OF 1 YEAR BEGINING AT FINAL ACCEPTANCE. THIS WARRANTY SHALL INCLUDE REPLACEMENT OF PLANTS (SAME SIZE AND SPECIES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS) THAT PROVE EITHER TO BE MISLOCATED OR UNSUITABLE AS TO PLANT MATERIAL STANDARDS. EXCEPT FOR LOSS DUE TO EXCESSIVELY SEVERE CUMATOLOGICAL CONDmONS (SUBSTANTIATED BY 10 -YEAR RECORDED WEATHER CHARTS), INSTALLED PLANT MATERIALS ARE REQUIRED TO BE GUARANTEED FOR ONE YEAR AGAINST DEFECTS AND UNSATISFACTORY GROWTH, EXCEPT FOR CASES OF NEGLECT BY OWNER OR ABUSE /DAMAGE BY OTHERS. PART 10 — FINAL ACCEPTANCE UPON COMPLETION OF THE PLANTING, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE WETLAND CONSTRUCTION MONITOR WITH A SET OF CLEARLY MARKED PRINTS DESIGNATING THE ACTUAL LOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES OF PLANTINGS WITHIN THE MITIGATION AREAS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP A COMPLETE SET OF PRINTS AT THE JOB SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF °RED - LINING° CHANGES OR MODIFICATIONS TO THE APPROVED PLANS AND SHALL UPDATE SAID INFORMATION ON A DAILY BASIS. CONTRACTOR SHALL TAG INDIVIDUAL PLANT SPECIES AT THE TIME OF INSTALLATION. EACH PLANT SPECIES SHALL HAVE A DIFFERENT COLOR TAG FOR VISUAL IDENTIFICATION. A COLOR CODED PLANT TAG LEGEND SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE WETLAND CONSTRUCTION MONITOR PRIOR TO SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION. THE WETLAND CONSTRUCTION MONITOR SHALL APPROVE PLANTING LOCATIONS. IF ITEMS ARE TO BE CORRECTED, A PUNCH UST SHALL BE PREPARED BY THE WETLAND CONSTRUCTION MONITOR AND SUBMITTED TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR COMPLETION. AFTER PUNCH LIST ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED, THE WETLAND CONSTRUCTION MONITOR SHALL REVIEW THE PROJECT FOR FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF PLAN IMPLEMENTATION. AFTER FINAL ACCEPTANCE BY THE WETLAND CONSTRUCTION MONITOR, THE MONITOR WILL SUBMIT A LETTER OF COMPLETION TO THE CITY OF TUKWILA. THE LETTER SHALL INDICATE THAT GRADING AND FINAL PLANT INSTALLATION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED FINAL PLAN. THE DATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE SHALL CONSTITUTE THE BEGINNING OF THE ONE -YEAR WARRANTY /MAINTENANCE PERIOD AS WELL AS THE 5 -YEAR MAINTENANCE /MONITORING PERIOD AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF TUKWILA. PART 11 — MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE IS REQUIRED DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS WITH THE WETLAND CONSTRUCTION MONITOR WHO IS FAMILIAR WITH THE STATED GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE MITIGATION PLAN. MAINTENANCE SHALL BE PROVIDED THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION AND DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CORRECT EROSION AND DRAINAGE PROBLEMS AS SPECIFIED ON THE PLANS THROUGHOUT THE ONE -YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE SILT FENCING AT THE END OF THE ONE -YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD AND RESTORE THE FENCE AREA BY HAND SEEDING BETWEEN APRIL 1ST AND OCTOBER 15TH, ALL BARE AREAS GREATER THAN ONE SQUARE FOOT. MAINTENANCE WITHIN THE MITIGATION AREAS SHALL BE PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR OR OWNER UNDER DIRECTION OF THE CONSTRUCTION WETLAND MONITOR. REQUIRED MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES ARE INCLUDED IN TABLE 2. MAINTENANCE • ACTIVITY SCHEDULE - - -- SPECIAL NOTES REPLACE ALL FAILED MITIGATION PLANTINGS. ONE YEAR FOLLOWING REQUIRED. THEN T REWIRED TO MEET PERFORMANCE STANDARDS BY CONTRACTOR THE FIRST YEAR; BY OWNER AFTER FIRST YEAR. TEMPORARY IRRIGATION OF NEW PLANTINGS. AT LEAST WEEKLY, MAY 15 THROUGH OCTOBER 31 FOR THE FIRST YEAR FOLLOWING PLANTING. ALL PLANTS MUST RECEIVE ONE INCH OF WATER PER WEEK DURING THE FIRST GROWING SEASON; BY CONTRACTOR THE FIRST YEAR AND BY OWNER AFTER THE FIRST YEAR. TRASH REMOVAL FROM NGPA INSPECT AT LEAST ONCE EACH YEAR FOR YEARS 1, 2, 3, AND 5 OF THE FIVE YEAR MONITORING PERIOD. BY CONTRACTOR THE FIRST YEAR AND OWNER AFTER THE FIRST YEAR. REPAIR/REPLACE NGPA SIGNS AND SPUT RAIL FENCES. INSPECT AT LEAST ONCE EACH YEAR FOR YEARS 1. 2. 3, AND 5 OF THE FIVE YEAR MONITORING PERIOD. BY CONTRACTOR THE FIRST YEAR AND OWNER AFTER THE FIRST YEAR. WEEDING AT LEAST ONCE EACH YEAR FOR YEARS 1, 2, 3, 4, AND 5 OF THE FIVE YEAR MONITORING PERIOD TREES AND SHRUBS MUST BE WEEDED TO THE DRIPUNE AND MULCH MAINTAINED AT 3 INCHES DEPTH. BY CONTRACTOR THE FIRST YEAR; BY OWNER AFTER THE FIRST YEAR. CLEAR AND GRUB UNDESIRABLE INVASIVE PLANTS FROM NGPA. UNDESIRABLE SPECIES INCLUDE: HIMALAYAN BLACKBERRY EVERGREEN BLACKBERRY SCOTS BROOM ENGLISH IVY PURPLE LOOSE STRIFE MORNING GLORY CUMBING NIGHTSHADE JAPANESE KNOTWEED REED CANARYGRASS AS REQUIRED IN ANNUAL MONITORING REPORTS. REMOVAL SHOULD BE AS DIRECTED BY WETLAND CONSTRUCTION MONITOR DURING FIRST YEAR. CLEARING AND GRUBBING SHALL BE ACCOMPUSHED BY PHYSICALLY (NON - MECHANICAL) REMOVING PLANT MATERIALS (INCLUDING ROOT MASSES) OR HAND TRIMMING BY CONTRACTOR. WEEDS MUST BE PROPERLY DISPOSED OF OFF -SITE BY CONTRACTOR THE FIRST YEAR; BY OWNER AFTER THE FIRST YEAR. PART 12 — MONITORING MITIGATION MONITORING SHALL BE CONDUCTED BY A WETLAND BIOLOGIST FOR FIVE (5) YEARS WHICH INCLUDES THE INSTALLATION INSPECTION (ONE YEAR WARRANTY INSPECTION). THE OBJECTIVE OF THE MONITORING PROGRAM SHALL BE TO ASSESS REVEGETATION SUCCESS. REPORTS DESCRIBING MONITORING RESULTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF TUKWILA, AND U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS BY DECEMBER 31 OF YEARS 1 THROUGH 5. THE MONITORING RESULTS SHALL BE RELATED TO THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND IF WARRANTED, RECOMMENDATIONS SHALL BE MADE BASED ON THESE FINDINGS. PART 13 — PERFORMANCE STATNDARDS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS HAVE BEEN ESTABUSHED THAT CORRESPOND TO THE STATED MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. THESE STANDARDS ARE THE PRIMARY FACTORS THAT SHALL BE USED TO MEASURE THE SUCCESS OF THE WETLAND CREATION, WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AND STREAM BUFFER ENHANCEMENT MITIGATION AREAS. IT IS IMPORTANT TO EVALUATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MITIGATION PLAN OVER THE ENTIRE MONITORING PERIOD WHEN DETERMINING WHETHER ALL STANDARDS HAVE BEEN MET. WHILE SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS PROVIDE IMPORTANT BENCHMARKS AND SHALL HELP TO DIRECT MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY TABLE 2: PERFORMANDFE STANDARDS AND METHODS EFFORTS, TH SUCCESS OF MITIGATION MUST BE MEASURED AGAINST GOALS AND OBJECTIVES E OVERALL MITIGATION PLAN. BY MONITORING TH ECT AND COMPARING TORING RESULTS TO PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, A RMINATION CAN BE MADE FOR THE NEED TO IMPLEMENT MAINTENANCE EFFORTS OR THE CONTINGENCY PLAN. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ARE IDENTIFIED IN TABLE 2. PART 14 — MITIGATION APPROACH MITIGATION FOR 1,347 SF (0.03 AC) OF PERMANENT WETLAND IMPACT FROM THE FOLEY DEVELOPMENT, WILL BE ACCOMPUSHED BY OFF -SITE WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AND CREATION. ENHANCEMENT WILL AMOUNT TO 1,000 SF (0.02 AC) OF EXISTING CATEGORY II WETLAND AND 1,520 SF (0.04 AC) OF CREATED CATEGORY II WETLAND, FOR A TOTAL OF 2,520 SF (0.06 AC) OF MITIGATION PROVIDED. MITIGATION WILL INCLUDE THE PLANTING OF NATIVE TREE AND SHRUB SPECIES THAT PROVIDE IMPROVED VEGETATION AND HABITAT DIVERSITY. PART 15 — GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 1. REPLACE PERMANENT ON -SITE WETLAND IMPACT TO 1,347 SF OF DEGRADED CATEGORY III WETLAND BY MITIGATING AN OFF -SITE WETLAND APPROVED BY CITY OF TUKWILA. MITIGATION SHALL INCLUDE 1,000 SF OF WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AND 1,520 SF OF CREATION TO CATEGORY II WETLAND. MITIGATION WILL OCCUR BY REMOVING EXISTING INVASIVES, GRADING EXISTING UPLAND TO WETLAND ELEVATIONS AND REPLANTING WITH NATIVE TREES, SHRUBS AND EMERGENT SPECIES THAT WILL PLANT DIVERSITY AND HABITAT. 2. ENHANCE 626 SF OF DEGRADED TYPE IV STREAM BUFFER (ON- SITE). ENHANCEMENT SHALL INCLUDE REPLANTING WITH NATIVE TREES AND SHRUBS. ENHANCEMENT AREA WILL BE PROTECTED WITH SPUT RAIL FENCE AND SENSITIVE AREA SIGNAGE. PART 16 — CONTINGENCY PLAN THE CONTINGENCY PLAN WILL PROVIDE REMEDIATION FOR THE MITIGATION GOALS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN MET. IF THE DESIRED MITIGATION GOALS, AS MEASURED BY THE MONITORING PROGRAM AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, HAVE NOT BEEN MET AND CANNOT BE ACHIEVED THROUGH ROUTINE MAINTENANCE, THEN A DETERMINATION BY THE CITY OF TUKWILA AND THE PROJECT PROPONENT MAY BE MADE TO REQUIRE SUBMITTAL OF A CONTINGENCY PLAN. AFTER WRITTEN APPROVAL BY THE CITY, A CONTINGENCY PLAN SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED THAT COMPENSATES FOR THE FAILED GOALS OF THE APPROVED MITIGATION PLAN. IF THE CONTINGENCY PLAN IS SUBSTANTIAL, THE CITY WILL EXTEND THE MONITORING PERIOD. PART 17 — PERFORMANCE SECURITY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WILL NOT BE COMPLETE UNTIL THE MITIGATION PLAN IS INSTALLED, INSPECTED, APPROVED AND BONDED. IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT THE MITIGATION IS PROPERLY IMPLEMENTED, INCLUDING MONITORING AND CONTINGENCIES, THE PROJECT PROPONENT (JEFF FOLEY) WILL PROVIDE A PERFORMANCE BOND FOLLOWING CITY OF TUKWILA PROCEDURES. THE TOTAL COST, PLUS CONINGENCY FEES, WILL BE THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE BOND. THE PERFORMANCE BOND WILL BECOME EFFECTIVE FOLLOWING INSTALLATION AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY A. MITIGATION COST ESTIMATE B. BOND ESTIMATE (Includes labor, materials, maintenance and monitoring for 5 years, 30% contingency and mobilization) TOTAL COST ESTIMATE THE PERFORMANCE BOND (120% OF A) IS ESTIMATED TO BE. 2- $ 16,800.00 $ 20,200.00 ITAlt Or WwvawaTw PERFORMANCE STANDARDS MONITORING METHODS MONITORING INTERVAL 1. 100 PERCENT SURVIVAL OF ALL INSTALLED NATIVE TREES AND SHRUBS ONE -YEAR POST INSTALLATION OF ALL BUFFER PLANTS. 2. ANNUAL MONITORING FOR SURVIVAL COUNT OF ALL INSTALLED TREES AND SHRUBS. VOLUNTEER NATIVE TREES AND SHRUBS IN WETLAND CREATION /ENHANCEMENT, STREAM BUFFER MONITORING AREAS. TREE AND SHRUB SURVIVAL: 100% BY YEAR 1, 85% BY YEAR 3, 60% BY YEAR 5. 3. DELINEATION OF WETLAND CREATION AREA AT YEAR 5. 1. TOTAL PLANT COUNT OF INSTALLED TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL DETERMINE ONE YEAR WARRANTY AND PERFORMANCE STANDARD OF SURVIVAL 2. PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION SHALL OCCUR WITH EACH MONITORING FROM ESTABLISHED PHOTOPOINTS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION OF PLANT SUCCESS. 3. AT YEAR 5 A MINIMUM OF .04 ACRES OF WETLAND WILL BE PRESENT IN THE WETLAND CREATION AREA. DELINEATION OF THE WETLAND CREATION AREA WILL COMPLY WITH METHODOLOGY CRITERIA AS NOTED IN THE 1987 ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WETLAND DEUNEATION MANUAL AND SUPPLEMENTS. YEARS 1, 2, 3, (WETLAND AND 4 AND 5 WETLAND BUFFER) DATE: SEPTEMBER 11.2008 DESIGN: GBK DRAWN: GBK CHECKED: JCGA REVISION NUMBER: SCALE: 4. AT LEAST 4 NATIVE TREE SPECIES AND 4 NATIVE SHRUB SPECIES SHALL BE PRESENT IN THE MITIGATION AREA. YEARS 1, 2, 3, (WETLAND AND 4 AND 5 WETLAND BUFFER) 5. UP TO 20% OF ANY STRATUM CAN BE COMPOSED OF DESIRABLE NATIVE VOLUNTEERS WHEN MEASURING COVER. NO MORE THAN 10% COVER OF NON- NATIVE OR OTHER INVASIVES, E.G., HIMALAYAN BLACKBERRY, EVERGREEN BLACKBERRY, REED CANARYGRASS, SCOTS BROOM, ENGLISH IVY, MORNING GLORY, ETC. IS PERMISSIBLE, 0% FOR JAPANESE KNOTWEED, IN ANY MONITORING YEAR. BOND HOLDERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO MAINTAIN MITIGATION SITES WITHIN THESE STANDARDS THROUGHOUT THE MONITORING PERIOD, TO AVOID CORRECTIVE MEASURES. YEARS 1, 2, 3, (WETLAND AND 4 AND 5 WETLAND BUFFER) RECEIVED gl:P 2 9 2008 PROJECT NUMBER: DRAWING FILE: JEFO_0001 _M -3 SHEET NO. WM -3 OF 7 ww.4v:.• MWMWP gbk 09/11/08 9:01am — P: \j \JEF000000001 \0400CAD \Off site Jefo mitigation \JEF01_M -4.dwg • \ ice' —� \, I ''� i ; r 1 14°1-°° \\ 11 1H t�� j ,__ �, ) i B� 1 II j I lm ;(;�� ,� -- a IS Nq1 / i , I' A• Tq 8E EXI�n NG--' FQQpDR WETLAND , TI N \-' J `(SUFFER IJ, 1 C N TRUCTION j GRAVEL <' �, r, HAANCEMENTi4' IIA C SS / \ X , .. `\ , � ( i \ 'a • ' `� 1 1 i ^� EXISTING ■ a. ) �_ ( , WETLAND • -y U $ _..a•' ` U EANRH� CEMEN ••� , -� �\ 7 ,•, 1 I 1 , ( l // '*--------- I I " til •+ \ \ \ '' \ , I EL157.0 \ ice' u- I y „ 1 _ 1 }� \ � I :::\:\sli C ELAND \/y4 ' i b ' 1�\ `\ lEXISTING AREA �� ,I,` ,1, ' I / 1 \ 1\ ( C. \ \`` WETLAND `�� \ BUFFER a . 4' \'' ) ,I/^ kl_4' (\ 1'1 1\ \`` '4, `� . \1\ \ \\ (,//' ( IEXISIING WETLAND / 1 \\ " ^ -� ----< C. �� I ) 1`,/ `fit -V�+I. 4, _�W 4, 4. \ \ \ 1- _ :.-- - -,a_ '4' �' I • _ ( f • l' .I. .I, v. tom. I l \ \�k w I �^ 1 .1, w �``. w 4, 1 ui I 4,1 ,1 jI ' '. 4 '.\ 1 s6 y ( \ "y../Y ) y W l� ,-/ iv;/ 11. )4, W (_w4 1 * I 4' `\ 1\ % I I I v v 1' 'j/ 4, w4. y\ s \\ `— 1 \' w . i 1 ) w V w ,y , \� V / I r' S 4, ; . - V ' Jr ' W 1 I W , kri 0 20 40 80 SCALE: 1 "= 20' TEMPORARY BOSON AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES SEE SHEET WM -2 GRADING NOTES SEE SHEET WM -2 LEGEND EL157.0 180 CLEARING LIMIT FENCE STRAW WATTLE PROPOSED ELEVATION SPOT EXISTING WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED WETLAND BOUNDARY EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR EXISTING WETLAND STRAW WA 8 TO 10 INCHES IN DIAMETER STAGGER JOINTS MS; x K 24 INCHES 3 10 7 WCNES SECTION 8 INCHES MINIMUM STAKE SPACING 4 FT MAXIMUM TIGHTLY MUTT MJCINING WATTLES — FLOW PLAN VIEW STRAW WATTLE WO MIA RECEIVED 1rip22ZS conaunfitian, \JEF01 _M -5.dwg 0 0 N88'46.33 "W 468.98' SS SFB HYDR UPL SITIVE AR H AT 100' LANDAUT 1 1 MAPLE 14 SFB /1 3 0 EXISTING WETLAND BUFFER 0 JEF000000001 \0400CA i \ I I r�cy�tt \ \ ` 2 .v \- - --- W WEILJWDMI` ( 1 1i \. b / • •L, \.4 ) '411 Y- -, y. /' / i / ) W �' f �• III 1 • /- , I' >L 4, ; 4' 1\ 1 ..'' ,1_ '1 . (, .( I£XISUNG WETLAND /'�4 1 _mow �. �_�I. ` W I L\ 4. 4. W4, 4, 1 �\ \ w'I , \` —'\ uo- r, 1 M' 1 'L W 1'1. 'i l\ �y I J1 \$ `' \ 4. I 1 svI 1W 1 W' 1 4, I W LEGEND PLANT SCHEDULE BOTANICAL NAME TREES/ LARGE SHRUBS 1HUJA PUCATA PICEA STCHENSS PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESI ACER MACROPHYLLUM FRAXINUS LATIFOIJA SAUX LASANDRA COMMON NAME WESTERN RED CEDAR S1<A SPRUCE DOUGLAS FIR BIGLEAF MAPLE OREGON ASH PACIFIC WILLOW NOTE: EACH WILLOW SYMBOL IS EQUAL TO 16 SHRUBS ACER GRCINATUM CORNUS SERICEA PHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUS CRATAEGUS DOUCLASII SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS LONICERA INVOLUCRATA OEMLERIA CERASFORMIS ROSA NUTKANA SAMBUCUS RACEMOSA EMERGENTS CAREX OBNUPTA SCIRPUS MICROCARPUS OUANTITf CONWTON SIZE (HT) 2 2 4 4 3 144 UVE STAKES. VINE MAPLE RED OSIER DOGWOOD PACIFIC NINEBARK BLACK HAWTHORN SNOWBERRY BLACK TWINBERRY INDIAN PLUM NOOMA ROSE RED ELDERBERRY 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL 5 GAL UVE STAKES 4 5 GAL 23 1 GAL 9 2 GAL 4 2 GAL 15 1 GAL 7 1 GAL 4 2 GAL 7 1 GAL 7 1 GAL SLOUGH SEDGE 19 ROOT STOCK SMALL— FRUITED BULRUSH 14 ROOT STOCK UPLAND HYDROSEED MIX KIND/VARIETY S BY WEIGHT MIN. S GERM BARCLAY PERENNIAL RYEGRASS RED CREEPING FESCUE HARD FESCUE 705 205 105 905 905 905 APPUCATION RATE. 220 LBS /ACRE WOOD CELLULOSE FIBER MULCH- 2 000 U3S /ACRE 14N- 14P -14K FERTIUZER• 300 LBS /ACRE GUAR TACKIFIER• 50 LBS /ACRE WETLAND HYDROSEED MIX KIND/VARIETY % BY WEIGHT MIN. % GERM RICE CUTGRASS 455 90% WESTERN MANA GRASS 405 90% CANADA REED 105 905 SPIKE BENTGRASS 35 905 WOOL —GRASS 2% 905 APPUCATION RATE" 120 LEIS /ACRE W000 CELLULOSE FIBER MULCH: 14N- 14P -14K FERRUZER: 2,000 LBS /ACRE 255 LBS /ACRE GUAR TACKIFIER: 40 LEIS/ACRE EL.157.0 160 gbk 09/11/08 9:1 0 20 40 80 SCALE: 1 " =20' EDGE OF 15' WETLAND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT AREA STRAW WATTLE PROPOSED ELEVATION SPOT EXISTING WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED WETLAND BOUNDARY EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR EXISTING WETLAND SENSITIVE AREA SIGN 4' HT MIN. 4' HT MIN. 4' HT MIN. 6' HT MIN. 6' HT MIN. 20' HT MIN. PLANTING NOTES SEE SHEET WM -2 REMARKS AS SHOWN, STAKED. AS SHOWN, STAKED. AS SHOWN, STAKED AS SHOWN STAKED 20' 0.C.. STAKED 24' O.C.. UVE STAKES AS SHOWN, 6' 0.C. 6' 0.C. 6' O.C. 4' 0.C. 4' 0.C. 4' 0.C. 4' 0.C. 4' 0.C. 24' 0.C. 24' 0.C. E STATE W WASINOTON REVISIONS: APPD. 8=21- 0847EVISED PER CITY COMMENTS PLANTING DETAILS SEE SHEET WM-7 RECEJV E.. ISEP 2 2 EN OEIABAKREFrr DATE: SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 DESIGN: GBK DRAWN:. GBK CHECKED:. JCGA REVISION NUMBER: SCALE: 1' =2O' PROJECT NUMBER: JEF00000 -0001. DRAWING PU.E: JEFO_0001JI6 SHEET NO. WM -5 OF 7 LEGEND SPUT RAIL FENCE STREAM CHANNEL FLOW UNE 25 STREAM BUFFER UNE SENSITIVE AREA SIGN EXISTING WETLAND CALL BEFORE YOU DIG 0 20 40 80 SCALE: 1 " =20' ga IC fs SS THUJA PUCATA Di 11107 PICEA SI TCHENSS FRAXINUS LATIFOUA PLANT SCHEDULE COMYON NAME BOTANICAL NAME TREES/ LARGE SHRUBS SHRUBS /GROUNDCOVERS CORNUS SERICEA SYMPHORICARPOS AUIUS LONICERA INVOLUCRATA ROSA NUTKANA WESTERN RED CEDAR six SPRUCE OREGON ASH RED OSIER DOGWOOD SNOWBERRY BLACK TANBERRY NOOTKA ROSE OUAN1TtY oW1W>toN WETLAND HYDROSEED MIX KIND ARIETY RICE WESTERN N NANA GRASS CANADA REED SPIKE BENTGRASS WOOL -GRASS APPUCA110N RATE' WOOD CELLULOSE FIBER MULCH: 14N- 14P-14K FERTIUZER: GUAR TACKIFIER: 45% 40% 10% 3% 2% 5 GAL. 5 GAL 1 5 GAL 4 6 6 6 1 GAL 1 GAL 1 GAL 1 GAL 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 120 LBS /ACRE 2.000 LBS /ACRE 255 LBS /ACRE 40 LBS /ACRE 5� (Nn REMARKS 4' HT MIN. 4' HT MIN. 6' HT MIN. AS SHOWN. STAKED. AS SHOWN. STAKED. AS SHOWN, STAKED. 5' 0.C. 4' 0.C. 4' 0.C. 4' O.C. Y'4.P' RECEIVED .SEP 2 2 2008 osroirroAjp SIAM OF wwaa"oiva Aap1fECT ADI C. CAME "CATE MO 0152 REWIMSKTNe acclti�.. DATE: SEPTEMBER 11, 200E DESIGN: GBK DRAWN: GBK CHECKED: JCGA REVISION NUMBER: SCALE: PROJECT NIII1BER: DRAWING FILE: WRLC6 SBRP -WM3 SHEET NO. WM -6 OP 7 gbk 09/11/08 9:21am — P: \j \JEF000000001 \04000AD \Off site Jefo mitigation \JEF01_M -7.dwg 3- MIN. ROOT BALL EVERGREEN TREE PLANTING ROOT CROWN r-4' ABOVE PLANTING SOIL GRADE r BARK MULCH, HOLD BACK 2 -r FROM MAIN STEM 3 HIGH RIM BERM HYDROSEED W/SPECIFIED SEED MIX FINISH GRADE LOOSEN ROOT BALLS, STRAIGHTEN OR PRUNE CIRCLING ROOTS BEFORE PLANTING. FERTIUZER PER PLANTING NOTES AMENDED SOIL PER PLANTING NOTES EXISTING SUBGRADE FIRMLY HAND COMPACT 3" MOUND BELOW ROOTBALL Stream Buffer Sensitive Area Boundary Help protect and care for this area. Remcawry oramrasw�.an.en,.eU.. S .c * (maaume NOT TO SCALE n SD'an Buller w.� r W EXISTING SUBGRADE ROOT BALL DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING PLASTIC LOCK STRIP (1) 2x2 HARDWOOD STAKE REMOVE AFTER ONE YEAR ROOT CROWN 1 " -2' ABOVE PLANTING SOIL GRADE 3' BARK MULCH. HOLD BACK 2' -3' AWAY FROM MAIN STEM 3' HIGH RIM BERM HYDROSEED W/SPECIFIED SEED MIX FINISH GRADE AMENDED SOIL PER PLANTING NOTES FERTIUZER PER PLANTING NOTES LOOSEN ROOT BALLS, STRAIGHTEN OR PRUNE CIRCUNG ROOTS BEFORE PLANTING. FIRMLY HAND COMPACT r MOUND BELOW ROOTBALL PRINTED METAL SIGN CEDAR POST CONCRETE FOOIDIG 1. OE SENSITIVE AREA SIGN SHALL BE POSTED AT THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE SEN4INE AREA BUFFER. SEIBAa( AREA OR SETBACK TRACT AND THE BIALD1C SETBACK AREA 2. ONE SIGN SNAIL BE POSTED PER LOT FOR EVERY 100 FEET OF SENSNNE AREA BUFFER AND SHALL BE STATIONED PER THE LOCATIONS ON THE APPROVED PLANS FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. SKIS WAY ALSO BE ATTACHED 10 FENCES. 3. SIGNS SRN/ BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF TUKWI A STMNARDS SENSITIVE AREA SIGN ATTACH SIGN TO POST WfTH no 5/0 GALVANIZED LAG BOLTS TM WASHERS. (TYP) NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE EXISTING SUBGRADE ROOT BALL SHRUB PLANTING ROOT CROWN 1 - -2• ABOVE PLANTING SOIL GRADE 3' BARK MULCH. HOLD BACK r -3 AWAY FROM MAIN STEM 3' HIGH RIM BERN HYDROSEED AS SPECIFIED FINISH GRADE AMENDED SOIL PER PLANTING SPECIFICATIONS FERTIUZER PER PLANTING NOTES LOOSEN ROOT BALLS. STRAIGHTEN OR PRUNE CIRCLING ROOTS BEFORE PLANTING. FIRMLY HAND COMPACT r MOUND BELOW RGOTBALL SPLIT RAL FENCE NOl 1 O"'SCALE NOT TO SCALE 18" ABOVE FINISHED GRADE WITH A MINIMUM OF 2 LEAF NODES EXPOSED INSERT STAKE WITH BUDS POINTING UP USE CUTTINGS 30' MIN., 1/2' -3/4 DA. SOIL CUT END TO A POINT AND PRE -DRILL PILOT HOLE FOR EASIER INSTALLATION CUT TOP SQUARE FOR EASIER INSTALLATION, PROTECT TOP FROM SPLITTING. LIVE STAKE PLANTING FINISHED GRADE TRIM OFF BRANCHES WITH CLEAN CUTS MIN. BURIAL 12" INTO SOIL 1 -2—n -u 11- 11 =11 =t .IF 'L 1 .11=11 =1 11 =11. I 11 =11 : II.— ‘ 1 =1- II =11 NOT TO SCALE WATER DEPTH VARIES WITH SEASON AND LOCATION. FINISHED GRADE HAND PLANT ROOT STOCK IN PREPARED SOIL MEDIUM MIN. 4' ENSURE GOOD SOIL TO ROOT CONTACT BY HAND. ROOT STOCK EMERGBVT PLANTING NOT TO SCALE RECEIVED 1SFP 2 2 20D8 cOMMUNTry DEVELOPMENT 2 t7 F- CC co az U z < � W3 Co Z a3 QJ I.L STATE Or WAS.NC1OrN REGISTERED 0 z 71W ZW >< WV 20 0Q C z REVISIONS: APPD. B-21 -08 REWSED- PER CITY COMMENTS DATE: SEPTEMBER 11. 2001 DESIGN: GBK DRAWN: GBK CHECKED: JCGA REVISION NUMBER: SCALE: PROJECT NUMBER: JEF00000 -0001 DRAWING PILE: JEFO_0001 _M -4 SHEET NO. WM -7 OF 7