The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSEPA E01-019 - LIVING CARE SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - RIVERTON CREEK LODGEE01 -019 RIVERTON CREEK LODGE 13112 MILITARY RD S City of tukwila • Department of Community Development / 6300 Southcenter BL, Suite 100 / Tukwila, WA 98188 / (206) 431 -3670 DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) File Number: E01 -019 Applied: 07/23/2001 Issue Date: 01/29/2002 Status: ISSUED Proponent: LIVING CARE SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT WITH 120 UNITS OF ASSISTED LIVING AND 25 BED ALZHEIMER UNIT Location of Proposal: Address: 12844 MILITARY RD S TUKW Parcel Number: 1623049001 Section/Township /Range: NE 16/23/4 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by �gto . 13 2-00 2 • The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431 -3670 _31L1AJUa/Li O Zoo Z _ Date Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations shall be commenced within the time period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.21C.075) doc: Miscperm E01 -019 Printed: 01 -28 -2002 Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION EA/ock HEREBY DECLARE THAT: , Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non- Significance Project Name: U-(1,4 CeAX, r Notice of Public Meeting D1 .4I Q,L010/14e44A- Mitigated Determination of Non- . Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt i Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice' Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda 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 on this 51 day of dttvl-in the . year 200% P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM Project Name: U-(1,4 CeAX, r NA) D1 .4I Q,L010/14e44A- Project Number: lEEDI -019 Mailer's Signature: i Person requesting mailing: A)O- P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM i City ofiTukwila • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Jack Pace, Planning Manager FROM: Nora Gierloff, Associate Planner RE: Riverton Creek Lodge DATE: January 28, 2001 Project File: E01 -019 Associated Files: L01 -052 BLA L01 -056 Design Review L01 -057 PRD Applicant: Living Care Senior Housing Development Project Location: 13112 Military Road South Parcels #162304 -9001 and -9179 Studies submitted with the applications include: Traffic Impact Analysis by Transpo dated December 2001 Wetland Report by Adolphson dated July 2001 Level 1 Downstream Analysis by Triad Associates dated 5/4/2001 Geotechnical Investigation by Redmond & Associates dated 11/20/2000 Attachment: A. Site Plan Project Description: The completed project will provide 145 units of senior housing in two buildings on a 10.42 acre site. A special needs residence will house 25 individuals with Alzheimer's disease and an assisted living facility will contain 120 apartments. The site contains steep slopes and three Class 1 wetlands. Approximately 15,000 cubic yards of cut and 12,000 cubic yards of fill will be required to create building sites. Agencies With Jurisdiction: City of SeaTac Washington State Department of Ecology 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 0 Tukwila, Washington 98188 0 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 0 Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Jan -12 -02 11 :OOA LivirCareSrHousing • f gC�,LC Senior Housing RECEIVED JAN 1 . COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FAX TRANSMISSION FROM: Richard J. Creamer TO: City of Tukwila Nora Gierloff & Cyndy Knighton (206)431 -3665 DATE: January 12, 2002 PAGES: One including this one SUBJECT: Riverton Creek Lodge Frontage Improvements E01 -019 P.01 28,9 Elliott Avenue Suite zoo Seattle WA 9812, Tel. 206.441.,77o Fax: 206.441.1977 Dear Nora: We are very disappointed that we have been working on this project for over one year and the City of Tukwila finally determines that they will require the frontage improvements along 32i' Avenue. The proposed frontage improvements would encroach wetlands and that is not anything we had planned on. Based on this `curve ball' we are considering terminating our purchase agreement with Highline and not pursuing the project. The reason for this decision is that our company needs to build the project during 2002. We have spent over a year on this project and have other opportunities to pursue and as a business time is money. This late notice requiring us to make the frontage improvements means that we will be required to develop wetlands. A Wetland Permit is very time consuming and it will be impossible to develop this project in 2002. Had we known of this requirement when we met last spring at our pre - application meeting we could have been planning for it all along. Is there any way we can defer the improvements to a later date or pay fees in lieu of? We know there is a great need for our type of facilities in the City of Tukwila and would hate to see this project `cancelled' by such onerous requirements. Please call for further discussion. Very truly, G CARE SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, LLC lit Cam' chard J. Creamer VP Development V M } • Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: (206) 431 -3670 Fax: (206) 431 -3665 To: Fax: Phone: Re: (_2oA `lol0-77 LD From: Date: • City Of Tukwila / /eV vz Pages: ❑ Urgent ❑ For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle •Comments: e; *C(-c- r)J c7 r I dr ^Gr„JrA --S A;Vv1 AX-e- 244 r • `C , `"7�(2 C�`t° .[ JZ.-■ 1 s.+ , --t'✓ /,1 ■ ∎ rt.e_><-,)V., v D (2 v 1 //J G. ✓a- -h) 0 yve .14 ,--' 1 r i!/ r- t/Y\ 1 r 0-A rv,n S i nd e 1-- `- o, (x -I-s 14kr- 1.‘e 5'7 rI 1 7 h 1 • • Action Staff Report to Council Staff Report approved and ready for copying Notice of Hearing Mailed /Posted Last day for SEPA Issuance Final Drawings /Presentation Packets to City * Monday 1/21 is a holiday Hearing Date Feb. 4 Feb. 18 1/25 2/8 1/22 2/5 1/18 2/4 1/17 2/1 1/15 1/29 • Gity of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor January 10, 2002 Department of Public Works James E Morrow, P.E., Director Richard J. Creamer Vice President Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC 2819 Elliot Avenue, Suite 200 Seattle, Washington 98121 RE: Riverton Creek Lodge Frontage Improvements E01 -019 VIA FAX(206) 441 -1977 Dear Mr. Creamer: I have been working with Nora Gierloff and Jill Mosqueda on the review of the Riverton Creek Lodge. At this point, the outstanding issue that will need to be addressed by you is the frontage improvements along 32nd Avenue S. The City of Tukwila will require half - street frontage improvements on 32 "d Avenue S to be built as part of this development. There is a preliminary design report for 32nd Avenue S (S 130`h Street to S 137th Street), which was completed in 1996, to help guide the ultimate design. The final design of the entire street section (from S 133rd Street to S 130th Street) must be done by your engineers, at your expense. That design will only require a 29 -foot cross section — the minimum urban street width — and will have to take into consideration wetland encroachment, stream and water rights, and driveway grades for properties abutting 32 "d Avenue S. The City of Tukwila will be as flexible as possible working with you and your engineers in the final design and construction of the half - street improvements of 32nd Avenue S. We recognize the need to balance wetland encroachment, water rights, driveway access, and construction costs. For your information, the City of Tukwila will not be requiring any concurrency fees or off -site SEPA mitigation for traffic impacts. The City of SeaTac is requiring half, street frontage improvements be constructed along Military Road. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 433 -0179 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • • Should you have any questions or wish to contact me for further detail, please do so at (206) 433 -0179 or via email at cknighton @ci.tukwila.wa.us. Sincerely, C y Kn" ton Senior Transportation Engineer cc: Michael Matheson, Triad Associates, 425 -821 -3481 Jill Mosqueda ,.Nora Gierloff File Nora Gierloff - Riverton Creek Lodge From: Ryan Larson To: Nora Gierloff Date: 12/18/01 12: 53 P M Subject: Riverton Creek Lodge Nora, Page 1 I talked to Jill today concerning this development. The discrepancy over where the tributaries connect downstream will effect the design of the site's storm drainage, however, I do not believe this needs to be resolved during the SEPA process. I would just let the applicant know that this discrepancy exists and that we will work it out during the permitting stage. Let me know if you need anything more on this issue - Ryan CC: Jill Mosqueda 9 Nora. C-i y ,t 1 Fwd: Re: E01 -019 _Rivert( . cmGgamo4nsoparo O/ v jsn'enn:aOJaid*oonnnnm / :d gPage 1 From: Cyndy Knighton To: Jill Mosqueda; Nora Gierloff Date: 10/31/01 6:41 PM Subject: Fwd: Re: E01 -019 Riverton Creek We can require a traffic study because Tukwila is the permitting agency, even though the access is in another jurisdiction. While we probably can't collect impact fees on behalf of Seatac, I believe there is a mechanism for them to still be paid. If we have an interlocal agreement with Seatac on this issue, we can collect the fee. But, if there isn't an interlocal, SEPA is probably the way we can require them to comply with Seatac's concurrency ordinance. I don't want SEPA issued without a traffic study done as it's not just about finding the $$ amount to pay for the impact fee. SEPA is our only mechanism for addressing project related impacts that are not covered under concurrency. This can include site access improvements, street lighting, addressing inadequate sight distance, inadequate frontage, etc. For example, frontage improvements which may be required to accomodate the new traffic volumes and improve sight distance at a driveway are addressed through SEPA and the concurrency ordinance has no authority. Thanks for holding the SEPA determination until a traffic study is completed. Seatac needs to be involved in that review and at least one consultant being considered for the study has already discussed their game plan which would include coordination with my counterpart in Seatac. Cyndy Z JO Z aged October 23, 2001 RECEIVED' OCT 2 6 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TRIAL ASSOCIATES Ms. Nora Gierloff City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300,Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Riverton Creek Lodge E01-019 SEPA Checklist L01` -056 Design Review LO1 -057 Planned Residential Development Triad Job No. 01 -055 Dear Nora: Enclosed for review are three copies of a revised SEPA checklist that reflect comments made in your September 28, 2001 . letter to Richard Creamer of Living Care. \� 11814 1 15th Avenue NE Kirkland, WA 98034 -6923 425.821.8448 425.821.3481 fax 800.488.0756 toll free www.triadassoc.com Also enclosed is a completed Part D of the ESA Supplement. Please note that Mr. Ryan Partee stated in the Public Works Project Review Comments dated September 26, 2001 that the ESA Supplement Part A.3 -0 should have been answered "Yes" and Part D should be completed. We believe Part A.3 -0 should be answered "No" because the current proposal does not include work below the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands. Nevertheless, we have completed Part D per his request, and included it for review. We appreciate your assistance is reviewing these documents. If you have any questions, please call me at (425) 821 -8448. Sincerely, TRIAD ASSOCIATES Michael L. Matheson, PE Project Manager MLM/tlj Encl. Cc: Richard Creamer, Living Care ment Consultants • city of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director September 28, 2001 Richard Creamer Living Care Senior Housing Development 2819 Elliott Avenue Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98121 RE: E01 -019 SEPA Checklist L01 -056 Design Review L01 -057 Planned Residential Development Dear Richard, I have reviewed your SEPA checklist and have the following comments: A. 10. An HPA permit from the State Department of Fish and Wildlife is required. Your sewer provider is ValVue, not Rainier Vista. B. 3. a. 2) Please discuss the installation of the sewer connection to the existing sewer line within the wetland buffer. B. 4. a. Wet soil plants are also found on the site per the Wetlands Study. B. 5. a. Cutthrout trout are found near the site. B. 16. b. The water district is 125, the sewer district is ValVue. Please also see the attached SEPA comments from Public Works. As a reminder, the public notice period will not start until you have installed the notice board and I have posted and mailed the Notice of Application. The notice period must start at least 5 weeks prior to the desired hearing date. We will also need to schedule a public meeting on the project no sooner than day 16 of the comment period and at least 14 days prior to the public hearing. If you have any questions feel free to call me at (206) 433 -7141. Sincerely, Nora Gierloff Associate Planner cc: Jill Mosqueda, Public Works C: \Nora's Files \RivertonCreek \SEPAComm.DOC 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • • CITY OF TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS Project Name: Highline Community Hospital (Riverton Creek Lodge) 13112 Military Road South File #: E01 -019 Date: 09.26.01 Reviewer: L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. The City Of Tukwila Public Works Department has the following comments regarding your application for the above permit. Please contact Jill Mosqueda at (206) 433 -0179, if you have any questions regarding the following comments. SEPA 1. ESA Supplement RP Part A. 3 -0 should have been answered "Yes" and Part D should be completed. 2. Applicant shall provide a Traffic Impact Analysis CK The report must include description of the existing condition, description of the proposed development, and an analysis of the impacts of the new development. The analysis must include accident analysis, distribution of peak hour trips through the street network, LOS analysis at all intersections impacted by 5 or more project peak hour trips for both year of opening and year of opening plus 6 years. Concurrency impact fees may be collected as defined in the Comp plan, SEPA impacts may also be required to be mitigated. Tukwila's concurrency ordinance applies, therefore the report must show compliance. Report must be stamped, signed, and dated by Washington registered professional engineer. Projects /Riverton Creek/E01 -019 SEPA Comm 1 1 Other Comments 1. At time of building permit application, the applicant shall provide a Full Drainage Report and drainage design meeting the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The Applicant's design team shall take special care to maintain the current watershed flow regime. The locations where surface water leaves the site must be maintained. UM /RP 2. The ESA plans incorrectly locate the west fork of Riverton Creek. RP 3. The project will need a Hydraulic Permit Approval from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. UM /RP 4. There is a resident population of cutthroat trout living below the proposed construction area. This condition shall be considered in all site work and the fishery shall be protected. UM /RP Projects /Riverton Creek/E01 -019 SEPA Comm 1 2 CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF APPLICATION PROJECT INFORMATION Living Care Senior Housing Development has filed applications for development of a 121 bed assisted living and 26 bed special needs residence to be located at 13112 Military Road South. Permits applied for include: L01 -056 Design Review L01 -057 Planned Residential Development Other known required permits include: Hydraulic Project Approval by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife Studies required with the applications include: Wetland Study, Geotechnical Report An environmental checklist has been submitted with the studies identified above. FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The project files are available at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request them at the counter at the Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100. Project Files include: L01 -052 Boundary Line Adjustment L01 -056 Design Review L01 -057 Planned Residential Development E01 -019 SEPA Checklist 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., October 26, 2001. A meeting to provide you with information on the project has been scheduled on Thursday, October 18, 2001 from 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. at the Tukwila City Council Chambers, 6200 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila. Opportunity for additional spoken and written public comments will be provided at a public hearing before the City Council. Notice of the hearing date will be mailed and posted at least 14 days prior to the hearing. To confirm the date, call the Department of Community Development at (206) 431 -3670. 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 Nora Gierloff at (206) 431 -3670 or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: 7/23/01 Notice of Completeness Issued: 9/17/01 Notice of Application Issued: 10/05/01 Editing Vegetation to remain Wetland. Wetlanl Wetland Ulna of Clearing Non Irrigated Meadow IYPT sccd Courrvate L§, Perimeter Butler — Evergreen Hedge — e-sv focal , row., re au rovnite... wanonet .4.1.01 Oa. mai •••• al••••■• \—Mcdlan Planting • vas \—Annual Planting PRELITIIINA0( PLANT L 18T ACER nienfaXEMIED MAX.* Pn14•071.+.1.4./.. 0 \-11:lecIduous street trees, t_vp. t— Evergreen Hedge v••••• " __ Foun at.on shrub a.anon.s around buuldngs 7- -~ •- - -• 0 STREET TREES sdar4.4 • X C., Xr, LASE DECIDUOUS S44,4DE TREES N0741. • X C-4. X•l• .1..RRI•EnnXURCO rune OCALA ...22,,C*12111/.20.27..4fl1 et. CanST•le OCT.ILLOMPO7n. KANO., coiciovvvvii.u, MPO.GrLCAtb.fl ,fl! F.46 071-,1C.ACMCNI.v. MO. M.P.! .j.077,/.4CAPREEn (2.222.15 XALLOTIOnenIN CORO. ntiORAMED O. DECIDUOUS ACCENT ACM CnC.4111•11vnE MP, ACC" OntOOXITIO•CCOMIC ALEN 1,2.1•2■Tf11.421,42•5E CONK. Sad/ 42116.• xxxl.arnyb OOLTS01.•• Lern•00 0.8704 •■•.ZEL VELLATA.T.• •4.1401...• MAGNOLIA X 00J.........SAUCL, IVONOLla OxVIDENOVI •ROOMMXL/OCUPOLCOD X•LnLie 6,401.11,44 Onen, STELLAniln 0,2.1,11,270+7.104 015...•AninCOUL•O tnOnCEL.I. G CONI_ROU.5 TREES. INSTALI. • •• Mr. C-40On.0.0 OCOARIOnnireanen CIO.* 01.01.1.421100•2/2 CaueL•COV.X•En OnTUndoCT.01“1 1.4.6 06201.4a 4222,TRII. •••24. 1,1122,2 1....1.7•AIRSITIW MD CID. VINES .11•91.• SOLC,Kin O.CrIATIS lOnCLAA JAXO•ICX/JAPANne Andl•WCX1, InOnn tC.,11,50. SOCID: parse.. 1,0S120.00■051£41L CIROUNDCOvIIR TOTAL. •• 1•014 • n• OC ■■•••■•■I v[7.00, CO.OR .16.7001,121,r21.1.75 Ca41.1261.12. X•000.1X/OnnnYINTEREPRN 0..O.Tue•nn m•.••••• •CInv07...C.Inan• runC•ao. P71,5110431 IlLIXPXV.A.OPO *CC, 177 NON IRRI....t.TED MEOW ••• >0.W. Mtn •00 Tx......07 1..11 I C.I.LON PC. LO. ORO., sae, tinnO0n3 ox5v On.ne •■40.0.•••■■PGNA, 4,•••,. .51.1.4,4212 CAX••••••• AnAntn.Etven.in En2XXX16 4■145.011... ELOWX•lan.Ln•C•OCArv....,,,,,, ,o••••■•• na0Ella.C.••••..,v WC..ne•- eVOIL.C.E.a v-OnanOr- r.e ■■■■• Ardef ta...Tx0en LOnCnInn orrninnox xCnn•CoOXLC M.O.& CXX¢SiCian.alVEX, InArt000 01xxXXxue OC.■••••VOnesilonnab InCRO. JAPOnCantn, nan v4, • Penn RCP 1.1.C.CreDninn ••••E 012•0000ENOROn 4064 00, 8.1•••••■•■•,.. ...1111:fin. 6.C.C,OCL... .•1•11.• JAPCNICA 15,...41i • ...C..11/7■•■••/,Ire to..k. vieuwan PLICATov •Tpr,nrrtyl, 111110., CALL./.7.2.4. !M. WRS.0.4., ExISTING T.REES TO NOTE 41.a 6.1.011e-aoll ANfiat• 1.04 On onv ...10•1•Oc oninco.,CTI 5•01a, TmE MEV, n •ne non IsR1P.AXCO •C•Onra GC on! Car ..0[14■110 11,•00/01,• 04204 P•doe., bOL 0. PO. ALE 50* MAO ASSOCIATES nas so. n 01.1.Z.r.17 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLAN RI VER TON CREEK LODGE WA 91-1INGION n1,1Z717.;5"" ktt mama unmet alffiT ,/12/1•1 OCN1SE COrnrCAn all? NM 511.1 WYE SUM MY M110 122 NOLL 01-055 I ="=C2.1.4 • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director September 17, 2001 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION Richard Creamer Living Care Senior Housing Development 2819 Elliott Avenue Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98121 RE: E01 -019 SEPA Checklist L01 -056 Design Review L01 -057 Planned Residential Development Dear Richard, Your application for the Riverton Creek Lodge senior housing development located at 13112 Military Road South has been found to be complete on September 17th for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. The next step is for you to install the notice board on the site within 14 days of the date of this letter. You received information on how to install the sign with your application packet. If you need another set of those instructions, please call me. Once you have notified me that the notice board has been installed I will post it with a laminated copy of the Notice of Application and the comment period will start. This 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. The Public Works Department has determined that a traffic impact analysis will be required for the project based on the submitted trip generation study that indicated a PM peak hour generation of more than 5 new trips. The analysis must include accident analysis, distribution of peak hour trips through the street network, LOS analysis at all intersections impacted by 5 or more project peak hour trips for both year of opening and year of opening plus 6 years. Concurrency impact fees may be collected as defined in the Comprehensive Plan, SEPA impacts may also be required to be mitigated. Tukwila's concurrency ordinance applies, therefore the report must show compliance. The report must be signed by a licensed PE in Washington state. We are open to the idea that an assisted living facility will generate less traffic than the ITE trip generation manual may indicate, but the TIA will need to justify the change. C:\Nora's Files \RivertonCreek \COMPLETE.DOC 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665 This notice of complete application applies only to the permits identified above. It is your responsibility to apply for and obtain all necessary permits issued by other agencies. If you have any questions feel free to call me at (206) 433 -7141. Sincerely, Nora Gierloff Associate Planner cc: Jill Mosqueda, Public Works C:Wora's Files\RivertonCreek \COMPLETE.DOC • City of TSla ESA Screening Checklist Date: City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist RECEIVED SEP 0 7 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 200.1 Applicant Name: Pt[6)64 Street Address: 281 a, i1t"it ke--1 C t 20-0 City, State, Zip: Cie ►e uu o Telephone: (,4) ` €4 / - 1% DIRECTIONS This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to result in potential "take" of chinook salmon, coho salmon, or'cutthroat trout as defined by Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or "No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next question as directed by the checklist. To , answer these questions, you may need to refer to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if "take" is indicated. January 25, 2001 1 . City of 7ila ESA Screening Checklist Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully. Consider all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -0 Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is defined as any excavating, filling, clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof; which alters the existing ground surface of the earth (see Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC.) Chanter 18 06, Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 Continue to Question .1 -1 (Page 3). 2 -0 Will the project require any form of clearing? Clearing means the removal or causing to be removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (see Chapter 18.06, Page 18 -8). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 Continue to Question 2 -1 (Page 4) 3 -0 Will the project require work, during any time of the project, below the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands? Ordinary high water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks of a stream and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual as to distinctly mark the soil from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Page 18 -15). Please circle appropriate response. NO Continue to Question 4 -0 YES - Continue to Question 3 -1 (Page 5) 4 -0 Will the project result in the processing or handling, storage, or treatment of hazardous substances? This does not include the proper use of fuel stored in a vehicle's fuel tank. Hazardous substances are any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits the characteristics or criteria of hazardous waste as defined by Washington Administrative Code 173 -303 (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on -site during construction. Please circle appropriate response. Continne to Question 5 -0 YES • Continue to Question 5 -0 5-0 Will the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples of projects that may affect groundwater include, but are not limited to: construction of a new well, change in water withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC 18.45.060 and 18.45.080E.4, or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt under TMC 18.45.080A, should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 6 -0 YES - ontinue to Question 6 -0 Jaruary.25, 2001 7 • City of T>ila ESA Screening Checklist part-A (continued) 6 -0 Will the project involve landscaping or re- occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one -time use of - transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect . appropriate for the use of the land (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18- -13).. For tile*purpo3c of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new .lawnorgrass. Please circle appropriate response. NO — Checklist Complete YE.Checklist Complete Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -1 Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water mark and top of bank? This includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a river or stream, but will not require work below the ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high water mark is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response. C&- Continue to Question 1 -2 YES - Continue to Question 1 -2 1 -2 Could the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off site or increased rates of erosion and /or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in increased erosion and/or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your project involves grading and you have not prepared a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percent of the runoff (including during construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answer Yes to this question. If your project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 1 -3 Continue to Question 1 -3 1 -3 Will the project result in the construction of new impervious surfaces? Impervious surfaces include those hard surfaces which prevent or restrict the entry of water into the soil in the manner that such water entered the soils under natural conditions prior to development; or a hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased rate of flow from the flow presented under natural conditions prior to development (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -12). Such areas include, but are not limited to, rooftops, asphalt or concrete paving, compacted surfaces, or other surfaces that similarly affect the natural infiltration or runoff patterns existing prior to development. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) Continue to Question 1 -4 January 25, 2001 • City of T la ESA Screening Checklist Part B (continued) 1_4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include g . ....i.., .. .. the design of a swLaZwater management systern. specifically designed , to: infiltrate stormwater, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) ontinue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include but not.im Review to each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the nest question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 2 -1 Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) Continue to Question 2 -2 2 -2 Will the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black t Rivers? by one main trunk, with a 18.06.845 as any self - supporting woody plant, characterized potential diameter- breast - height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -3 Continue to Question 2 -3 7.3 Will the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in the fall. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -4 Rl.�J Continue to Question 2 -4 Z_4 Will the project involve clearing with in r or Rivo m Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. watercourse or the Green/Duwa NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 1) yE Continue to Question 2 -5 2_5 Will the project involve clearing within 40a k Rivers? Please circle appr priate response. watercourse or the Green/Duwarnish or B Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) January 25, 2001, 1 City of Tukw SA Screening Checklist Part.D; Please review each question below for projects eenor Black or in wetlands. Review each water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish/ but not limited to, question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as.directed for each No or Yes answer. 3 -1 Will the project involve the direct alteea�iFoo�e euhposeeof this analysis, channel means the Green/Duwamish rivers, .or Black River? purpose between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a :stieam, and bed means the stream bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted -width of a stream. This includes both temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -2 YES - Continue to Question 3 -2 3 -2 Will the project involve any physical alteration to a watercourse or wetland connected to the Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose culvert, or having other physical characteristics that flowing into via a surface connection or , allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts ortions of natural wat courses or anyear�ea remnant oxbows, ditches formed from ch annelized P that may provide off channel rearing habitat ions and permanent modifications. D SWatercourses includes both temporary construction alter P or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwa mad River artificial structure that precludes fish access flap gate, diversion, or any entirely man should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -3 YES - Continue to Question 3 -3 3 -3 Will the project result in the construction ofa or the Green/Duwamish or Black could be a barrier to salmonid passage within the watercourse Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, a barrier natural m upst eam orldownstream movement of structure or hydraulic condition that inhibits salmonids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -4 YES - Continue to Question 3 -4 a 3 -4 Will the project involve a temporary permanent change in he purpose a, nalysarea the watercourse or the Green/Duwarnish or Black Rivers? For cross-sectional area is defined as a profile taken from ank Please t Pleas circle rl appropriate responseght bank to the ordinary high water mark on the left NO - Continue to Question 3 -5 YES - Continue to Question 3 -5 3 -3 Will the project require the removal of debris from i For he ordinary purpose high this ter.misk of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Ri files; rip -rap, submerged metal, includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, logs, shrubs, rocks; p and broken concrete or other building materials• Rivers debris activity from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivs s part of a should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response_ NO - Continue to Question 3 -6 YES - Continue to Question 3 -6 5 January 25, 2001 • City of Vila ESA Screening Checklist Part 1) (continued) 3 -6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or wetlands that have a surface connection to another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside seeps and wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection. to the watercourse or river but are not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under natural. conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow /groundwater support of 9 and above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -7 YES - Continue to Question 3 -7 3 -7 Will the project include the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands connected to a watercourse containing salmonids? For the purpose of this analysis, the constnic:tion of artificial waterways or wetlands includes wetlands, channels, sloughs, or other habitat feature created to enhance wildlife use, particularly waterfowl use, or may be attractive to wildlife, particularly waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -8 YES - Continue to Question 3 -8 3 -8 Will the project include bank stabilization? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete structures, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) January 25, 2001 August 24, 2001 • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION Richard Creamer Living Care Senior Housing Development 2819 Elliott Avenue Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98121 RE: E01 -019 SEPA Checklist L01 -052 BLA LO 1 -056 Design Review LO 1 -057 Planned Residential Development Dear Richard, Steven M. Mullet, Mayo, Steve Lancaster, Directo, As you have requested we are treating your permits for Riverton Creek Lodge as a consolidated application. This allows you to have only one hearing and perform consolidated public notice. This letter is to inform you that we are missing some items from these applications. In order to be complete the following materials must be submitted: a. A recent title report listing all encumbrances and easements on the property. b. A completed ESA screening checklist (attached). c. Locations and proposed screening for all mechanical equipment. d. Schematic designs for water and sewer service. e. Copy of the geotechnical report prepared by Redmond and Associates in 2000. Public Works is reviewing the need for a traffic impact analysis. Upon receipt of these items, the City will re- review them for completeness and will mail you written notification of completeness or incompleteness within 14 days. These applications will expire if we do not receive the additional information within ninety days of the date of this letter unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 18.105.070(E). If you have any questions with this matter please call me at (206) 433 -7141. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • Nora Gierloff Associate Planner CC: Jill Mosqueda, Public Works Enclosure. • • ValVue Sewer District Water District 125 Comments to SEPA Checklist: None. Summary of Primary Impacts: 1. Earth - During construction the site will be graded and some structural fill will be placed. A retaining wall will be built adjacent to the wetland buffer along the northeastern edge of the project. Minor soil erosion during construction is a possibility, but this will be controlled with a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan. Approximately 22% of the site will be covered by impervious surfaces after construction. No negative earth impacts are expected to result from the project. 2. Air - There will be exhaust emissions from construction equipment and trucks carrying the cut and fill soil and construction materials during the project. The project's air emissions when complete will consist of automotive traffic to and from the site. A traffic impact analysis was submitted as part of the environmental review. 3. Water — The site contains three Class 1 wetlands that are tributary to Riverton Creek. The 100 foot wetland buffer and 15 foot building setback will be maintained except for a 320 foot section adjacent to wetland C. The Applicant is preparing a mitigation plan in exchange for a 50% buffer reduction. The plan will have to meet the criteria and standards in Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Overlay District. An underground detention vault and water quality feature will be constructed in the southeastern corner of the site. Water from the vault will be discharged into a roadside ditch along the west side of 32nd Avenue South. No hazardous wastes are expected to be released during or after construction. 4. Plants — Approximately 50% of the site will retain tree canopy cover after development. New landscaping will be installed along the west and south edges of the site, around the buildings, and throughout the parking areas. 5. Animals — Other than the wetlands the site does not contain significant animal habitat. The on- site wetlands are tributary to the salmon - bearing Riverton Creek. 6. Energy and Natural Resources - The project will require energy for construction equipment, vehicles coming to the site and building operation after completion. The project will be required to meet current energy codes. 7. Environmental Health — Construction activities and all HVAC equipment must meet Tukwila's noise ordinance. • • 8. Land and Shoreline Use - The proposed project will not affect the shoreline as the Green/Duwamish River is approximately 3/4 of a mile east of the site. A small portion of the site is zoned LDR (single family) and the rest is zoned MDR (multi - family). 9. Housing - The proposal will provide housing for up to 160 senior citizens. One vacant single family house will be demolished. 10. Aesthetics - The project is subject to the Design Review and Planned Residential Development processes including a hearing before the City Council. The building permit drawings and constructed project must agree with the BAR approved design. 11. Light and Glare - Site lighting will be provided by new light standards along the driveway and parking areas. Light levels are expected to vary from 0 up to 1 footcandle at the residential property line. The project will need to balance site lighting to enhance safety without causing negative impacts to the residential zone to the south. 12. Recreation - The proposal will not affect existing recreational facilities and will provide both indoor and outdoor recreation for its residents. 13. Historical and Cultural Preservation - The site is not known to have any historical or cultural significance. 14. Transportation - A traffic impact analysis by Transpo was submitted showing that no off -site traffic mitigation measures are warranted. The left turn pockets on Military Rd. requested by the City of SeaTac are still being discussed and Tukwila is still waiting for the issue to be resolved. Tukwila will not require any traffic mitigation fees for the project. Pedestrian paths will be provided between and around the buildings. One driveway is planned onto Military Road with a second for emergency vehicles only onto 32nd Avenue. 15. Public Services - The project will slightly increase demand on public services as up to 160 residents will be added to the site. 16. Utilities - The project will increase the use of utilities on site. The site is in the Val Vue Sewer District and Water District 125. Power is available from City Light and natural gas from Puget Sound Energy. Recommended Threshold Determination: Determination of non - significance. Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study RECEIVED TABLE OF CONTENTS JUL 2 7 2001 .1 TUKWILA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PUBLIC WORKS I TABLE OF CONTENTS I PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK 2 SITE DESCRIPTION 2 WETLAND DEFINITION AND REGULATIONS 2 METHODS 3 Review of Existing Information 3 On -site Investigation 3 WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS 4 Hydrology 4 Soils 5 Vegetation 5 Wetland Functions and Values 5 FINDINGS 6 Existing Information 6 Wetlands Determinations 6 Functions Assessment 7 Off -Site Wetlands 10 Streams 10 Upland Description 10 Wildlife Observations 11 REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS 11 Local Regulations 9 State Regulations 9 PROPOSED PROJECT Project Impacts Conceptual Mitigation LIMITATIONS 13 REFERENCES 13 APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY OF TERMS A -1 APPENDIX B: COMMON & TAXONOMIC PLANT NAMES B -1 APPENDIX C: FUNCTIONS ASSESSMENT C -1 APPENDIX D: DATA SHEETS D -1 Adolfson Associates, Inc. page ii Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the request of the Living Care Senior Housing Facility (Living Care Facility), Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) performed a wetlands study and prepared this technical report for a proposed Living Care Facility in the City of Tukwila, King County, Washington. The Scope of Work for this project included wetland determinations, delineations, a brief discussion of regulatory implications and permitting considerations, and conceptual mitigation. The subject property, an approximately 11 -acre parcel, is located at 12844 and 13112 Military Road South, in the City of Tukwila, King County, Washington (Section 16, Township 23 North, Range 4 East) (Figure 1). The site is located east of Military Road, west of 32nd Avenue South, north of 132 "d Street South. A row of residential homes line the south boundary of the property, Highline Community Hospital lies to the northwest, and 32 "d Avenue forms the east property boundary (Figure 2). Topographically, the southern portion of the site is moderately sloping, descending from the west to the east, with overall topographic relief across the site estimated at about 60 to 70 feet (Redmond and Associates, 2000). To the north, the site slopes steeply to a ravine, which extends north- easterly beyond the property boundary. This site is largely undeveloped. The portion of the site immediately east of the medical buildings and parking lots may historically have been used as an orchard, and is currently used as a yard waste dumping site. Three wetland areas were identified on the site. Wetland A is 30,114 square feet in size within the property boundary and occurs within the ravine beginning in the northwest corner of the site. Wetland B is 23,655 square feet within the property boundary, and Wetland C is 57,678 square feet within the property boundary. All three wetlands are associated with several hillside seeps. The Living Care Facility property is located within the Tukwila City limits. Sensitive areas within the City of Tukwila have been recorded in City of Tukwila Water Resource Rating and Buffer Recommendations (May 1990). This document identifies a wetland (Wetland 21) east of the hospital as a Type 2 wetland according to Tukwila Municipal Code. Wetland A, B, and C are all part of this larger off -site wetland. It is our opinion that, under the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.45 — Sensitive Areas Overlay, Wetland A, B, and C are considered Type 1 wetlands, as all three are associated with the larger wetland that extends offsite. This wetland is greater than 5 acres in size and has at least 3 wetland classes (emergent, scrub - shrub, and forested) and therefore can be classified as a Type 1 wetland (TMC 18.45.020.C.1). The standard buffer for Type 1 wetlands is 100 feet (TMC 18.45.040.C.1). The standard building setback is 15 feet from the buffer edge (TMC 18.45.040.C.3a). Pursuant to TMC, certain alterations and exemptions are allowed (TMC 18.45.040.4), but only in those areas which do not contain slopes 20 percent or greater. Several seeps are evident in Wetlands A, B, and C, within the property boundary. While there were no streams identified on the subject property, these seeps form streams off site, which flow northeastward to Riverton Creek. Stream buffers on Riverton Creek are not likely to extend past wetland buffers on the subject property. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page i Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK At the request of the Living Care Senior Housing Facility Development (Living Care Facility), Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) performed a wetland delineation and prepared this technical report for the Living Care Facility site, located in Tukwila, Washington. All rights -of- entry to the subject property for the purpose of conducting this study were granted by the Living Care Senior Housing Facility Development. The boundaries of the study area were established based on a preliminary site map provided by Living Care Senior Housing Facility Development. The Scope of Work for this project included wetland determinations and delineations, summarized in this technical report. A brief discussion of regulatory implications and permitting considerations is also included in this report. An analysis of potential wetland impacts and the development of a mitigation plan were not included in this Scope of Work. SITE DESCRIPTION The Living Care site, an approximately 11 -acre property, is located at 12844 and 13112 Military Road South, in the City of Tukwila, Washington (Section 16, Township 23 North, Range 4 East) (Figure 1). The site is located east of Military Road, west of 32nd Avenue South, north of 132 "d Street South. A row of residential homes line the south boundary of the property, Highline Community Hospital lies to the northwest, and 32' Avenue forms the east property boundary (Figure 2). Topographically, the site is generally moderately sloping, descending from the west to the east, with overall topographic relief across the site estimated at about 60 to 70 feet (Redmond and Associates, 2000). To the north, the site slopes steeply to a ravine, which extends north- easterly beyond the property boundary. WETLAND DEFINITION AND REGULATIONS Wetlands are formally defined by the Corps of Engineers (Corps) (Federal Register 1982), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Federal Register 1985), the Washington Shoreline Management Act (SMA) (1971) and the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) (1992) as "... those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas" (Federal Register, 1982, 1985). In addition, the SMA and the GMA definitions add: "Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non - wetland site, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990 that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificially created wetlands intentionally created from non - wetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands ". Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 2 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study Numerous federal, state, and local regulations govern development and other activities in or near wetlands; at each level, there are typically several agencies charged with such powers (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1994). Specific regulatory implications concerning the subject property are summarized within this report. METHODS Two levels of investigation were conducted for the analysis of wetlands on,the subject property: a review of existing information and an on -site investigation. Review of Existing Information A review of existing literature, maps, and other materials was conducted to identify wetlands or site characteristics indicative of wetlands on the subject property. Note that these sources can only indicate the likelihood of the presence of wetlands; actual wetland determinations must be based upon data obtained from field investigations. Several documents were available for this review: • U.S. Geological Survey, 1:25,000 scale, Topographic Map, Burien Quadrangle 1983. • Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. (Snyder, Gale, and Pringle, 1973). • National Wetland Inventory, Burien Quadrangle. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1988). • Hydric Soils of the State of Washington. (Soil Conservation Service, 1991). • City of Tukwila Water Resource Rating and Buffer Recommendations. (Jones and Stokes, 1990). • City of Tukwila Watercourse Rating Data Sheets (Jones and Stokes, 1990). On -site Investigation Methods defined in the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997), a manual consistent with the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual ("1987 Manual ") (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) were used to determine the presence and extent of wetlands on the subject property Washington state and all local governments must use the state delineation manual to implement the SMA and/or the local regulations adopted pursuant to the GMA. The methodology outlined in the manual is based upon three essential characteristics of wetlands: (1) hydrophytic vegetation; (2) hydric soils; and (3) wetland hydrology. Field indicators of these three characteristics must all be Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 3 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study present in order to make a positive wetland determination (unless problem areas or atypical situations are encountered). The "routine on -site determination method" was used to determine the wetland boundaries. The routine method is used for areas equal to or less than five acres in size, or for larger areas with relatively homogeneous vegetative, soil, and hydrologic properties. Formal data plots were established in areas of relatively homogeneous vegetation, where information regarding each of the three wetland parameters (vegetation, soils, and hydrology) was recorded. Dominant herbs and saplings /shrubs within a 5 -foot radius, and dominant trees and woody vines within a 30 -foot radius from the data plot center were recorded on the data form (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997). This information was used to distinguish wetlands from non - wetlands. If wetlands were determined to be present on the subject property, the wetland boundaries were delineated. Wetland boundaries identified with sequentially - numbered colored flagging imprinted with the words "WETLAND DELINEATION." Data plot locations were marked with colored flagging. WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS Hydrology Water must be present in order for wetlands to exist; however, it need not be present throughout the entire year. Wetland hydrology is considered to be present when there is permanent or periodic inundation or soil saturation for more than 12.5 percent of the growing season (typically two weeks in lowland Pacific Northwest areas). Areas that are inundated or saturated for between 5 and 12.5 percent of the growing season in most years, may or may not be wetlands. Areas inundated or saturated for less than 5 percent of the growing season are non- wetlands (Ecology 1997). Indicators of wetland hydrology include observation of ponding or soil saturation, water marks, drift lines, drainage patterns, sediment deposits, oxidized rhizospheres, water - stained leaves, and local soil survey data. Where positive indicators of wetland hydrology are observed, it is assumed that wetland hydrology occurs for a significant period of the growing season. Soils Hydric soils are indicative of wetlands. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), formerly known as the Soil Conservation Service (SCS), has defined hydric soils as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic _ conditions in the upper part of the soil profile (SCS, 1987). The NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, has compiled lists of hydric soils of the United States (SCS, 1987, 1991). These lists identify soil series mapped by the NRCS that meet hydric soil criteria. It is common, however, for a map unit of non - wetland (non - hydric) soil to have Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 4 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study inclusions of hydric soil, and vice versa; field examination of soil conditions is therefore important to determine if hydric conditions exist. Due to anaerobic conditions, hydric soils exhibit certain characteristics, collectively known as "redoximorphic features," that can be observed in the field. Redoximorphic features include: high organic content, accumulation of sulfidic material (rotten egg odor), greenish- or bluish -gray color (gley formation), spots or blotches of different color interspersed with the dominant(or matrix) color (mottling), and dark soil colors (low soil chroma). Soil colors are described both by common color name (for example, "dark brown ") and by a numerical description of their hue, value, and chroma (for example, 10YR 2/2) as identified on a Munsell soil color chart (Munsell Color, 1992). Soil color is determined from a moist soil sample. Vegetation Plants must be specially adapted for life under saturated or anaerobic conditions to grow in wetlands. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has determined the estimated probability of each plant species' occurrence in wetlands and has accordingly assigned a "wetland indicator status" (WIS) to each species (Reed, 1997). Plants are categorized as obligate (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), facultative (FAC), facultative, upland (FACU), upland (UPL), not listed (NL), or no indicator status (NI). Definitions for each indicator status are listed in the Glossary (Appendix A). Species with an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC are considered adapted for life in saturated or anaerobic soil conditions. Such species are referred to as "hydrophytic" vegetation. A ( +) or ( -) sign following the WIS signifies greater or lesser likelihood, respectively, of being found in wetland conditions. Areas of relatively homogeneous vegetative composition are primarily characterized by "dominant" species (see Glossary in Appendix A). The indicator status of the dominant species within each vegetative strata is used to determine if the plant community of the area may be characterized as hydrophytic. The vegetation of an area is considered to be hydrophytic if greater than 50% of the dominant plant cover is comprised of species having an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC. Common plant names are used throughout this text. The common and taxonomic (scientific) names and wetland indicator status for each plant noted is presented in Appendix B. Scientific nomenclature of all plant species encountered follows that of Reed (1997). Where the taxonomic names of plant species have been recently changed, former names (synonymies) are included in Appendix B. Wetland Functions and Values Wetlands play important roles that provide valuable benefits to the environment and society. Detailed scientific knowledge of wetland functions is limited, so that evaluations of the functions of individual wetlands are qualitative and dependent upon professional judgment. Wetland functions and the methodology that is used to assess these functions for a particular wetland area are described in Appendix C. On the Living Care Facility property all three wetlands were evaluated together since they are connected off -site. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 5 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study FINDINGS The following sections describe the results of the field investigation conducted on the Living Care Facility site on March 14, 2001. These sections describe the wetland(s) found on the site, streams and upland habitats, and observations of wildlife. Nine data plots were established within relatively uniform areas of vegetation on the site. Data sheets, which correspond to formal data plots, are provided in Appendix D. Existing Information The City of Tukwila Water Resource Rating and Buffer Recommendations (Jones and Stokes, 1990) indicated the presence of wetlands on the subject property (Figure 3). While there were no streams indicated on the subject property, the City of Tukwila Watercourse Rating Data Sheets indicate Watercourse 16 -1 begins directly north of the site. The USDA has not mapped soils in the vicinity of the site because the area is largely urbanized. The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) did not indicate any wetlands on the subject property. King County GIS data shows three drainages within the property boundary. The Riverton Creek Salmon Habitat Restoration map (City of Tukwila, 1990) maps stream restoration along Riverton Creek in an adjacent site and shows Riverton Creek as originating on the Living Care Facility site. The map indicates the presence of springs on the Living Care Facility site. Wetlands Determinations Three wetlands were identified on the property. The wetlands appear to be part of a larger wetland that extends offsite to the north. The following describes each of the wetlands and the upland habitats found on the site. Wetland A Location and Geomorphic Setting. Wetland A is located in the northwest corner of the subject property. It is 30,114 square feet (0.69 acre) in size on the subject property and extends off site to the north and east as part of an approximately 10 -acre wetland. Wetland A occurs at the base of a steep -sided ravine and includes several seeps originating on the ravine slopes. Wetland A is characterized by Data Plot A - 1 (Figure 4). Hydrology. The hydrology in Wetland A is characterized by hillside seeps that flow northeast to form a stream channel. This stream (Riverton Creek) flows off -site to the north and then flows east under Highway 99. The soils were saturated to the surface during the March site visit and water in DP A -1 rose rapidly to eight inches during the March site visit. Based upon groundwater at eight inches, this area was assumed to meet the criterion for wetland hydrology. Soils. Soils in Wetland A were black (10YR 2/1) gravelly sandy loam from 0 to 9 inches, and from 9 to 16 inches they were gray sandy loam. There was also a sulfidic odor to the soils when the test plot was dug. The sulfidic odor, and low chroma soil horizons indicate hydric soils. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 6 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study Vegetation. The vegetation in Wetland A is dominated by salmonberry and skunk cabbage. There was an overstory of big leaf maple originating on the slopes of the ravine, but not rooted in the wetland. This area meets the wetland vegetation criterion. Wetland B Location and Geomorphic Setting. Wetland B is located in the northcentral portion of the subject property (Figure 4). It is 23,655 square feet (0.54 acre) in size on the subject property and extends off site to the north and east to join with Wetland A as part of an approximately 10 -acre wetland. Wetland B is represented by Data Plots B -1, B -2, B -3 and B -4 (Figure 4). Hydrology. Several hillside seeps flow together to form a stream drainage within Wetland B. During our March site visit water was encountered at eight inches below the ground surface and soils were saturated. Based upon the presence of groundwater, this area was assumed to meet the criterion for wetland hydrology. Soils. Soils in Wetland B were black (10YR 2/1) organic loam from 0 to 10 inches. Based upon low chroma soils and organic content this area meets the criterion for wetland soils. Vegetation. The vegetation in Wetland B was characterized by waterleaf, salmonberry, nettle, alder, cottonwood, lady fern and skunk cabbage. This area meets the wetland vegetation criterion. Wetland C Location and Geomorphic Setting. Wetland C is located in the northeastern portion of the subject property. It is 57,678 square feet (1.32 acres) in size on the subject property and extends off site to the north and east as part of an approximately 10 -acre wetland. It occurs at the lowest topographic area on the site along the eastern property boundary. Wetland C is characterized by Data Plot C —1 (Figure 4). Hydrology. The hydrology in Wetland C is characterized by seeps contained by uncapped wells. These flow northeast to form a stream drainage which joins those flowing from Wetlands A and B, and then flows east under Highway 99. The soils were saturated to the surface during the March site visit and water in DP C -1 rose rapidly to eight inches during the March site visit. Based upon saturated soils and groundwater at eight inches, this area was assumed to meet the criterion for wetland hydrology. Soils. Soils in Wetland C were black (10YR 2/1) gravelly sandy loam from 0 to 9 inches, and from 9 to 16 inches they were gray sandy loam. There was also a sulfidic odor to the soils when the test plot was dug. The sulfidic odor, and low chroma soil horizons indicate hydric soils. Vegetation. The vegetation in Wetland C is dominated by salmonberry, cattail, purple loosestrife, and skunk cabbage, with an overstory of black cottonwood and red alder. This area meets the wetland vegetation criterion. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 7 Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 8 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study PROPOSED MITIGATION FOR PROJECT IMPACTS The proposed project involves the construction of a senior assisted living facility located adjacent to Riverton Hospital. There are no anticipated impacts to wetlands as part of the proposed project. All development will be contained in the southern half of the subject property. However, to adhere to all of the development regulations for the City of Tukwila, to make the site work for the development needs, and to create an aesthetically pleasing facility, a portion of the buffer for Wetland C is proposed for reduction. A 100 -foot buffer is typically required for Type 1 wetlands such as Wetlands A, B, and C. The project as proposed will reduce the wetland buffer 50% on the northeast portion of the site, only on the south and west side of Wetland C (Figure 4). The entire amount of wetland buffer on the subject property is 159,887 square feet (3.67 acres). The anticipated amount of buffer proposed for reduction totals 18,902 square feet (0.43 acres). The minimum wetland buffer would be 50- feet around wetland C, and a 100 -foot wetland buffer would be retained around Wetlands A and B. The 50 -foot wetland buffer would be protected and enhanced as compensation for lost or diminished buffer functions. Identified Impacts The proposed wetland buffer reduction will result in loss of approximately 0.43 -acres of wetland buffer. The existing wetland buffer is partially forested with upland species such as big -leaf maple, red alder, and cottonwood. The majority of the buffer is dominated by invasive and/or exotic species such as Himalayan and evergreen blackberry, scots broom, and English ivy. These invasive species typically out - compete native and less vigorous vegetation, and provide few benefits for wetlands or wetland buffers. The tree species found in the wetland buffer are opportunistic species that self -seed well, and typically have vigorous growth habits. Mitigation Concepts To offset the proposed wetland buffer impacts, mitigation has been evaluated at a conceptual level. To mitigate for the wetland buffer impacts to Wetland C, we propose buffer enhancement at a 1:1 ratio, of approximately 0.43 -acre of the existing wetland buffer around Wetland B and C. Conceptual mitigation shall include planting native vegetation that provides functional support for wildlife habitat, water quality, and diversity within the vegetative community adjacent to the wetland. These are functions that the current buffer provides at a low to moderate level. Removal of invasive plant species will be one of the main goals of buffer enhancement. Addition of coniferous trees will be another goal of enhancement. Typical plant species may include Douglas fir, western red cedar, hawthorn, bitter cherry, Pacific crabapple, serviceberry, and Oregon Grape. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 10 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study Monitoring of the buffer enhancement would occur for a period of three to five years. Monitoring reports would be prepared on a yearly basis and submitted to the City. They would include photos, field observations, maintenance suggestions, and contingencies if necessary. A split -rail fence will be installed at the buffer edge. If the City is willing to give preliminary approval on this concept we would prepare a formal mitigation plan. This mitigation plan would include construction details, planting details, contingency plans, meetings, comprehensive monitoring plan, and bonding requirements. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 11 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study LIMITATIONS It should be recognized that the delineation of wetland boundaries and functional value assessments are inexact sciences; wetland professionals may disagree on the precise location of wetland boundaries or the functional value of a wetland. The final determination of wetland boundaries is the responsibility of the resource agencies that regulate activities in and around wetlands. Accordingly, all wetland delineations performed for this study, as well as the conclusions drawn in this report, should be reviewed by the appropriate regulatory agencies prior to any detailed site planning or construction activities. Further, wetlands are by definition transition areas; wetland boundaries may change with time. We therefore recommend that this wetlands study be verified with the appropriate regulatory agencies as soon as practical. Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope -of -work, we warrant that this study was conducted in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and criteria in effect at the time this study was performed, as outlined in the Methods section. The results and conclusions of this report represent the authors' best professional judgment, based upon information provided by the project proponent in addition to that obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 12 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study REFERENCES Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Publ. # FWS /OBS- 79/31. 131 p. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Federal Register. 1980.40 CFR Part 230: Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites of Dredged or Fill Material. Vol. 45, No. 249, pp. 85352- 85353, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Federal Register. 1982. Title 33: Navigation and Navigable Waters; Chapter II, Regulatory Programs of the corps of Engineers. Vol 47, No. 138, p. 31810, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Federal Register. 1986.40 CFR Parts 320 through 330: Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule. Vol. 51. No. 219. pp. 41206- 41260, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Jones and Stokes. 1990. City of Tukwila Water Resource Rating and Buffer Recommendations. City of Tukwila, Washington. Jones and Stokes. 1990. City of Tukwila Watercourse Rating Data Sheets. City of Tukwila, Washington. Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Univ. of Washington Press, Seattle. Munsell Color. 1988. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, MD. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1997. Revision of the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 253 pages. Reppert, R.T., W. Sigles, E. Stakhiv, L. Messman, and C. Meyers. 1979. Wetlands Values: Concepts and Methods for Wetlands Evaluation. Inst. for Water Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Belvoir, VA. Res. rpt. 79 -R1. Snyder, D.E., P.S. Gale, and R.F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1991. Hydric Soils of the State of Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 13 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1987. Hydric Soils of the United States. In cooperation with the National Technical committee for Hydric Soils. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Washington State Department of Ecology . 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Washington State Department of Ecology, Publication No. 96 -94. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Wetlands Regulations Guidebook. Washington State Department of Ecology, Publication No. 88 -5. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page 14 II. \ %{� _ • -......_ _... 1TH AV S ��, r I 1129THaI ST 4/ QO 11 _ 15600 --- -- ....._• -- LAKE REED �m\ 1 i5OM ST � _ LORA LAKE r,„ oN\ .\.c) 12s +0fiLFp�s S 130TH, N v, S__ MEMORIAL 7 ,i ot, :. e; r,,,,,,,, r,,,,,,,, t"- }`'° '0..1"' `�'"a ;' idZ*I! 1 .S r13THPLS 14TH .115,, 16TH V ��' :' :'ei:ui A V S ' 3 ^l � °1 }"y�}4 ; -`V , ST v, , S l� - is 14TH PL S IV 16TH AV S Reproduced with permission granted by THOMAS BROS. MAPS. This nap is copyrighted by THOMAS BROS. MAPS. It is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for personal use or resale, without permission. aiy File name: 21044vic.ai NORTH Original graphic by: ACT No Scale Edits by: Date: 4/5/01 - 3;L`�'� +l 2400 E�i c/� qV ��k` Y;f:;'� TACOMA "`'~ INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ' i; • , , ' CY i" `y "Z`y ■ -O. co.) 14300 IV 25TH AV S, 26TH AV cn y e s j, l 7 �'{ b� Kr/.SY ( 4 ' t( �`� J�a i r' �` �° •}z Mttt Y 1 4 � � '1' p . s �7riorMY: o .4, AV S Y3RD. ":?Y N � ; � ( y J r �t'i 4._'i iS f 4 :4ti y1 �,P.+ I 21ST AV (/, ''-. S p CT) 22ND t1'►. • �` J1PT422ND! i4 �AV S s " I i I, S H192 AV S -..i- 27TH 24TH PL S 25TH CTS '�') 23RD s 15000. H 26TH N 6 `a ' "'N 26TH AV s 01 r "' - ° .'4i' !P a �` Z FIGURE 1. VICINITY MAP LIVING CARE TUKWILA SITE TUKWILA, WASHINGTON y— '-r N S a, 0 26TH PL 5 25TH PL S v) 26TH PL S 25TH PL S PL i "' 26rti W 61N V S / c o 30TH 3sT H AV s sue.. 29TH— 28TH AV S S PL 26n+ u+ s 28TH AV S 28TH PL S CT s � ,,,N s , �n� �`` all N ,J VI _ 28TH AV 5 AV S 29TH : C/) PL g AV S t3°T 005c1 1W El A 14200 tr I A 30TH _ _'j NI 1SB ' v+ r-■ 3oTl� i Z � av s �- � ''�..."ri �' `-" 30TH t o 3P H AV S s N S .. Q� Dt %� Y 1� C~ s ' "I ti N N N ., AV S if32ND b PL s_ 3N S S � . = ■ 8 " 32ND 3 N � ' o 7 A. i t A, d ` a . „� , pV �Er31i� ►W:' , X 0 C7 AV S N 0 \ 0y,1tiv� C7\ 1 • � � . 009VG 34TH. AV .5 3 5TH : AV . S :. :.: du , 33RD aH �aTN pL 35TH : AV 'S: e34. f- X00 :: �d O`er . �• __ 3TH 4. S. - _ 40TH P :s LH ; _ g 37TH � . • y ,:. N I N 437TH AV . �• 37TH � eltr `-� cn m ,Iti . u, ,.. v, `� NL a N � �. a 4 :..' _38 AV . S.. AV . S �M�i o-I 40Th AV .S : A�" PL S y OT 4p Hlov +a o. ° 1 " :14100 ° �' ST N1t3 isdW 1d . LN s 41ST PL 42ND Jyy ?+ • by AV 4, S .. ti ;r, I! -■ . `a' I ' 300 :. 42ND , .P' .... Al/ , AA„A C . . ... ' ,�CfA :. w1 Z`' ,w. 4 :' : it WN S. Stv S 128TH STREET PARCEL# 1623049001 PARCEL # 1873049179 k a A D O I P S O N NORTH No Scale Fde name: 21044drainage.ai Original graphic by: ACT Edits by: 7/11/2001 nis Date: 4/6/01 Source: King County GIS data; 2000. FIGURE 2. ON -SITE DRAINAGE LIVING CARE TUKWILA SITE TUKWILA, WASHINGTON S 12 7 S t 8 f'0 0 N fi % n '0 IQ. 0 Salmon s Habitat Restoration • 1 0 Area I4 Remote Site Salmon Egg Incubator Location I LS 126 St S128St — Open Channel . Culverted o Open Culvert ® Concrete Sluiceway r A S 1)0 St / % A A A A A A 1 NORTH No Scale File name: 21044salmon.ai Original graphic by: ACT Edits by: Date: 4/5/01 Source: City of Tukwila; 1990. FIGURE 3. RIVERTON CREEK SALMON RESTORATION LIVING CARE TUKWILA SITE TUKWILA, WASHINGTON APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY OF TERMS Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study agricultural wetland - areas where wetland soils and hydrology remain, but hydrophytic vegetation have been removed to allow a crop to be grown. best management practices (BMP's) - physical, structural, and/or managerial practices that, when used singly or in combination, prevent or reduce pollutant discharges. buffer - a designated area along the perimeter of a stream or wetland which is regulated to control the negative effects of adjacent development from intruding into the aquatic resource. emergent - a plant that grows rooted in shallow water, the bulk of which emerges from the water and stands vertically. Usually applied to non -woody vegetation. emergent wetland - in the USFWS classification system (Cowardin et al., 1979), a wetland characterized by erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes, excluding mosses and lichens. enhancement - an improvement in the functions and values of an existing wetland. forested wetland - in the USFWS classification system (Cowardin et al., 1979), a wetland characterized by woody vegetation that is six meters (20 feet) tall or taller. 404 permit - a permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act which allows an activity (filling) within a wetland. A 404 permit usually requires compensation or mitigation for the allowed use in a wetland. herbaceous - with the characteristics of an herb; a plant with no persistent woody stem above ground. hydric soil - a soil that in its undrained condition is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic (wetland) vegetation. hydrology - the properties, distribution, and circulation of water. hydrophyte - any plant growing in water or on a substrate that is at least periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive water content. hydrophytic vegetation - see hydrophyte. in -kind compensation - compensation for lost wetland habitat with a replacement wetland of the same habitat type. invasive plant species - those species which become established easily in disturbed conditions, reproduce readily, and often establish monocultures. Most invasive plants are non - native species (i.e. were introduced to the northwest intentionally or unintentionally, by humans) Examples of common invasive species in the Pacific Northwest are: Scot's broom, Canada thistle, hedge bindweed, English ivy, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, and soft rush. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page A -1 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study reach - a length of channel with uniform characteristics. restoration - to improve a disturbed or altered wetland by returning wetland parameters which may be missing. The restoration may return an original wetland habitat or may alter the wetland for some other desired outcome. riverine - in USFWS classification system (Cowardin et al., 1979), freshwater (less than 0.5 parts per thousand ocean - derived salts) areas that are contained within a channel and which are not dominated by trees, shrubs, and persistent emergents, for example, rivers and streams. scrub -shrub - in USFWS classification system (Cowardin et al., 1979), areas dominated by woody vegetation less than 6 meters (20 feet) tall. The species include tree shrubs, young trees, and tress or shrubs that are smaller stunted because of environmental conditions. section 404 permit - see "404 Permit ". sub - catchment - a subdivision of a drainage basin generally determined by topography. synonymy - different scientific names for the same species. wetland - transitional lands between terrestrial and aquatic systems, where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water. Wetlands must have one or more of the following attributes: (1) at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes; (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; and (3) the substrate is non -soil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year. wetland hydrology - the total of all wetness characteristics in areas that are inundated or have saturated soils for a sufficient duration to support hydrophytic vegetation. wetland indicator status (WIS) - categories of plant species based upon the estimated probabilities (expressed as a frequency of occurrence) of a species occurring in a wetland or non - wetland. Wetland indicator statuses include the following: • Obligate (OBL): species that almost always occur wetlands under natural conditions (estimated probability >99 %). • Facultative wetland (FACW): species that usually occur in wetlands (estimated probability 67 to 99 %), but are occasionally found in non - wetlands. • Facultative (FAC): Species that are equally likely to occur in wetlands or non - wetlands (estimated probability 34 to 66 %). • Facultative upland (FACU): species that usually occur in non - wetlands (estimated probability 67 to 99 %), but are occasionally found in wetlands. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page A -3 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study • Upland (UPL): species that almost always occur in non - wetlands under normal conditions (estimated probability >99 %). • Not listed (NL): species that are not listed and are presumed to be upland species. • No indicator status (NI): species that have not yet been evaluated. A ( +) or ( -) following the WIS signifies a greater or lesser likelihood of being found in wetland conditions. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page A -4 APPENDIX B: SITE PLANT LIST Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study :TREES` SPECIES LIST FOR THE LIVING CARE SITE IDENTIFIED ON JANUARY 19, 1999 COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME big -leaf maple bitter cherry black cottonwood Douglas fir one fruited hawthorn Oregon ash Pacific crabapple red alder western hemlock western red cedar Acer macrophyllum Prunus emarginata Populus balsamifera Pseudotsuga menziesii Crataegus monogyna Fraxinus latifolia Malus fusca Alnus rubra Tsuga heterophylla Thuja plicata FACU FACU* FAC FACU* ORN FACW FACW FAC FACU- FAC beaked hazelnut black hawthorn clustered rose currant devil's club Douglas' spiraea English holly Corylus cornuta Crataegus douglassi Rosa pisocarpa Ribes spp. Oplopanax horridus Spiraea douglasii Ilex aquifolium FACU FAC FAC FAC -FAC+ FAC+ FACW NL Adolfson Associates, Inc. page B -2 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study English ivy evergreen blackberry Himalayan blackberry huckleberry Indian plum long - leaved Oregon grape Nootka rose ocean spray one -seed hawthorn Pacific blackberry Pacific ninebark Pacific willow red -osier dogwood salal salmonberry Scot's broom Scouler's willow Sitka willow snowberry tall Oregon grape thimbleberry vine maple wood rose Hedera helix Rubus laciniatus Rubus discolor Vaccinium spp. Oemleria cerasiformis Berberis nervosa Rosa nutkana Holodiscus discolor Crataegus monogyna Rubus vitifolius Physocarpus capitatus Salix lasiandra Cornus stolonifera Gaultheria shallon Rubus spectabilis Cytisus scoparius Salix scouleriana Salix sitchensis Symphoricarpos albus Berberis aquifolium Rubus parvif torus Acer circinatum Rosa gymnocarpa NL FACU FACU NL -OBL FACU NL FAC NL FACU +* NI FACW- FACW+ FACW FACU* FAC+ NL FAC FACW FACU NL FAC- FAC- FACU Adolfson Associates, Inc. page B -3 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME WIS1 bedstraw bluegrass bracken fern colonial bentgrass common plantain creeping buttercup dandelion dock English plantain horsetail lady fern Pacific bleedingheart pig -a- back -plant purple loosestrife reed canarygrass skunk cabbage stinging nettle sword fern thistle water parsley white trillium Galium SDD. Poa spp. Pteridium aquilinum Agrostis tenuis Plantago major Ranunculus repens Taraxacum officinale Rumex spp. Plantago lanceolata Equisetum spp. Athyrium filix femina Dicentra formosa Tolmiea menziesii Lythrum salicaria Phalaris arundinacea Lysichitum americanum Urtica dioica Polystichum munitum Cirsium spp. Oenanthe sarmentosaa Trillium ovatum UPL -FACW+ NL -FACW FACU FAC FACU+ FACW FACU FAC -.OBL FAC FAC -OBL FAC FACU* FAC* FACW+ FACW OBL FAC+ FACU FACU -OBL OBL FACU* Adolfson Associates, Inc. page B -4 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study WIS (Wetland Indicator Status) OBL (Obligate): species that almost always occur wetlands under natural conditions (est. probability >99 %). FACW (Facultative wetland) : species that usually occur in wetlands (est. probability 67 to 99 %), but are occasionally found in non - wetlands. FAC 34 to 66 %). (Facultative): Species that are equally likely to occur in wetlands or non - wetlands (est. probability FACU (Facultative upland): species that usually occur in non - wetlands (est. probability 67 to 99 %), but are occasionally found in wetlands. UPL (Upland): species that almost always occur in non - wetlands under normal conditions (est. probability >99 %). NL reviews (Not listed): species that are not listed and are presumed to be upland species. indicates a species that is more frequently found in wetlands indicates a species that is less frequently found in wetlands identifies a tentative assignment based upon either limited information or conflicting Adolfson Associates, Inc. page B-5 APPENDIX C: FUNCTIONS ASSESSMENT Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study A methodology developed by the Corps (Reppert et al., 1979), and modified by Cooke (1996) as well as work by Adamus (1983) and Adamus et al. (1987) <DELETE LAST CLAUSE IF NO W.E.T.> were the primary basis for evaluating wetlands for the following wetland functions and values: (1) flood and storm water control; (2) base flow and ground water support; (3) erosion and shoreline protection; (4) water quality improvement; (5) natural biological support, (6) overall habitat functions; (7) specific habitat functions; and (8) cultural and socioeconomic characteristics. Flood and stormwater control refers to a wetland's ability to reduce or modify potentially damaging effects of storm and flood flows. This function is evaluated according to such parameters as size and category of wetland; type of outlet, amount of forested cover; and position in the drainage. Baseflow and groundwater support is defined as "...the role which a specific wetland area plays in maintaining the stability and environmental integrity of the entire system to which it is physically and functionally related" (Reppert et al., 1979). This function is evaluated according to parameters such as size and location of the wetland; proximity to other palustrine, riverine, or lacustrine systems; hydroperiod; and presence of flow - sensitive fish.. Erosion and shoreline protection refers to .a wetland's ability to mitigate the effects of wave effects and storm damage, and thus increase shoreline stability and limit erosion. This function is evaluated according to such features as type, structure, and density of vegetation; width of the vegetative area and buffering capacity; and amount of development in the sub - catchment (see glossary). Water quality improvement refers to a wetland's ability to purify water through a variety of physical, biological, and chemical processes. This function is evaluated according to such characteristics as size and type of wetland; nature and density of vegetation; hydroperiod; and proximity to pollution sources. Natural biological support refers to a wetland's ability to provide habitats for a diversity of species. This function is evaluated according to such parameters as type, diversity, and amount of vegetation; proximity to other habitats; prevalence of invasive species; amount of organic accumulation and export; type, diversity, size, and amount of habitat features, width of buffer; and connectivity to other habitats. Overall habitat function refers to the likelihood of the presence of uncommon plant communities or associations of rare animal species. This function is evaluated according to characteristics of size, amount of habitat diversity, and the presence or absence of a wildlife refuge or sanctuary. Specific habitat function evaluates the wetland's capacity to provide habitat for invertebrates, amphibians, fish, mammals, and birds. This function is evaluated by parameters which include presence of surface water, connectivity to other aquatic features, diversity of vegetative communities, and proximity to other habitats. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page C -1 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study Cultural and socioeconomic characteristics, based upon the value of the wetland to humans, are evaluated by assessing parameters including opportunities for education or recreation, aesthetic value, presence of commercially valuable natural resources, historical or archaeological value, and proximity to open space. Wetlands in this report are rated "LOW," "MODERATE," or "HIGH" for each wetland function. For the purposes of the functional assessment each function is assigned a maximum total of points based upon the number of criteria used in the evaluation. The ratings of "LOW ", "MODERATE ", or "HIGH" correspond to the low, middle and higher third of the point scale for each function respectively. For example, the highest possible points for the water quality improvement function is 12. Therefore for this function a score of four to six is LOW, a score of seven to nine is MODERATE, and a score of 10 to 12 is HIGH. Adolfson Associates, Inc. page C -2 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study Functional Assessment for Wetlands A, B, and C '+ F xa'4a. 2 , j t e"t�` .. l {s t nc o .0 t4 ,-G: Gro' ? t r v r 2 „,,,f1..1,' fg �r . r droll Flood/ Storm Water Control Size < 5 acres 2 Size 5 - 10 acres Size > 10 acres Rivenne or Lakeshore wetland Mid - sloped wetland 3 Depressions, headwaters, bogs, Flats < 10% forested cover 10 - 30% forested cover 3 > 30% forested cover Unconstrained outlet 2 Semi - constrained outlet Culvert/bermed outlet Located in lower 1/3 of drainage Located in middle 1/3 of Drainage 3 Located in upper 1/3 of drainage '.Points ax' l5): . Base Flow/ Ground Water Support Size < 5 acres 2 Size 5 - 10 acres Size > 10 acres Riverine or lakeshore wetland Mid - sloped wetland 3 Depressions, headwaters, bogs, Flats Located in lower 1/3 of drainage Located in middle 1/3 of drainage 3 Located in upper 1/3 of drainage Temporarily flooded or saturated 2 Seasonally or semi - permanently flooded or saturated Permanently flooded or saturated, or intermittently Exposed No flow- sensitive fish populations on -site or downstream 2 Small populations of flow - sensitive fish on -site or downstream Large populations of flow - sensitive fish contiguous with site in highly permeable strata 'Points(Max:15):" Erosion/ Shoreline Protection N/A Sparse grass /herbs or no veg Along OHWM Sparse wood or veg along OHWM Dense wood or veg along OHWM Wetland extends < 30 m from OHWM Wetland extends 30 - 60 m from OHWM Wetland extends > 200 m from OHWM Highly developed shoreline or Subcatchments Moderately developed shoreline or subcatchment • Undeveloped shoreline or Subcatchment : P,oints,(Max.9):...- . Water Quality Improve- Ment Rapid flow through site 2 Moderate flow through site Slow flow through site < 50 % veg cover 2 50 - 80% cover >80% veg cover Upstream in basin from wetland is undeveloped 2 < 50% of basin upstream from wetland is developed > 50% of basin upstream from wetland is developed 1 Holds < 25% overland runoff Holds 35 - 50% overland runoff 3 Holds > 50% overland runoff :Points (Maz :12): Natural Biological Support Size < 5 acres 2 Size 5 - 10 acres Size > 10 acres Ag land, low veg structure Two level veg 3 High veg structure Seasonal surface water 2 Permanent surface water Open water pools through Summer One habitat type PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST Two habitat types PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST 3 > Three habitat types PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST Low plant diversity (< 6 Species) 2 Moderate plant diversity (7 - 15 species) High plant diversity (> 15 species) > 50% invasive species 2 10 to 50% invasive species <10% invasive species Low primary productivity 2 Moderate primary productivity High primary productivity Low organic accumulation 2 Moderate organic accumulation High organic accumulation Low organic export 2 Moderate organic export High organic export Few habitat features 2 Some habitat features Many habitat features Buffers very disturbed 2 Buffers slightly disturbed Buffers not disturbed Isolated from upland habitats Partially connected to upland 3 Well connected to upland . Points (Max36): Adolfson Associates, Inc. page C -3 Living Care Senior Housing Facility Wetlands Study ■ -,"; .4""*"4" ' ' " ' 11". . 4 " ' .. ' ' .4"' 1 eragiig V. ..i...0. — s --, - .. . •-z, ... ...V.A.KW:I."?' ...''' .4,,,t 2 , .-, , . ,1/4.• , , ,, , . . ‘ • I I } '' °A' . 1 . , e up. ft,f'•2r,'` ,,,, ' ' . '''' 't.. , ,y; • :"'"'.4 \ ''''; ': “". PUP 1" . . ''',.L "" ', 't be. : . Nu Overall Habitat Functions Size < 5 acres 2 Size 5 - 10 acres Size > 10 acres Low habitat diversity 2 Moderate habitat diversity High habitat diversity . Low sanctuary or refuge 2 Moderate sanctuary or refuge High sanctuary or refuge -Points (Max 9): Specific Habitat Functions Low invertebrate habitat 2 Moderate invertebrate habitat High invertebrate habitat 1 Low amphibian habitat Moderate amphibian habitat High amphibian habitat 1 Low fish habitat Moderate fish habitat High fish habitat Low mammal habitat 2 Moderate mammal habitat High mammal habitat Low bird habitat 2 Moderate bird habitat High bird habitat Points,(Max 15): Cultural Socio- Economic 1 Low educational opportunities Moderate educational Opportunities High educational opportunities Low aesthetic value 2 Moderate aesthetic value High aesthetic value 1 Lacks commercial fisheries, agriculture, renewable resources Moderate commercial fisheries, agriculture, renewable resources High commercial fisheries, agriculture, renewable resources 1 Lacks historical or archeological resources Historical or archeological site Important historical or archeological site 1 Lacks passive and active recreational opportunities Some passive and active recreational opportunities Many passive and active recreational opportunities 1 Privately owned Privately owned, some public Access Unrestricted public access Not near open space 2 Some connection to open space Directly connected to open space Points (Max>21): „ . N/A = NOT APPLICABLE; N/I = NO INFORMATION AVAILABLE Adolfson Associates, Inc. page C-4 APPENDIX D: DATA SHEETS DATA FORM 1 Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Coras Wetland Delineation Manual) Project Site: Living Care Senior Housing Applicant/Owner: Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC Investigator(s): Amy Dearborn, Nancy Job Date: 3 -14 -01 County: King State: Washington S/T/R: 16/23N/4E Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Is the area a potential problem area? No Community ID: WETLAND Transect ID: Plot ID: A -1 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Rubs spectabilis S 60 FAC Tolmiea menziesii H 40 FAC Urtica dioica H 30 FAC+ Lysitchion americanum H 20 OBL Acer circinatum S T FACU+ HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 100% Check all indicators that apply & Regional knowledge of plant communities Physiological or reproductive adaptations Technical literature explain below: X Wetland Plant List (Natl or regional) Morphological adaptations Wetland plant data base X OTHER . Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes No Rationale for Decision/Remarks: Dominant vegetation is considered hydropyhtic. HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season: Yes Based on: Evidence of new growth Water Marks: Yes No Sediment Deposits: Yes No Drift Lines: Yes No Drainage Patterns: Yes No Dept. of inundation: 8 inches Depth to free water in pit: 8 inches Depth to saturated soil: 0 inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. Yes No Local Soil Survey: Yes No FAC Neutral: Yes No Water - stained Leaves: Yes No Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, lake or gage data: Other: Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decision/remarks: There was evidence of hydrology Yes No in this soil plot. SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Unmapped Drainage Class N/A Field observations confirm Taxonomy (subgroup) N/A mapped type? N/A 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 -9 A 10YR 2/1 none none Gravelly sandy loam 9 -16 B 10YR 2/1 none none sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: (Check all that apply) • Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High organic content in surface layer of sandy soils Sulfidic Odor Organic streaking in sandy soils Aquic moisture regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or low - chroma colors Other (explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: Indicators of hydric soil were present. Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soils present? Wetland hydrology present? [Yes 'Yes Yes No No Is the sampling point within a wetland? Yes No No Rationale/Remarks: This data plot contains all three wetland parameters. NOTES: DATA FORM 1 Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corns Wetland Delineation Manual) Project Site: Living Care Senior Housing Applicant/Owner: Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC Investigator(s): Amy Dearborn, Nancy Job Date: 3- 14 -01 County: King State: Washington S/T/R: 16/23N/4E Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Is the area a potential problem area? No _ Community ID: UPLAND Transect ID: Plot ID: B -1 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator • Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Olemaria cerasiformis S 60 FACU Dicentra formosa H 40 FACU Geranium sp. H 20 - Rubus discolor S 60 FACU- Ilex aquifolium S Trace NL HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 0% Check all indicators that apply & Regional knowledge of plant communities Physiological or reproductive adaptations Technical literature explain below: X Wetland Plant List (Natl or regional) Morphological adaptations Wetland plant data base X OTHER • Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes No Rationale for Decision/Remarks: Dominant vegetation is invasive and not considered hydropyhtic. HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season: Yes Based on: Evidence of new growth Water Marks: Yes No Sediment Deposits: Yes No Drift Lines: Yes No Drainage Patterns: Yes No Dept. of inundation: >14 inches Depth to free water in pit: >14 inches Depth to saturated soil: >14 inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. Yes No Local Soil Survey: Yes No FAC Neutral: Yes No Water- stained Leaves: Yes No Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, lake or gage data: Other: Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: There was no evidence of hydrology in this soil plot. SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Unmapped Taxonomy (subgroup) N/A Drainage Class N/A Field observations confirm mapped type? N/A 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 -5 A 10YR 3/3 none none Silt loam 5 -14 B 10YR 4/4 none none Silt loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Check all that apply) Epipedon Odor moisture regime conditions or low - chroma colors Concretions content in surface layer of sandy soils in sandy soils Hydric Soils List Hydric Soils List in remarks) Histic High organic Sulfidic Organic streaking Aquic Listed on Local Reducing Listed on National Gleyed Other (explain Hydric soils present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: No indicators of hydric soil were present.. Wetland Determination (circle) Io Is the sampling point within a wetland? Yes No Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Hydric soils present? Yes Wetland hydrology present? Yes Rationale/Remarks: This data plot was missing all three wetland parameters. NOTES: DATA FORM 1 Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) Project Site: Living Care Senior Housing Applicant/Owner: Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC Investigator(s): Amy Dearborn, Nancy Job Date: 3 -14 -01 County: King State: Washington S/T/R: 16/23N/4E Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? . No Is the area a potential problem area? No Community ID: WETLAND Transect ID: Plot ID: B -2 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Rubs spectabilis S 60 FAC Athyrium filix- femina H 40 FAC Urtica dioica H • 20 FAC+ Alnus rubra T 10 FAC Populus balsamifera T 40 FAC HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 100% Check all indicators that apply & Regional knowledge of plant communities Physiological or reproductive adaptations Technical literature explain below: X Wetland Plant List (Natl or regional) Morphological adaptations Wetland plant data base X OTHER . Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes No Rationale for Decision/Remarks: Dominant vegetation is considered hydropyhtic. HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season: Yes Based on: Evidence of new growth Water Marks: Yes No Sediment Deposits: Yes No Drift Lines: Yes No Drainage Patterns: Yes No Dept. of inundation: 12 inches Depth to free water in pit: 12 inches Depth to saturated soil: 6 inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. Yes No Local Soil Survey: Yes No FAC Neutral: Yes No Water- stained Leaves: Yes No Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, lake or gage data: Other: Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decision/remarks: There was evidence of hydrology Yes No in this soil plot. SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Unmapped Drainage Class N/A Field observations confirm Taxonomy (subgroup) N/A mapped type? N/A 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 -4 A 10YR 2/2 none none Organic loam 4 -6 Coal / burn layer 6 -14 B 10YR 2/1 Organic loam Hydric Soil Indicators: (Check all that apply) Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High organic content in surface Layer of sandy soils Sulfidic Odor Organic streaking in sandy soils Aquic moisture regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List X Gleyed or low - chroma colors Other (explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: Indicators of hydric soil were present. Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soils present? Wetland hydrology present? 'Yes) No Yes' No Is the sampling point within a wetland? Yes No Yes' No Rationale/Remarks: This data plot contains all three wetland parameters. NOTES: DATA FORM 1 Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) Project Site: Living Care Senior Housing Applicant/Owner: Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC Investigator(s): Amy Dearborn, Nancy Job Date: 3 -14 -01 County: King State: Washington S/T/R: 16/23N/4E Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Is the area a potential problem area? No Community ID: WETLAND Transect ID: Plot ID: B -3 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Rubs spectabilis S 35 FAC Athyrium filix- femina H 60 FAC Urtica dioica H 20 FAC+ Alnus rubra T 40 FAC Lysichiton americanum H 20 OBL Acer circinatum H 20 FACU+ HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 80% Check all indicators that apply & Regional knowledge of plant communities Physiological or reproductive adaptations Technical literature explain below: X Wetland Plant List (Natl or regional) Morphological adaptations Wetland plant data base X OTHER . Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes No . Rationale for Decision/Remarks: Dominant vegetation is considered hydropyhtic. HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season: Yes Based on: Evidence of new growth Water Marks: Yes No Sediment Deposits: Yes No Drift Lines: • Yes No Drainage Patterns: Yes No Dept. of inundation: 8 inches Depth to free water in pit: 8 inches Depth to saturated soil: 0 inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. Yes No Local Soil Survey: Yes No FAC Neutral: . Yes No Water- stained Leaves: Yes No Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, lake or gage data: Other: . Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: There was evidence of hydrology in this soil plot. SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Unmapped Drainage Class N/A Field observations confirm Taxonomy (subgroup) N/A mapped type? N/A 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 -10 A 10YR 2/1 none none Organic loam Hydric Soil Indicators: (Check all that apply) Histosol Concretions X Histic Epipedon High organic content in surface layer of sandy soils Sulfidic Odor Organic streaking in sandy soils Aquic moisture regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List X Gleyed or low - chroma colors Other (explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: Indicators of hydric soil were present. Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? 1Yesl Hydric soils present? !Yes Wetland hydrology present? (Yes No No Is the sampling point within a wetland? Yes No No Rationale/Remarks: This data plot contains all three wetland parameters. NOTES: DATA FORM 1 Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corns Wetland Delineation Manual) Project Site: Living Care Senior Housing Applicant/Owner: Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC Investigator(s): Amy Dearborn, Nancy Job Date: 3 -14 -01 County: King State: Washington S/T/R: 16/23N/4E Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Is the area a potential problem area? No Community ID: WETLAND Transect ID: Plot ID: B-4 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Rubus spectabilis S 90 FAC Dicentra formosa H 20 FACU Populus balsamifera T 70 FAC Alnus rubra T 40 FAC HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: . % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 50% Check all indicators that apply & Regional knowledge of plant communities Physiological or reproductive adaptations Technical literature explain below: X Wetland Plant List (Natl or regional) Morphological adaptations Wetland plant data base X OTHER . Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes No Rationale for Decision/Remarks: Dominant vegetation is considered hydropyhtic. HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season: Yes Based on: Evidence of new growth Water Marks: Yes No Sediment Deposits: Yes No Drift Lines: Yes No Drainage Patterns: Yes No Dept. of inundation: >15 inches Depth to free water in pit: >15 inches Depth to saturated soil: >15 inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. Yes No Local Soil Survey: Yes No FAC Neutral: Yes No Water stained Leaves: Yes No Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, lake or gage data: Other: Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decision/remarks: There was no evidence of hydrology Yes No. in this soil plot. SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Unmapped Taxonomy (subgroup) N/A Drainage Class N/A Field observations confirm mapped type? N/A 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 -7 A 10YR 2/1 none none Loam 7 -15 B Gley 6 /10Y 10YR 5/8 Small, abundant, and distinct Clay loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Check all that Epipedon Odor moisture regime conditions or low - chroma apply) Concretions content in surface layer of sandy soils in sandy soils Hydric Soils List Hydric Soils List in remarks) Histic High organic Sulfidic ' Organic streaking Aquic Listed on Local Reducing Listed on National X Gleyed colors Other (explain Hydric soils present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: Indicators of hydric soil were present. Wetland Determination (circle) No Is the sampling point within a wetland? Yes No Hydrophytic vegetation Hydric soils present? Wetland hydrology present? present? IYesi IYesl No Yes to Rationale/Remarks: This data plot contains vegetation and soil wetland parameters, but lacks hydrology. This plot was on the edge of the wetland. NOTES: DATA FORM 1 Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) Project Site: Living Care Senior Housing Applicant/Owner: Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC Investigator(s): Amy Dearborn, Nancy Job Date: 3 -14 -01 County: King State: Washington S/T/R: 16/23N/4E Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Is the area a potential problem area? No Community ID: UPLAND Transect ID: Plot ID: C -1 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Rubus lacianatus S 60 FACU+ Rubus spectabilis S 15 FACW- . Polysitchum munitum H 20 FACU Rubus discolor S 20 FACU Alnus rubra T 30 FAC HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 25% Check all indicators that apply & Regional knowledge of plant communities Physiological or reproductive adaptations Technical literature explain below: X Wetland Plant List (Natl or regional) Morphological adaptations Wetland plant data base X OTHER . Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes No Rationale for Decision/Remarks: Dominant vegetation is invasive and / or is not considered hydropyhtic. HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season: Yes Based on: Evidence of new growth Water Marks: Yes No Sediment Deposits: Yes No Drift Lines: Yes No Drainage Patterns: Yes No Dept. of inundation: >12 inches Depth to free water in pit: >12 inches Depth to saturated soil: >12 inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. Yes No Local Soil Survey: Yes No FAC Neutral: Yes No Water- stained Leaves: Yes No Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, lake or gage data: Other: Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: There was no evidence of hydrology in this soil plot. SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Unmapped Drainage Class N/A Field observations confirm Taxonomy (subgroup) N/A mapped type? N/A 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 -12 A 10YR 3/2 none none Gravelly sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Check all that Epipedon Odor moisture regime conditions or low - chroma apply) Concretions content in surface layer of sandy soils in sandy soils Hydric Soils List Hydric Soils List in remarks) Histic High organic Sulfidic Organic streaking Aquic Listed on Local Reducing Listed on National Gleyed colors Other (explain Hydric soils present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: No indicators of hydric soil were present except the low chroma. Wetland Determination (circle) to No Is the sampling point within a wetland? Yes ' No lo_ Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Hydric soils present? 'Yes' Wetland hydrology present? Yes Rationale/Remarks: This data plot was missing vegetation and hydrology parameters. NOTES: DATA FORM 1 Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Coras Wetland Delineation Manual) Project Site: Living Care Senior Housing Applicant/Owner: Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC Investigator(s): Amy Dearborn, Nancy Job Date: 3 -14 -01 County: King State: Washington S/T/R: 16/23N/4E Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Is the area a potential problem area? No Community ID: UPLAND Transect ID: Plot ID: D -1 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Rubus lacianatus S 50 FACU+ Spirea douglasii S 80 FACW Pteridium aquilinum S 70 FACU Rubus discolor S 50 FACU Oemlaria cerasiforis S 20 FACU HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: • % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 20% Check all indicators that apply & Regional knowledge of plant communities Physiological or reproductive adaptations Technical literature explain below: X Wetland Plant List (Natl or regional) Morphological adaptations Wetland plant data base X OTHER . Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes No Rationale for Decision/Remarks: Dominant vegetation is not considered hydropyhtic. HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season: Yes Based on: Evidence of new growth Water Marks: Yes No Sediment Deposits: Yes No Drift Lines: Yes No Drainage Patterns: Yes No Dept. of inundation: >12 inches Depth to free water in pit: >12 inches Depth to saturated soil: >12 inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. Yes No Local Soil Survey: Yes No . FAC Neutral: Yes No Water stained Leaves: Yes No Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, lake or gage data: Other: . Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: There was no evidence of hydrology in this soil plot. DATA FORM 1 Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) Project Site: Living Care Senior Housing Applicant/Owner: Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC Investigator(s): Amy Dearborn, Nancy Job Date: 3 -14 -01 County: King State: Washington S/T/R: 16/23N/4E Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Is the area a potential problem area? No Community ID: UPLAND Transect ID: Plot ID: D -2 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Rubus discolor S 50 FACU Malus sp. T 50 - Cytisus scoparius S 70 NL HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: To of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 0% Check all indicators that apply & Regional knowledge of plant communities Physiological or reproductive adaptations Technical literature explain below: X Wetland Plant List (Natl or regional) Morphological adaptations Wetland plant data base X OTHER . Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes No Rationale for Decision/Remarks: - Dominant vegetation is not considered hydropyhtic. This plot was in old orchard area. Malus sp. is cultivated species. HYDROLOGY . • Is it the growing season: Yes Based on: Evidence of new growth Water Marks: Yes No Sediment Deposits: Yes No Drift Lines: Yes No Drainage Patterns: Yes No Dept. of inundation: >10 inches Depth to free water in pit: >10 inches Depth to saturated soil: >10 inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. Yes No Local Soil Survey: Yes No FAC Neutral: Yes No Water- stained Leaves: Yes No Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, lake or gage data: Other: - Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: There was no evidence of hydrology in this soil plot. SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Unmapped Drainage Class N/A Field observations confirm Taxonomy (subgroup) N/A mapped type? N/A 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 -10 A 10YR 3/3 none none sandy loam 10+ B 10YR 4/4 none none sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Check all that apply) Epipedon Odor • moisture regime conditions or low - chroma colors Concretions content in surface layer of sandy soils in sandy soils Hydric Soils List Hydric Soils List in remarks) Histic High organic Sulfidic Organic streaking Aquic Listed on Local Reducing Listed on National Gleyed Other (explain Hydric soils present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: No indicators of hydric soil were present. Wetland Determination (circle) INo o to Is the sampling point within a wetland? Yes No Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Hydric soils present? Yes Wetland hydrology present? Yes Rationale/Remarks: This data plot was missing all three wetland parameters. NOTES: DATA FORM 1 Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Coras Wetland Delineation Manual) Project Site: Living Care Senior Housing Applicant/Owner: Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC Investigator(s): Amy Dearborn, Nancy Job Date: 3 -14 -01 County: King State: Washington S/T/R: 16/23N/4E Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Is the area a potential problem area? No Community ID: UPLAND Transect ID: Plot ID: E -1 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent cover Indicator Juncus effusus H 5 FACW Rumex crispus H '10 FACW Circium sp. H 10 - Rubus discolor S 60 FACU Poa sp. H 50 FACU- FAC HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 0% - 50% Check all indicators that apply & Regional knowledge of plant communities Physiological or reproductive adaptations Technical literature explain below: X Wetland Plant List (Natl or regional) Morphological adaptations Wetland plant data base X OTHER . Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes No Rationale for Decision/Remarks: • Dominant vegetation is invasive and / or is not considered hydropyhtic. HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season: Yes Based on: Evidence of new growth Water Marks: Yes No Sediment Deposits: Yes No Drift Lines: Yes No Drainage Patterns: Yes No Dept. of inundation: >10 inches Depth to free water in pit: >10 inches Depth to saturated soil: >10 inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. Yes No Local Soil Survey: Yes No FAC Neutral: Yes No Water- stained Leaves: Yes No Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, lake or gage data: Other: Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: There was no evidence of hydrology in this soil plot. SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Unmapped Drainage Class N/A Field observations confirm Taxonomy (subgroup) N/A mapped type? N/A 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 -10 A 10YR 4/2 none none Gravelly sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Check all that apply) Epipedon Odor moisture regime conditions or low - chroma colors Concretions content in surface layer of sandy soils in sandy soils Hydric Soils List Hydric Soils List in remarks) Histic High organic Sulfidic Organic streaking Aquic Listed on Local Reducing Listed on National Gleyed Other (explain Hydric soils present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: No indicators of hydric soil were present except the low chroma. • Wetland Determination (circle) Is the sampling point within a wetland? Yes No Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Hydric soils present? Yes Wetland hydrology present? Yes M o° o Rationale/Remarks: This data plot was missing all three wetland parameters. NOTES: Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila S• Checklist • Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help the City of Tukwila's Responsible Official and any other agencies with jurisdiction to identify impacts from a proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the City of Renton decide whether an EIS is required. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Riverton Creek Lodge 2. Name of proponent: Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC 3. Address and phone number of proponent and contact person: Proponent: Contact Person: Richard J. Creamer, Vice President Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC 2819 Elliott Avenue, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98121 Michael Matheson, PE Triad Associates 11814 — 115th Avenue NE Kirkland, WA 98034 (425) 821 -8448 Phone (425) 821 -3481 Fax 4. Date checklist prepared: Originally Prepared: July 12, 2001 Revised: October 22, 2001, January 24, 2002, and January 25, 2002 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The proponent will begin construction upon receiving all necessary approvals and permits. It is anticipated that the proposed project will be constructed in one phase. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes please explain. There are no plans for any future expansions or additions at this time. 1 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila Ilk Checklist • 8. List any information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. • Level 1 Offsite Drainage Analysis • Geotechnical Analysis • Wetland Study 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by this proposal? No. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. • SEPA Threshold Determination, City of Tukwila • Clearing and Grading Permit, City of Tukwila • Demolition Permit, City of Tukwila • Building Permits, City of Tukwila • Right -Of -Way Use Permit, City of SeaTac • Sanitary Sewer Construction Approval, Val Vue Sewer District • Water System Construction Approval, Water District 125 • Hydraulic Permit Application, State Department of Fish and Wildlife 11. Give brief, complete description of the proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The proposed project consists of two buildings on a 10.42 -acre site; an independent and assisted living building and a special needs residence for individuals with Alzheimer's and similar disease. The buildings will include approximately 145 units. The project is a special combination of housing, supportive services, and personalized assistance, designed to respond to the individual needs of the those age 65 years and older who require some basic help with activities of daily living, or have special needs related to memory impairment or other related dementias. Units are furnished with their own personal effects, and are equipped with an emergency intercom system and fire /smoke detection system. The special needs residence for individuals with Alzheimer's and similar disease is a single -story building with central kitchen and dining. It includes approximately 25 bedrooms with private bathrooms, 395 to 495 square feet. Residents residing in the Special Needs Residence, have the added security of an enclosed courtyard monitored by specially trained staff members. 12. Location of the proposal. Provide a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if available. The project site is located on property controlled by Living Care Senior Housing Development and currently owned by Highline Community Hospital adjoining their Specialty Center located at 12844 Military Road South. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 2 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila 101 Checklist • 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slopes on the site is approximately sixty (60) percent c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, and muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Geotechnical investigation revealed about one (1) foot of topsoil underlain by glacial till. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. The geotechnical study indicated that the site is not at risk for deep- seated failures. The steep slopes are at risk for shallow surface failures, and the geotechnical engineer has recommended a 25 -foot setback for structures. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Grading of the site will be necessary to clear an existing asphalt driveway and cul -de -sac and prepare the site for construction and utility improvements. The amount of material involved for grading and filling activities (excluding stripping) includes approximately 15,053 cubic yards of cut and 12,190 cubic yards of fill. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. g. Some erosion could occur on -site as a result of construction activities; however, temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures to be approved by the City of Tukwila will be employed to reduce erosion impacts. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately twenty (22) percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after construction. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: During construction, the contractor will follow an approved temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan meeting City of Tukwila standards. Typical measures, which may be employed, include the use of silt fences, straw bales, and temporary erosion control traps. Hydroseeding, mulching and covering exposed soils during and after construction will also reduce the potential for erosion. 3 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila S Checklist 2. Air • a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, and industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Emissions and dust particulates generated primarily by construction equipment will be produced during the construction phase of this project. The amount of emissions to the air will be minimal and will occur during the actual grading and construction of the assisted care structures. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Watering of the site during the construction phase would help reduce production of airborne dust and other particulates. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, and wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There are three Class 1 wetlands onsite that are tributary to Riverton Creek. 2) Will the project require any work over, in or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The project will require clearing, grading, construction of buildings, utilities and roadways within 200 feet of the onsite wetlands. As seen on the Preliminary Utility Plan of the accompanying plan set, an eight -inch sanitary sewer line will be installed within a Class 1 wetland buffer. Disturbed area will be replanted with City- approved plant material, which will serve as mitigation for this disturbance. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No filling or dredging of surface water or wetlands is anticipated. 4 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila *Checklist • 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The completed project will not result in groundwater withdrawals or discharges to ground water. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The source of runoff is direct precipitation onto the project site. Stormwater will be collected by catch basins and tightlined to an underground detention vault and discharged to a roadside ditch on the west side of 32nd Avenue South. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Any construction waste or contaminated soils from accidental spills during construction would be contained and removed from the site to an approved disposal location. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: A stormwater detention vault constructed to meet the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual standards is proposed, meeting "Level 2" detention. A "stormceptor" or approved equal is proposed as water quality mitigation. 5 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila A Checklist 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, hemlock, pine, other shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? • ■ Construction of the assisted care structures, utilities, and access will result in the removal of some vegetation and trees. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The site will be landscaped to meet the code requirements of the City of Tukwila. The existing vegetation in the wetland and wetland buffers will also be retained. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: rabbits, raccoons, rodents fish: bass, perch, salmon, cut throat trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. 6 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila Mk Checklist • Electrical energy will be the primary source of power serving the needs of the project and natural gas will be made available for the purpose of heating and other needs associated with assisted living facilities. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The new assisted living care facilities will meet or exceed the applicable residential and commercial energy conservation /consumption requirements in the City of Tukwila and the Uniform Building Code. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None known. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area, which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? The predominant source of noise in the area is from vehicles traveling on Military Road South, located just west of the property. The traffic noise is not project related or generated. Aircraft noise is detectable from the Sea - Tac Airport. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short-term impacts would result from the use of construction equipment during site development. Construction would occur primarily during the daylight hours and in compliance with the City of Tukwila Noise Standards. Heavy equipment, hand tools, and the transporting of construction equipment generate construction noise. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction activity will be limited to permitted construction hours and construction equipment will not be allowed to idle for continuous periods 7 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SO Checklist • of time, which will help to mitigate the impacts of potential construction noise. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently occupied by one single - family residence. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. There is one single - family residential unit and an attached garage on site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Construction of driveways, utilities and the assisted living facilities will result in the demolition of the existing single - family home. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site is zoned Low Density Residential (LDR) and Medium Density Residential (MDR). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? g. According to the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Map, the area is designated as low and medium density residential. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N /A. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes. There are three Class 1 wetlands located on the site, which are considered to be critical areas. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 160 people within the entire project. The will provide 24 -hour care, managed in three shifts. The day shift (7AM — 3PM) will have approximately 19 employees, the evening shift (3PM —11 PM) will have approximately 13 employees and the graveyard shift (11PM — 7AM) approximately 7 employees. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. 8 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila Checklist • I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The project will be developed in accordance with applicable City of Tukwila development and land use codes to ensure the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and applicable Development Regulations in effect at the time of a complete application. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. Approximately 145 units. It is anticipated that the housing will be middle and low- income housing. b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. One single - family residential unit and garage will be demolished as part of the proposed action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The tallest height of any proposed building is 30 -feet. The principal exterior building material proposed is vinyl. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The proposed project will be designed to limit visibility from the second and third story to neighboring LDR properties. Landscape plans will include screening to obstruct the second and third story units from being visible to neighboring residential properties. 11 Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Any light and glare from the proposed structure will be screened by landscaping or angled to reduce potential impacts. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not under normal circumstances. FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila Checklist • c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control Tight and glare impacts, if any: None. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Common open space and courtyards are proposed for the residents of the proposed project. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The project would not displace any existing recreational uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: The project would not displace any existing recreational uses. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None known. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. To the best of our knowledge, there are no landmarks or evidence of any significant historic, archaeological, scientific or cultural resources known to be on or next to the site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The proposed assisted living and special needs facilities will ingress and egress from Military Road South via a pan handle. 10 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SChecklist b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Metro bus service is available along Military Road South. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The completed project would have approximately 90 parking stalls. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes, the proposed project will require construction of new, 24' paved access roadway, which will be private. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Based on a typical assisted living facility of this size and operation, approximately 1.73 weekday average trips per unit. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The proponent will build frontage improvements to Military Road South as prescribed by the City of SeaTac. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The completed project may result in a very slight increased need for police and fire protection as well as emergency medical service. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 11 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Riverton Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SO Checklist 16. Utilities a. Indicate utilities currently available at the site: • Electricity, Natural Gas, Water, Telephone, Sanitary Sewer, Septic System, Refuse Service, Other. All utilities will be extended to the project. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Sanitary Sewer: Val Vue Sewer District Water: Water District 125 Electricity: Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas: Puget Sound Energy Telephone: U.S. West Communications Cable TV: ATT Broadband Refuse Service: City of Tukwila C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its d- cision. Signature: Date Prepared: Date Revised: George Newman, AICP Planning Director I -ZS- 02 July 12, 2001 October 22, 2001, January 24, 2002, January 25, 2002 12 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY • Living Care Senior Housing Development LLC July 23, 2001 • NLJ1CF. UE JUL 2.3 2001 COMUMITY DEVELOPMENT LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila WA 98188 Re: SEPA Environmental Review Riverton Creek Lodge — Retirement and Assisted Living Community Enclosed please find: Application Checklist Item # Item Description 2819 Elliott Avenue Suite zoo Seattle WA 98121 Tel: 206.441.1770 Fax: 206.441.1977 1. Application Checklist 2. Four (4) copies of wetland studies 3. Complete Application Packet a. Six (6) copies of application form b. Six (6) copies of full sized plans, six (6) sets of reduced plans 4. SEPA Environmental Checklist — Six (6) copies 4. SEPA Environmental Review Fee — $325 5. One (1) King County Assessor's map 6. Two (2) sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants within -$00 feet 7. Vicinity Map with site location 8. Surrounding Land Use Map (Deferred Submittal) 9. 10. Title Report Lot lines for 300 ft. from the sites' property lines including right -of -ways (Deferred Submittal) Very truly, LWJ G CARE SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, LLC 0A,otit o( T» Richard J. Creamer Vice President Development • JUL 23 2001 CORIMAUM '5 SEPA CITY OF TUKWILA DEVELOPTEMT Department of Community Development ENVIRONMENTAL 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan n ci.tukwila.wa.us REVIEW APPLICATION NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: ■VW -I4er1 Gat- IL - R1✓tirene it Annoy Assisted C.iJivl� C vnin LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. l 3 l l2 coact 50A 1 102304 - aoo 1 riot tk,23(4 -9 rig Quarter: Se Section: 1(0 Township:2-3P/ Range: 4E (This information may be found on your tax statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: cgivav it C,rtavneic C/O Liv4,5 Care S(,Y1iO( I4wski beAtefortymebt Address: 2-SA E tt i o * Avev1kc Zoo 514441f_ wok q8 (21 Phone: (2oL) 44t- - 111 FAX: (90) 44 i - q1 Signatur t0 & G:\ APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 Date: /0(0 FOR STAFF USE ONLY SIERRA TYPE P-SEPA Planner: iki I File Number:129/ 00 Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: /.....01 _062 _c1LA NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: ■VW -I4er1 Gat- IL - R1✓tirene it Annoy Assisted C.iJivl� C vnin LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. l 3 l l2 coact 50A 1 102304 - aoo 1 riot tk,23(4 -9 rig Quarter: Se Section: 1(0 Township:2-3P/ Range: 4E (This information may be found on your tax statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: cgivav it C,rtavneic C/O Liv4,5 Care S(,Y1iO( I4wski beAtefortymebt Address: 2-SA E tt i o * Avev1kc Zoo 514441f_ wok q8 (21 Phone: (2oL) 44t- - 111 FAX: (90) 44 i - q1 Signatur t0 & G:\ APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 Date: /0(0 River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SEP, .;hecklist FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help the City of Tukwila's Responsible Official and any other agencies with jurisdiction to identify impacts from a proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the City of Renton decide whether an EIS is required. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Riverton Creek Lodge 2. Name of proponent: Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC 3. Address and phone number of proponent and contact person: Proponent: Contact Person: Richard J. Creamer, Vice President Living Care Senior Housing Development, LLC 2819 Elliott Avenue, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98121 Michael Matheson, PE Triad Associates 11814 — 115t'' Avenue NE Kirkland, WA 98034 (425) 821 -8448 Phone (425) 821 -3481 Fax 4. Date checklist prepared: July 12, 2001 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The proponent will begin construction upon receiving all necessary approvals and permits. It is anticipated that the proposed project will be constructed in one phase. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes please explain. There are no plans for any future expansions or additions at this time. River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SEP , checklist FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 8. List any information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. • Level 1 Offsite Drainage Analysis • Geotechnical Analysis • Wetland Study 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by this proposal? No. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. • SEPA Threshold Determination, City of Tukwila • Clearing and Grading Permit, City of Tukwila • Demolition Permit, City of Tukwila • Building Permits, City of Tukwila • Right -Of -Way Use Permit, City of SeaTac • Sanitary Sewer Construction Approval, Rainier Vista • Water System Construction Approval, Water District 125 11. Give brief, complete description of the proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The proposed project consists of two buildings, an independent and assisted living building with 121 apartment units, and a special needs residence for individuals with Alzheimer's and similar disease, which will include 26 bedrooms. The project is a special combination of housing, supportive services, and personalized assistance, designed to respond to the individual needs of the those age 65 years and older who require some basic help with activities of daily living, or have special needs related to memory impairment or other related dementias. Units are furnished with their own personal effects, and are equipped with an emergency intercom system and fire /smoke detection system. The special needs residence for individuals with Alzheimer's and similar disease is a single -story building with central kitchen and dining. It includes 26 bedrooms with private bathrooms, 395 to 495 square feet. Residents residing in the Special Needs Residence, have the added security of an enclosed courtyard monitored by specially trained staff members. 12. Location of the proposal. Provide a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if available. The project site is located on property controlled by Living Care Senior Housing Development and currently owned by Highline Community Hospital adjoining their Specialty Center located at 12844 Military Road South. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth 2 River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SE hecklist • a. General description of the site (circle one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slopes on the site is approximately sixty (60) percent c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, day, sand, gravel, peat, and muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Geotechnical investigation revealed about one (1) foot of topsoil underlain by glacial till. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. The geotechnical study indicated that the site is not at risk for deep- seated failures. The steep slopes are at risk for shallow surface failures, and the geotechnical engineer has recommended a 25 -foot setback for structures. e. Describe the purpose,, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Grading of the site will be necessary to clear an existing asphalt driveway and cul -de -sac and prepare the site for construction and utility improvements. The amount of material involved for grading and filling activities includes approximately 24,000 cubic yards of cut and 9,000 cubic yards of fill. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. 9. Some erosion could occur on -site as a result of construction activities; however, temporary erosion and sedimentation control measures to be approved by the City of Tukwila will be employed to reduce erosion impacts. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately twenty (22) percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after construction. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: During construction, the contractor will follow an approved temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan meeting City of Tukwila standards. Typical measures, which may be employed, include the use of silt fences, straw bales, and temporary erosion control traps. Hydroseeding, mulching and covering exposed soils during and after construction will also reduce the potential for erosion. 3 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SEP hecklist 2. Air • a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, and industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Emissions and dust particulates generated primarily by construction equipment will be produced during the construction phase of this project. The amount of emissions to the air will be minimal and will occur during the actual grading and construction of the assisted care structures. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Watering of the site during the construction phase would help reduce production of airborne dust and other particulates. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, and wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There are three Class 1 wetlands onsite that tributary to Riverton Creek. 2) Will the project require any work over, in or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The project will require clearing, grading, construction of buildings, utilities and roadways within 200 feet of the onsite wetlands. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No filling or dredging of surface water or wetlands is anticipated. 4 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SE hecklist • 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The completed project will not result in groundwater withdrawals or discharges to ground water. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The source of runoff is direct precipitation onto the project site. Stormwater will be collected by catch basins and tightlined to an underground detention /water quality vault and discharged to wetland C (the most easterly wetland). This wetland is the tributary to Riverton Creek. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Any construction waste or contaminated soils from accidental spills during construction would be contained and removed from the site to an approved disposal location. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: 4. Plants A stormwater detention /water quality vault constructed to meet the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual standards is proposed, meeting "Level 2" detention and "Basic" water quality requirements. 5 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SEP hecklist FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, hemlock, pine, other shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Construction of the assisted care structures, utilities, and access will result in the removal of some vegetation and trees. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The site will be landscaped to meet the code requirements of the City of Tukwila. The existing vegetation in the wetland and wetland buffers will also be retained. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: rabbits, raccoons, rodents fish: bass, perch, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electrical energy will be the primary source of power serving the needs of the project and natural gas will be made available for the purpose of heating and other needs associated with assisted living facilities. 6 River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SEF- Checklist i b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The new assisted living care facilities will meet or exceed the applicable residential and commercial energy conservation /consumption requirements in the City of Tukwila and the Uniform Building Code. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None known. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area, which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? The predominant source of noise in the area is from vehicles traveling on Military Road South, located just west of the property. The traffic noise is not project related or generated. Aircraft noise is detectable from the Sea -Tac Airport. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short-term impacts would result from the use of construction equipment during site development. Construction would occur primarily during the daylight hours and in compliance with the City of Tukwila Noise Standards. Heavy equipment, hand tools, and the transporting of construction equipment generate construction noise. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction activity will be limited to permitted construction hours and construction equipment will not be allowed to idle for continuous periods of time, which will help to mitigate the impacts of potential construction noise. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? 7 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SE hecklist • The site is currently occupied by one single - family residence. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. There is one single - family residential unit and an attached garage on site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Construction of driveways, utilities and the assisted living facilities will result in the demolition of the existing single - family home. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site is zoned Low Density Residential (LDR) and Medium Density Residential (MDR). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? g. According to the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Map, the area is designated as low and medium density residential. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes. There are three Class 1 wetlands located on the site, which are considered to be critical areas. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 121 people within the assisted living units and 26 people in special need facility. The will provide 24 -hour care, managed in three shifts. The day shift (7AM — 3PM) will have approximately 19 employees, the evening shift (3PM — 11PM) will have approximately 13 employees and the graveyard shift (11PM — 7AM) approximately 7 employees. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The project will be developed in accordance with applicable City of Tukwila development and land use codes to ensure the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and applicable Development Regulations in effect at the time of a complete application. 8 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SE'hecklist FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. 121 assisted living units and 26 special needs units. b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. One single - family residential unit and garage will be demolished as part of the proposed action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The tallest height of any proposed building is 30 -feet. The principal exterior building material proposed is vinyl. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The proposed project will be designed to limit visibility from the second and third story to neighboring LDR properties. Landscape plans will include screening to obstruct the second and third story units from being visible to neighboring residential properties. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Any light and glare from the proposed structure will be screened by landscaping or angled to reduce potential impacts. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not under normal circumstances. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None. 12. Recreation 9 River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SE hecklist • a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Common open space and courtyards are proposed for the residents of the proposed project. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The project would not displace any existing recreational uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: The project would not displace any existing recreational uses. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None known. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. To the best of our knowledge, there are no landmarks or evidence of any significant historic, archaeological, scientific or cultural resources known to be on or next to the site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The proposed assisted living and special needs facilities will ingress and egress from Military Road South via a pan handle. 10 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SE hecklist FOR AGENCY USE ONLY b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Metro bus service is available along Military Road South. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The completed project would have approximately 90 parking stalls. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes, the proposed project will require construction of new, 24' paved access roadway, which will be private. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Based on a typical assisted living facility of this size and operation, approximately 1.73 weekday average trips per unit. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The proponent will either build a left turn pocket as part of the City of Sea Tac improvements along Military Road South, or contribute it's fare share of the cost in lieu of constructing the turn pocket. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The completed project may result in a very slight increased need for police and fire protection as well as emergency medical service. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 11 River Creek Lodge - City of Tukwila SE hecklist 16. Utilities a. Indicate utilities currently available at the site: • Electricity, Natural Gas, Water, Telephone, Sanitary Sewer, Septic System, Refuse Service, Other. All utilities will be extended to the project. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Sanitary Sewer: Rainier Vista Water & Sewer District 125 Water: Rainier Vista Water & Sewer District 125 Electricity: Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas: Puget Sound Energy Telephone: U.S. West Communications Cable TV: ATT Broadband Refuse Service: City of Tukwila C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true .nd t omplete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relyin. on e ; to make its decision. Signature: ,a Si _ R g jir�►n►i�r.- Date Prepared: A bert Torrico Planner July 12, 2001 12 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY • tt: POR. NE 1/4, SEC. 16, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 4 E., W.M. RIVERTON CREEK LODGE LEGEND PliVPOSCO 094075, 045,0 tor Lot "II-f•-•Ar n.sdrxr 1:..amcoRsr.rtrAor LAY 006) N." "MUM 1;• 31109330 =OWN 0=02 Mar" air 20•13 7.1-11 amfl = AM, 303=032030 00331•VC PAU • 003 WM 311? I • a.m. ma, rmr • • =RA =VS= • MAO CAW EJt h Chil.15il5 5 ).-FM/517) 07510 7.4! !171';.? ":1:3:1;1,f2J CVSIINC ((8 0003 -- (WSW* 'row Elus • - WS" a" VOL. "froa mu NM", • 136" 3/0.03 ClLaSI VAl4 [arms am co =SIM nor mot LI Ma. um.. 4.K nrr "eV C•rag 8•5•3 71., • MI" PONY 10.1- Vele AV VA WO, A Wee,,,,,,e21 ee, r 4.9 4,70, ;•••-, , • • .2 ;••■ _/ • n r (.' . v I • , 1. - .• •-•\• 39 BCD SPf0. • NEEDS Olvf 5709r. PA VCI) . COOP ARO n 3.30t Im 030f. In .0..1 • 51 5T+u 0.0409 • , • , . 1 t • ; •: 1.1-! 1 ••••• • \_...;t • efArtxr " • rat'S:am• k !:!:‘ • +NO.;(40(0 • 'IL. La_rul • 4095510 U ONG COMMVIVIT .... ...... • • ............. . , . 1 L 23 2031 -77 '• • (0045 • 4.480 (-7.• t',..N p;,.■,). \ *, V-•.'.,, .':. ..,.. - . .•-•z...„/ • , • INDEX 001 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN CL2 PRELIMINARY UTILITY Y PLAN C2? CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLAN C2.2 PRELIMINARY TREE RETENTION PLAN 01.92 BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT I OP 1 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY C,102.(28 10087703 Of Ek7577,9C UPUTICS SRO. 15 APPRO.104 Tr AND 90785 4CCUR,4 CR 411 .ctuswr IT 5 THE CO,TRACTOR 5 RESPONSiglITT 70 rift(' ■27,1fr LOCATTO, Of 0005(5 P07074 TO 800(9f0095 CONSTRuCnOlv NOTE MU mu57 (Alt (-800-424-5555 NOT I.955 P945 AS *0u05 eff095 0(03305 (4(41* 50* wHERE 4/49 U.DE,C.R0000 ofkinES r BE LOCArED faLLRE 70 00 50 COULD MEAN BEARING 2)85749949 Rf PAIR 90555 al,' TO 0,0(5 2.4'5 NC COST Of 0f08105 70 7145 5E8800 02.0 MVO ••00323 MAD ASSOCIATES 4.311,401. 011 wn 3103.3,133133-R0 1•333.0 333 I•00013 tA INN MAN pa PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN RI VER TON CREEK LODGE WASHINGTON CITY OF TUKWILA, g 4.1.1•Q(kIcKC<KKY1 A ode 7/12/07 sten. 1.•7•4/A 743/0 flsO 110T 51195 caLas Sten ua 01-055 1 02"m"C1.1.4 1 ....... • POR. NE 1/4, SEC. 16, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 4 E., W M. • • • ! „ .. • • • .• '••• ! • . ,/ 1 So; az;.21., '• 174-7446.. .:• A , • ! LOT 2 LANDSCAPED C0,1577ARO • • !".0 ;• a I "CouRr 52 STALL GAWAGE.. !.! ro0.9.5 OD'ir '! LIJ "2:' 2001 SCALE: »» 50• 0 ZS 04 100 cALITION 20047700 00 EOSONC 071L/TIES 9401171 IS APPROXIMATE AND MAT NO, BE ACCURATE OR ALL INCLUSIVE. IF /5 THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSBILay 70 FIELD VERIFY LOCAnoN OF UOLITIES PRIOR 70 paocrromc 77I77 coNsmucno” NOTE, YOU MUST CALL 1-800-424-5555 NL.7 LESS IHAN 47 HOURS BEFORE BEPNIVINS EYCAVATION WHERE ANY UNDERGROUND ununEs 444780 LOCATED. FAxURE 70 00 SO COULD MEAN BEARING SUBSTANTIAL REPAIR COSTS. (UP 70 TWEE 7747ES DIE 0057 OF REPAIRS 70 NE 5(R800). 0100 7744/ xssocunt TRIAD ASSOCIATES 010 0 1012elZ1.1■10.1-010 011/0 000 en PRELIM /NARY UTILITY PLAN RIVER TON CREEK LODGE WASHINGTON CITY OF TUKWILA, <KK<K1(1441,1•1,11 grurYZar ern7r4i4 0000 =KM &SW Dar 7/11/c, VAL rai 1,so. 107,n 54117 MOT 41B MEE MID 4.0 DMZ 01-055 `""00""C1.2074 Eldsttng Vegetatlan to renlzm Limit of Clearing • lWetland ( Wetland ) 1• // Non Irrigated Meadow type seed Perimeter Buffer w Co .and ...am Vero and nroracooe, — Evergreen Hedge ,n. r.n rir -a., Jam, kr:U*4r. ��.A1N�my,myEp �ELq�g.RI�, i IFOES[r4i.�IPL•f3�1E�96i .F ��,��'• L;.�' a••=G� ~vreAi��/lB dot �: Median Planting G•rPeR.w yerukoAr Annual Planting PRELIMINARY PLANT LIST \\_Dcciduous Street trees. typ Evergreen Hedge NayPrm,..- — Foundation shrub planting around buildings 0 STREET TREES INSTALL • r cAL TIT. ACER RESIEJ1100 MAPLE FRANNIE PENISTLVAMD4ASN O LARGE DECIDUOUS SHADE TREES W ALL •P CAL trr. ACM Clef aruNED MORE OEKA JACaE ninuJ.caEtwarn MIRO. CARPS. PETULIASIE.DPEAN NOReFNN CE CIDIMTLLIPI JAPL•NCPLXATELRA TRPE FAO. STLVATICAMAL EAN DEECN RRAXN» PCFEtTLVANICAERED. AEN C Elm1S PALI/IRS/PH OAR 0ER018 IR6R41® OAR DECIDUOUS ACCENT TREES WALL • ]• CAL MR. ACM CIRCNATUVVNE MAPLE ACER anen.rAPEREA RC MAPLE ACER PALMAnIVJAPAKSE MAPLE CORNS CCU./ KVSADC 000 N4WELm % MERIRDI4 IMMO 0.10N HAZEL MAGNOLIA SRLLATAASTAR PIAr RXA 010l. x SOLOOIANAm UCER MAGOOL. OXTDf,DR.1 ARDOR¢Ih20LaDPD PRAIA .PPLOSERNO OERRT SRYNRTNA OVATAMOLMAN SIDUARTIA SI T.% ODASSWMAaYNT ENDIeELL sx CONIFEROUS TREES INOrALL • S' NT. Tr, CALOCEgdb DECOR ENMNCENSE CEDAR CEDRIE DEODARACECOAR CEDAR CNAMAECTPARN cenmICT,SLE /PLC NGM4AUSTRAN 4ACX PIC TN■A PLICATAAESTERi RED CEDAR VINES I . 1 GeLLEN ACTNDIA KLLOIRTA CLEMATIS OPP. LCNICERA JAPDXCNJAPAN@RE NAIETSLOGLE ROSA ST. MOLPEKa SORTS, WSTERA RORCJOAANSTERIA GROUNDCOVER METALL •• POTS • u• Pc A 02LA J PERO.IAL COLOR ARCTOSTAnmLOS WA -WLIC. .KEN% CALLOW VLLAARSSCA11CR GALLTNCR. AROC!ffi S NTEROPEE N CLAILDRRA bYLLPVSALAL AI CNA N ERVae4LGNaLEAP n4DNu POCTETICA 1 r1NTW ERD FEW LAU.N SHRUB PLANTING M -20• NT. MN 1021 TALLER ..41:1e0 I a 2 GALLON P021 LOD 6RtR6 SNR05 AI®WTb vEDOATRAUpERRT DUY CN'ELA PAPA ._•_•a•._J• CAMEL. DAPNE OOORA'AREO- MAPOPAT•'ALWER OAPNNE ENCIANT0D CAITANLATWbRMIANTND MON/MAS ALATAJOUROO DUSK ELO+TLe JAPONICA/VARIEGATED EUOn1LS MAGELLAMD4HARDT NICJNNA NIORAWJEA MAOROPNT- LA/OGLEA• NTORANEA ILEY TA IELIERI'/ JAPANCS MOLLY LAVANDRLA A741ETF0.1AIN IEN LAVENDER LC NICERA NTDAIDOX NPETRGCKLE NNONA DOPEETICA EAV4LT BAMBOO OEI9MTNE DELAVATLIORMAIONE PIER. JAPONICMM1T OF 1,E VALLEY e.Rale PNR Mrn'SOO...RE MEN PeE RMODOOENJRON RASA OPP. NDO>ERANA Nnvxw GAR- 2 #C A Scm NIA JAPONICA OPERA. rNICeRNvnuure D !PIRA. pR1E1 PLICATLM TRENTOEUM/DOLLERLE NELIP.PI NIELESE I CARLENIX0100N SPICE NEL.. �I v EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN NON IRRIGATED MEADOW SEED NOTE m EXCEPT FOR NCH IRRIGATED rEADCW SHALL De IRRIGATED OIN AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATICH STOICS TNC TREE0 ▪ THE NON IRRIGATED MEADOW WALL OE LPL WATER LSE PLANTS, drt SNALL DE IRRIGATED rpygtARILT DURSO PLANT EETADLINM N1 • JL 2 3 2001 SCALE: 1" - 50' o NR� INAS 8210.2: TRIAD ASSOCIATES ;111114 IMP INAPL,12,7:= NI N. lemEEN avow. ma CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLAN RIVERTON CREEK LODGE CITY OF TUKWILA, <1•14,1**(1•14,1,11.1 1RGQ F' 1,1, &V solo UTE 2/20>2> tut mI-Er ma STALETON 0112Sru :/"/j��PK'rnec1c1 CCRIRKA C 0. 52S SOT 11E1 rum uR22 CAD LD EL11D 01 -055 "a"Lmt2.1T 4 20% and greater slopes, typ Proposed limit of Clearing 20% and greater p 20% and greater ItYPIT7P-- 4.* 01. 440 4 4 • 4 e r4V00:4*. Welland• ■ .• • P • ■ ■ • •■• I 11 SCALE: I" .50' TREE RETENTION CALCULATIONS(BASED ON CITY OF TUKV4LA COOE 18.54.1408) TOTAL SITE AREA uffsnuuu TnSr C,m0P/ REQUIRED Ee5IINC FREE CI■NOPr PROPOSED TO BE SAVED EkT.'.71NC. TREF CANOP, 485554 SF/11.14 AC 97,110 SF/223 AC (20X OF THE sat AR(A) :49,843 5F/5.74 AC (57.5 x OF THE SITE AREA) ,IUL 23 2001 0.1 TRAO ASS,...41S TRIAD ASSOCIATES .1.1.11,t I. W. 112rnal.,:::1:4;110 1.11.111.11111% lel.wk PRELIMINARY TREE RETENTION PLAN RI VER TON CREEK LODGE 0 CITY OF TUKWILA, k<KKKKKK5KKKK1 praT.; 747ra' EMILNila =Mgt AlICOSIT 02/17/ MAIL elm ,so' MOP MN T. OSISS 50.19 13171.1 0401010 01-055 4 4 OTY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO DECLARATION KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT WL THE . UNDERSIGNED, OWNERS) OF 111E LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED 00 HEREBY MAKE A BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT THEREOF PURSUANT TO RCW 58.47.040. THE UNDERSIGNED FURTHER DECLARE THIS BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT 10 BE THE GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION OF SAID BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT, AND THE SAME IS MADE WITH THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIRE OF THE OWNER(S), IN WITNESS WHEREOF WE HAVE SET OUR HANDS AND SEALS. NAME: (TITLE) STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING) CITY OF TUKWILA S5 ON THIS DAY PERSONALLY APPEARED BEFORE ME TO ME KNOWN TO BE THE INDIVIDUAL 04.10 EXECUTED THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED THAT HE /SHE SIGNED THE SAME AS HIS/HER VOLUNTARY ACT AND DEED FOR THE USES AND PURPOSES MENTIONED THEREIN. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS DAY OF SIGNATURE: NAME AS COMMISSIONED: TITLE: MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES CITY OF TUKWIAL APPROVAL REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE SHORT SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE AND HEREBY CERTIFIED FOR FILING TH15 DAY OF , 2001. CHAIR, SHORT SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE PAGE I OF 2 APPROVAL DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES APPROVED THIS --_ DAY OF 20__. SENIOR ENGINEER, PLA11180 VNIT, LAND USE 5ERNCES DIVISION KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS EXAMINIED & APPROVED THIS ___ DAY OF 20_ RING COUNTY ASSESSOR DEPUTY KRI5 COUNTY ASSESSOR 051111NG I FF,AI DESCRIPTIONS f1R51 4,1EMCAN 1444E INSURANCE ORDER 50. 503669 -12, DATED 4401 1. 2001 4,7 7:30 Ake.. PMC2l A LOT 10< 0mC Cwnn SNORT PLAT 50, 1077144. ACCCRONC 10 521041 PLAT RECORDED *608 43. ■975 UNDER 0(000050 NO 7803130560 5 6160 CW511, *054,114078. PARCEL B THAI PORTION Of 147E NOR1EAS1 WARIER 0 7140 5CR1HEA51 WARIER OF SECTION 16, T0M4SH1P 23 NORM, RA-no 4 EAST, W. „ 6450 COUNTY, *052115018, 0(5CRiBED AS FOLLOWS. COLn(50440 01 144E m1ERYCnON or 147E 5WM 145E or 5440 Su8DI4151a W414, 117E EASTERLY 446005 OF *1111601 ROAD. AS CSTABUSNC0 B1 CONDCuN0nON PROCEEDI505 15 6150 CWN Ii SUPERIOR CWRI CAUSE N0. 239736: HENCE EASTERLY ALONE Su0 50)1HCRL1 115E 10 A P051 564 FEET EAST Cr THE SWTHWE51 C0944(R Cr SAM SUB0n5ON: 1HEnCE NORN(RL1 ALONG A LINE A 01041 ANGLES TO 5440 5W10 L4n0 64 FEET: THENCE 6E57 01000 A 1174E PARALLEL 4441H THE 50T 77, LINE Of 5040 508041518 10 A 2051 ON THE EASTERLY *6005 OF SAID 91111601 ROAD: THENCE SOUTHERLY ALO+C SAI0 EASTERLY 44.044 t0 ME 2051 1< BEONn1N0. 50W I FOAL ESFSE'RIPTIONF,: KW Lot 4: ALL THAT PORT TN 0 2600(1 4 0 5450 CWN11 52007 PLAT NO 10774•4, ACCORO50 10 544011 RAT RECORDED ■0004 13. 1975 Un00R RECORDING nWABER 7503130560, m 0150 COU610. *A52115010,1 AND THAT PORTION OF THE 5OR0EA51 WMTER a 4440 NORTNEAS1 WARIER Cr 5ECn04 16, 10Wn5N1P 23 NORTH, 5,740E 4 EAST, W*, 0150 CW514, *054115018*, DE50R1BE0 AS FOLLETT.: BEONNIN0 Al 101E 151ER5(117DN 00 THE SOUTH UNE 0 SAID 50904`45100 84TH 144E EA51 7114 LINE OF 441111601 ROAD. AS ESTABLISHED 81 (0•0(0507705 PROC(E0505 In 0150 CW541 SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE 50. 239736: THENCE SWIM 69'46'00' EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH UNE, A DISTANCE Of 976.94 FEET 10 101 WEST UNE Of 100 EAST 30.00 20(1 0 52D NOR15(55T W601ER Of ME 500100051 0)60100: THENCE HORN 04'32'40' EAST ALONG SAID WEST LINE . A DISTANCE Of 64187 FEET: THENCE 50010 69'46'00' 6(61 P40LEL Mtn 144E 5WN L1nE OF 5440 S*B0N540n, A 0S1ANCE Of 740.21 01E1: THENCE 58410 01'42'39• 8051. A DISTANCE Of 247.78 IEE1 TO 100 NOR10EA54 CORNER OF KCSP 140. 670102. AS 8E1000E0 UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 7903290829. RECORDS OF 415C C0n11. WA551n010n; TH(NCt 50)10 24'19'59' EAST AL8*C NE EAST L45) OF SATO 504071 PLAT. A 0151ANCI 14 9563 (EEL THENCE CaTIN0INC AL040 5440 EAST LINE, SCUT. 01'42'39' *E51, 0 05144400 Or 24311 ((El TO A PONT ON THE NORTH L1NE 0 NE SOU. 64.00 FEET 0 SAT0 NORTHEAST 04471(8 0' 100 N0RIHFASI 00601(8 0' 5240 SECE400 16, THENCE 5095 89'46'00' 8(54 ALONG SAND NORTH LINE, A 0510501 Of 292.85 FEET 10 THE EASTERLY 446005 Q *4141000 ROAD: THENCE 50)10 40'40'24' EAST ALONG SA10 EASTERLY 44ARON A 051AI7CE 0 6518 fEE1 10 144E 2051 0 80055150 COn1uN150 11.0 ACRES Of 14440. *ORE OR LESS. NEN LOT 24 LOT 4 0 0450 10)511 SHORT PLAT N0. ■017444, ACC00050 10 SHORT PLAT RECORDED 4ORCN 13. 4916 u5OER REC0D.0 NUMBER 7803130560, in 0440 CWnll, *ASN15C18. (2CE21 THAT PORTa LY150 SON Cif THE 00.104900 015CR40(D UNE: BCO554NC Al THE INTERSECTION 0 THE 50U7H 115E Cf SAID 540041108* 8410 100 EASTERLY 444E Of 441L11NR1 ROAD. AS ESTABLISHED BY C050E445A50.4 PROCCCO503 444 41740 0004411 SUPERIOR 10,18I CAUSE N0. 239736; MEnft 5OU10 09'46'00' EAST ALOH6 5.40 584141 LINE. A 051000E Of 4006.94 FEE1 TO THE 5WM(ASI CORNER SAID 54010EASI WARIER OF THE 50RM005T WARIER; 10(NOE 50TH 04)'40' EAST 0L8C THE EAST Lm( THEREOF. A OSIANCE OF 644.87 FEET TO THE TRUE PONY Of BEO46440; THENCE 110910 69.46'00' WEST PARALLEL 49144 10E SOWN 1174E OF SAD 548041518, A OSIANCE 00 770.21 01E1; 10E5CE SW10 04'42'39' 0E57, A DISTANCE Of 247.76 FEE7 10 THE 50010(051 CORNER Of 0052 N0, 676102, AS REC0R000 0140(0 REC00050 NUMBER 7903290829, RECORDS 0 0450 (04510, WASH4NC1a AND THE 1004445445 Of 1415 LINE. Ca144N040 15.1 ACRES Of 1.10. 4400E OR LESS. 71 t JUL 2001 =o N 0 O CO w 0 J w w cc U RIVERTON KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON Y 0 '1 • FOUND CONCRETE 00.I0YEN1 6• CASE 174111 TACK 40 L AB SET 1.1' BELOW RIM, 9 9 •419••••••( KC AS 60959'12 STAMPED: 17116 - 3/9/01 17 Y FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT IN CASE MTw 3. 1,41255 CAP MTN PU601 SET 1.8' BELOW RI STAMPED 17116 3/9/01 FOUND CONCRETE 9OVUNENI IN CASE MTH I. 50. LEAD MN SCRIBED •R SC 7.2' BCLOw R1M. 3/9/01 KCAS 606'30'5e•w 9 41419'39'03.0 9 FOUND 5341(206 3' BRASS 10 MK SET IN CO+CRE 1E RONUUEN1 S1AUPED: 9 70 ,3/13/01 00)0 w 55 SCALE: 1' - 1000' 0' 500' 1000' CAS 2626.64' 2590.29' 5C05 2590.37'16 15 7N r3.0 CONCRETE 0001300(41+ /03410 CONCRETE uOnuu0411 M CASE 11 LEAD AND 1APt v1 m CASE MN 3• BRASS 0SK - 5 3/9/01 Y1 0.3' BELOW Mu. 0410 734101 SE1 0•' 9E100 6,43 , r 3 /9 /PED: 16 15', NN 3/9/01 N` `• 2000' 16 GRAPHIC SCALE (SECTION DRAWING ONLY) NOTE: DISTANCES ARE GROUND. 1517.39' ._.. -1 - .NThS9oi•w ""`-- 111575'-- `'b11L�C22 FI(D SO,BED -1t IN 1 I•KI• LEAD 501•6E TOP 06 cONC. NON IN CASE 41. 2441 AvE S. 0 1 5, 120141 ST. (3- 09 -01) FOUND CONCRETE 0077416EN1 IN CASE 0415 3' BRASS N50 5E1 te' BELOW RIU. 3/9/01 21 FND R /CAP 15 /19567 SCALE: 1- - 200' 0' 100' 200' 600' GRAPHIC SCALE LLCM • SET MAD REBATE /CAP 0 FOUND CORNER, AS NOTED 10' REC 410. 2.02004 9 VICINITY MAP (NTS) s1 ( '83/S1 tl 11 410 M CE YAA6.0 ,5 *2541(1470101 STATE PLANE, NORM IONE FRO, KING CO)N11 CONTROL POINT 60. 3449 10 KING COUNTY CONTROL PONT 3.56, B1(NC NORLN 41952'55• *151. PR,6ARY CONTROL 70615 AND ACGESSBLE 404UUENI 8051BON5 6(NE nELO 44(5500(0 UTILIZING GLOBAL 6091/0/110 5YST(6 (075) 50RVE1 1(0•14(0JE5 351440 LEICA 541 9500 (00(648151. *048•IEN1 POSITIONS THAT *ERE NOT DIRECTLY 005(R*(0 u9RD CPS 53410(• 1(041503(5 WERE BED 7010 NE 004114101 P0615 011121NC LUCA ELECTRONIC TOTAL STATIONS FOR NE MEASUR(uE5T OF BOTH ANGLES AND DISTANCES. THIS SURVEY 6(ET5 OR Exam05 THE STANDARDS SET BY 8AC 332 - 130 -090 REFERENCES; 101AB0N 0 5 170111 51. PER KING C06N1• ENCRIE R's FIELD NOTES, SuRVE1 H0. 0- 23 -4-3, DATED 7(8 27,1967 2. LOCABON 0 9,1(1001 RD. 5. PER KING COUN11 (505(1R'5 FIELD NOTES, AS RECORDED IN NE ORDER OF ETIABLIS1uEN1 0 u5DAR1 ROAD DATED SEPT. 2, 1930, WELD PLAT (RIVERT01 C0u61) DISTANCE 7604 FOUND 9>06EN1 IN MC Cut-DE-SAC 0 5. 13000 PL. 10 CENTERLINE OF 9,1,4.01 'TOAD 3. PLAT OF MAR101 COURT, v0LU9( 69 Or PLATS, PAGE 85, RECORDS OF KING C0uN11, wA501NG10N. • KING C0uN11 SNORT PLAT 50. 10711•• RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO 1603130560, RECORDS 0 KING C00414, *AS/10010N 40 00 � O 8 0 W a 0 u NOTES' '8 L05.2./ 6012 2�T ' w 0.12' S CHO R/CAP LS •010w5• 910167 A 1ND R /CAP L5 96012 0,20 w ATE Or HICHLINE CORUun,1• HOSPITAL PLAT OF RIVERTON COURT VOL. 69, PG. 85 6ND 74:"C S_ 0(00 M0N ASE (141 -SAC /13041 R (3- 09 -01) F00 R /CAP L5 /6012 0,16' 5 BLA 10T 2 663.770 SO 11 15.70 ACRES 7. 1NSlRUSEN1ABON FOR DNS SURAT *A5 A ONE 914101E 1NE0 007: AND ELECTRONIC DISTANCE 0(05URING UNIT, PROCEDURES USED IN 1810 536811 ACRE FIELD 14120(415(, 6((1,410 CR EAC((0410 STANDARD:: SET BY wAC 332- 130 -090, 2, ME ,07064ABD1 OEFC1ED CN 415 4107 REPRESENTS 154E RESULTS Or A SLAV(Y RACE •4 DATE INOCA1(D AND CAN ONL1 1,0 CONDONED AS I5DICANNG THE GENERAL CMOBON EK1541N0 AT THAT BuE, PARCEL '1., AMP 1017144 ACC. (7963290029 CC /6.10170563 i271' 771121 PRE•O5(0 L01 LINE LINE !ABLE TARE LENGTH 8(40800 11 7151 N00705YE 10' REC. /92091■0667 /1.11.713 DIRE N10R0NT I KC0P 916102 76041 -•629 FAD R /CAP LS 26012 0.59 S BLA LOT I 429,160 50 F1 00 ACRES END IT IP BENT .2' EAST 0.70' E 03 • NO R /CAP L5 /6072 0.2e' S 7ND 0 /CAP L5 929537 0.20' E ` 50 R /CAP 5 /0012 1.42' To (FISTING LINE o.1e' s NO 9 /0•1. 4400'96v07w 976.9.' 15 16012 10041.•' 0.48' w 0,141' N PLAT OF RIVERTON ACRE TRACTS VOL. 11, PG. 100 30' DEEDED 10 011 0 1UKMLA SET 'NIAO' FND R/140 CAP REBATE /CAP 15 60012 r CURVE C2 C3 c. C5 08410E TABLE L(NC1 412005 207 50' 100 00' 710.5' 100 CO' 7(3 76' 266 •8 572 96' 1.3259' 51296' 156.6 DELTA 34-•,'30'04 34.1010'00' 34.•'..'1}' 5- 100000' A- 25'16'•5' • • L.ti1•ICIw 11b NE 1/4, SECTION 16, TWP. 23 N., RGE, 4 E., W.M. Kb ft. SI Se KIM VAMP ups lA. •tr0,0 >T�p M040 w t a SI Ca 1/lR ISCMIa ,rO.,.II,,I l• . r ru but Ka. 114 ft00lhM. •1•11Mnl,OM Cum,. "rw�'IV., itoou M. 0•41000 AT Ise 0.0.1414 M Om Mt IV Me M COPo MOWS 0001 VAS SWIM M. MINT: wMEM?.wa It 1M. 19117.9 ro MAW 11 At IM[ mlWr•,w 07M MSS 0 014•41 w MIS KAM ,Amrw� . 0:04. : Man SIMS, Cm. KM MC. 1.040 COMA .111 00 '�' •Otbi Iq v:, �b•w0.0 m CAW. Y Ctr : KM CC •• r, Ma 1M MI WOO OMMVI .03 OS MKT 10.0.111.1f ZAKT .11 la Laf=a M SIAM. SO ST MC 377-00-010 40 OM. COOMICCIT 14e MIMISTOM Ca MS ® 9u l,ay COMM. W 4C mmt w� {ate.► l"••••„„. s, 1 GRAPHIC (SECOOR ORA NOTE: DISTANCES / ti ♦`` of ` • rr �_ ♦ \ ♦ • ♦ \ WETLAND C'1 w1O'Oiu M . Kt ie. Marta, ` - ±,;%:l • -fie° 44,ft Vc`T • • i :,I,�Jl.TLAtJIS"8%5'rA'♦♦ .1 ;r ♦` ' ss '� (11 1 ` i �p • • • • 1 1 Il' ` ♦ 11,\ \ •t -�io• li 111''1` GRAPHIC� 01.10. M..•.r ♦ \ ` ` ♦ \ ♦ ♦ ',� i ILA `\ i 1J 1 • Ir • OK LIMO „ n tff8i Pc li!;•,••-41.szt ' 1 • • ♦ Kcaf 6 SOD Ma MAO ■Kalb t. WK. al MS S141.711 be KIWI 1 p1 t`[ %.41g ,.01,4 7Xj• 0 CCM Mb MM. f0 NO llOb SIMMS M. t .•07.1 M 00004., OMratIM r1••, 10 .•11.1.4144 • Ol0•M 14M� ra. IM ®a ., an MOM MM.. fela rib V WA ...4Amsaa 1 114 OK C. MOM m • Ie m'0.1iu.0..117. .9 • w ew4,+M +•a ®n 410.114.40•011 fa. Mk 1411 II4 011 Pp. MC. !✓UL_ C. •.1 AIV1 • O 0 0 tee • m • • O O M MOM WKS 04.1 ilaatAa 0M-071 als mum MS ma MCI. KT o Obt M. M140100. O to map b Mt Kw. am Tap Name 1MM 0.14 NESSIONSIS Eby es am may• COMIR alma OM KM AMMAR TI11AD ASSOCIATES - - 00+\ M~ m. Or,� u e C ■ r oK0p*0o000404 A- I10gftglargf® Rt NIT .04 t4. �I• T t• R t. tnts m r• YIP 01 -055 1.1 11 IC.7,1.•Vr WWI MY HOSOiAL RIVERTON SITE 1.3017-1 CT AnVAIO. LALSr ffvErAAr ALLEWIV. flA MN Pavvr 41- (599) FOSTER INDEX \ v INDEX C1.1 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN C1.2 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN C2.1 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLAN C2.2 PRELIMINARY TREE RETENTION PLAN S1-S2 BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT 1 OF 1 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY IN C'OAtgLK SET REBAR & CONTROL CAP . - - .••• , ;.„ " ., " , - • • :/1" ' • 5 1' • . • • , , • ;/ 640.00' / / N89'46.00-W . . • • I • • 770.21' • /` -.• -• • • • 7 0 • / I. a, , a, • t , • 7'250, EX. lit-RAND' • • ; ' /-- 7.7.- • , „ • • 1 • i!; • -": . .410-#/0- .. -" • , • _4/ , ! -s., !... • .` •.28„, ,. I .;• • - • ,! • . • •- • ••• , • ..)•/. • / • ••t‘ / • 4, • • I •• " • •,.7./.7/70/0,)11 • • N 1 ■ . '• ' , 4 .- `,"c7'-c)---,7: ' -j- ' . ' • ..'-,...' ...."- -.:---.. -•:::._.....7 ..-.:,_.... , . , . ,.. ... 5. 851; i... . ..,..) ... ii,j‘ / ,.....' \ ..../. i. Hs ,. ... ... .." ./ ,...)...17.C.,;4, PR: ED.:/..... :,.2..0 .7 vc H,..., ..„ T ,RU sS , ..T .s.ROVRt ,, . x:,... 1.. i:/:,........ 2, .:.,... L., _ii l',..,111.1.....7.1...._., _,...:\...r.1.1,..H, ..... • ,...7...............,V.c.,..,_.•.....; i_... \._.....:.....:.;.:•1.......„.'...........cls,"'".-j:sil ......./. 7%; 'A .,. ,,,...... /"LANDSCAPED ..\.\,, A v,....., ... .. ....„-- tt. ‘ .%, -;-:. .s. \ : .....,‹ 5, ; l' -... / \ „, , ,,,:. . -- ., ,,,,, „ ‘..,z,/, H...3;'• ze BED ' , ‘. '''; il'...‘s.', , ... . •,. . , . • .s',7 ,. .••,!),;,,,, /// \ ' . . .1 / '.,..8 ;:•' ti..1‘ • • 1//' 1. .;' ; .,.." ::,/, ' ‘;‘, ..1.__LaOs. 0:"....- :- ss.. , __ , .r.• I it . , _ __ 12' H..8...\ -... •-.. „•• --.... .t, ', • h 's ', ..,,,,,s,,,..., •,,..,-,::-..,.........t---,f.....,-......-.,...,. 1(ryl?) J., .../..:'r:1:.li:\:':::,. \ 1 ''s . : 1-' 7.--1.? s'2' _ . .. ___ • . i`. i ,,, . /....ii.,:, .. • NDRAILING , .. -..... ', 5NPEEECDIASL ),, il ..,, 'i ,r.L._1!..1 ‘',--1,:,.: ...,/,' ,... :_..,.. ..... • • i • sN. - ' • • \ ,'. / , • \ ' • • \ . . ONE STORY . rt 77' :-:;',, '• ' : *, "„ i 117 !UNIT -,-,--,-;-' s, st.•,,,' '1 %\.---:-.-'A..., -7''-----1-7--;-,---... "---7 .. zir,' -, '. ■ '', ,s1;,.'• \ '.. '‘"-, I ASSISTED 1.1.14NG ' 1,.. -, „...-...:!-:.7...-..)..,.,, .! \,:i COMMUNITY - -:-.....,... . \`, 41,5- PAVED ....-.., 1 ! - - ir ,:_;, : ---• -Z, • , v.; A \ , COURTYARD t: Icr ta. .77.9.01 , , t ... • •.• Ns, ' :.-''--...--',--'-i-\ • ,..1.-• , --1---E..-r".'IMF a: 327.•° 17-\:' 11,;:•' I .... :Far :a-EL "4314°5 I , c• , •,--,--;Th \\ %,, ; I .. .... s • 1 i I , , •• • . • . ‘ I V, . i . ■ ; \ s ■ % Li ;;;;J/0., -1 • • ,:r : „ . 48 STALL GARAGE .-J-.;': • 5. • ‘ - / /1 .• '. s. ...-, .r.~-z--- ' • : ",- -\ . ' -- uGliANoRT zis,riceRosfy . LI ' ,s.. \ , • , \ % '.." - - -1; 1: \ \ • .., li.. ,••^1 ''' /I - 1 I • • •• % .--- , \ ''‘..-......1:."'7----::1-1\•,-,,, i• re--I-. ,,,._•._., • . i „..... ..,,...:,_....!. ..,..._•. ,. , ,.,,•,, ,...,,,,,,.. , • ..... ..•••: :,,, • -,----1-----■ .... - / , \ ../ / • . \ i . , ,, o • . / s ' \ ■ _ -- ---. ... ''4‹.›/T‘il.' .• '';'''' '.■ ..* </' u. \ -..--.-*-'.-----. .--..-----. 1, e, --.- 43:,/-231,--t-, ‘‘....'s:', '-il ------1;14■2-: FMO ri?rL.L./4,2,.' 42g,(ZZ/4,END R/CAP• , • , LS 16012 1.4g w LS .16012 .. ''- _4-_ . , • . 0.18: 5 . • 0.59'•S • ,_. -_J189 ■ 292.85' --..".- i-- ,-T %, s •% ,-,1.. --- , ,' 4 t _.;;;f:-..--: .,. ..!:- ,,,.4..,:: i .. i 'L • i , ,. , % , *,-1:::----__.."- -4:7:-. , gl, 1.-:7---171-`'P-1 ; / 1 / ..*-•."-t---1 ;-4-1-4-i . , ., I i. , ‘• 1, -1,27 ,:.4..•-• rx . wertanto . . - .1 , 1 ' .I `404 ' ' ■ , I J. V .-......... . '11+ y \L., y * t. .4. :41 C`. •4. - ,- ..ztr -, „.t,„..-.„._.....,,...,:... .....:,.,_ .....,..),..„, le,-- . 8, . ,i,...t; :...... 4, ' ' .."'. 'I I:;I. ‘ •....A , / .....114•-• ,.,,,, ... . , \ . ; , . . . .. 146'. I'. ' . 4,-- --1..• :). , r27.6! Vrili' ..".-;1'.. II.,2,5...- ---c. ;•,J/' ' - .--.. • - . • ._ -- • • . . . - - .•;i : - , • f , 2 • • " • 112. .329.01 • _D- 15 so 30" DEEDED TO CITY OF RIK MLA -.1 PROPOSED DETENTION VAULT SEE SHEET 2 t i N8 . " • • \‘'N. • C'S \ ,,,,>••••" \ ' • ...v..' •-■ ,,,,' N ■ • , ,.) r t 1 i .. \,./ I ‘ '. • •• ' 1 's • ..% t I ■ i t. .. i .,..... 1 N , s. . •-• • . s .. .•-•',....7,7:-......7••••,,,- ___ _ ,-- -----.. ... .... .. ,... .... -........,. • ... . ' ... ..5 ....-.1----•-•••-....;;,.....' ......... ••-•-• -- '•'• Z.:, .. 7- •-• -. .-... ' 7- ••••• \ . - ...... •■•,, %,--..-.-..--- 7- - ''. V 'z ---- .7 ,.. V . '''''''..-4:: L-: 3 --,,, -'°••••:.'.. , L. -. LL L... -, - '''..... ' a. - ..L... ' ,_ ' tr- ,........v.__ A.c - 1 ..... ■:...,..2.....! ..-...... S. ,, , ...,.:: &lab- - - --- - - - - - ■ '',....,'''' i SOU771 LINE12i-TTIE NE 1/4. NE 1,41 SECTION 16 . sr ;•.\-T1■2N CONCRETE RETAINING WALL (111:9 END R/CAP LS 16012 0.18' W 0.18' N 11■4' • H.X.41••••1' ; 1 \ • \PROPOS(D WALL HEIGNIN (1)72) P T T 0 :V TR.4 1 END trx 8. ROOD PDS (TNC ( AND 5) .123' • ; ---- , `.; :(' 4.443' r77.z /77/2 SET -na40- 8(BAR CAP 0 PIO RAO CAP LS /6012 1.57' W KEY WETLAND EDGE, SURVEYED APPROX WETLAND EDGE WETLAND 100' BUFFER • DATA PLOT LOCATION PROPOSED BUFFER AREA CALCULATIONS TOTAL SITE = 11.15 ACRES NETLAND A = 30,114 SF (0.61 ACRE) NETLAND 5 = 23,655 SF (054 ACRE) WETLAND G = 57,6678 5F (132 ACRE) 100' EUFFEk = I59,881 SF (3b'1 ACRES) BUFFER WITH PROPOSED REDUCTION TO 50' FOR WETLAND iC = 140,485 5F (3.24 ACRES) T NORTH No Scale FHe name: 21044wetdwg Date: 4/12/2001 nls Revised: 7I9f2001 n s SOURCE: Triad Assodatee, 2001. FIGURE 4. WETLAND MAP LIVING CARE TUKWILA SITE TUKWILA, WASHINGTON • -/D9 f :•NAME • ADDRESS •:: v i.''iL.'' VVr')IIIIVVIUIV DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY- - WATER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION WATER RIGHT CLAIM �--f /.5D OP 'r zIP r �� CODE • 7/v 2.: SOURCE FROM WHICH THE RIGHT TO'TAKE.ANDMAKE USE OF WATER LS CLAIMED -;.. (SURFACE IF GROUNDWATER,'THE'SOURCE IS ..I B: IF SURFACE.WATER; THE SOURCE IS FIECEi / n DEPA,`((: RTIIT'OF ECOU)CY 7.11 097 82 U. CAS.f1..: (1Tlif:f( • :tiOHF .rr R GROUND r`'f •) (LEAVE BLANK) 3. THE QUANTITIES'OF WATER AND TIMES As; QUANTITY OF WATER. CLAIMED 13 ANNUAL' QUANTITY CLAIMED • F USE CLAIMED: C. IF FOR :IRRIGATION,.ACRES CLAIMED PRESENTLY USEDy' • - (CUBIC FEET PER SECOND OR GALLONS PER MINUTE) . PRESENTLY USED (ACRE FEET PER YEAR) . PRESENTLY IRRIGATED • :.D::TIME(S) DURING EACH YEAR WHEN WATER IS USED L 4,-.DATE OF.FIRST PUTTING WATER TO USE MONTH . } r U 5., LOCATION OF THE POINT(S)•OF DIVERSION /WITHDRAWAL:' AND FEET FROM THE CORNER OF SECTION '::BEING WITHIN OF SECTION T a 3., N R '(E:oRW.) W.M. YEAR -_I FEET ;:..IF.THIS IS WI;THIN•THE LIMITS.OF A RECORDED PLATTED PROPERTY, LOT 1 'FLOCK "I OF (GIVE NAME;OF .PLAT OR'ADDITION) 6. LEGAL DESCRIPTION.`' OF LANDS. ON:WHICN THE WATER IS.USED:: 0.: i/ OT, � 71 -FL- A-r. TnZ fT'FXo 7ri 407 -).0 /ift F Ro. licrh COUNTY 7 `PURPOSE(S).,FOR-WHICH WATER IS USED.- t-f U -)- .'THE LEGAL DOCTRINE(S)'.,(JPON WHICH THE'RIGHT OF CLAIM-IS 'BASED.' ! R'- /'lr�, :41E•F 'KING OF A.'STATEMENT OF CIAINI DOES NOT CONSTITUTE -AN ADJUDICATION OF ANY CI.AIM .-To;f0E:RIGH1' TO USE'OF- WATERS AS BETWEEN, THE WATER USE .CLAIW�ANTdANp'THE STATE IDR AS_BETWEEN ONE OR MORE WATER USE CLAIMANTS i-• AND ANOTHEIt`Oli'OTHER5..,,jFLIS .•ACKNOWLEDGEMENT °CONSTITUTES RECEIPT' FOR • THE FILING FCE.._., DATE RETURNED, TI1IS'HAS BEEN ASSIGNED ) -1. WATER.RIGI•IT :CLAIM REGISTRY NO. bIR�CTOR'= D °PARlIv1ENT OF ECOLOGY 15 9 7- t 75 5 c/77. ( G / 4 fi I HEREBY SWEAR MAT THE ACCURATE. TO -THE' BEST. •F . X ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND KN ND BELIEF: •Ait DATE .7 F ✓ d •Ig CLAIM FILED BY DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE, PRINT OR ..TYPE FULL NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS .OF. AGENT BELOW DDI IONAL INFORMATION .RELATING TO TE R pUA' L ITV - AND/ OR WE L CONSTRUCTION .AS .irn110y . 144 Yof a=ah.L.T liratu'• ,:, a,r W ..,.., « 1.1415= BS' .144- - ,a„/.7.rT f)? RETURN ALL THREE COPIES WITH CARBON.) INTACT, ALONG WITH YOUR FEE TO: DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY •WATER RIGHT CLAIMS REGISTRATION OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98504 RECEIVED 114,:NOV 0.6 , 2U01. T� KWILA BLIC.WORKS Transpo Group 11730 118TH AVENUE NE • SUITE 600 • KIRKLAND, WA 98034 -7120 (425) 821 -3665 • FAX: (425) 825 -8434 TO: /ns /1470- /EI G X- e/T 7u Gv /!-4 - l- D`lc- C1' y/ • doEvgz -, TRANSMITTED BY: ❑ Fax ❑ Courier Mail LETTEIPOF TRANSMITTAL DATE 1 //3 0 N, O.. ievz . dp 7J-OOBB FROM: (�J WA/ - X,ve ".7 RE: e /v.60(777v 4oriEele. DESCRIPTION d°k:. wii L3 c i 8 OO1 CO9vii,dty LAITY 0 Delivery COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION f / v i. 7X-of' e l~ T M4/ S/S i--ri THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as the ked below: ❑ As requested For your use ❑ For approval. For review and comment ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Returned for corr ctions REMARKS: CC: £/6# ee� ❑ Transmittal Only Add/e,e dd4fT ❑ Transmittal Only )1QD..Sr ❑ Transmittal Only ❑ Transmittal Only SIGNED: If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at