The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSEPA E05-002 - JONES JEFFREY / RIVERSTON HOMES - REASONABLE USE FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMEE05 -002 Riverstone homes lot- 26 4424 s 118th st • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development NOTICE OF DECISION TO: Jeffrey S. Jones, Applicant William A. Looney, Owner King County Assessor, Accounting Division Washington State Department of Ecology Agencies with Jurisdiction All Parties of Record Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director May 27, 2005 This letter serves as a notice of decision and is issued pursuant to TMC 18.104.170 on the following project and permit approval. Project File Number: Applicant: Type of Permit Applied for: Project Description: Location: Associated Files: Comprehensive Plan Designation/Zoning District: I. PROJECT INFORMATION L05 -010 Jeffrey S. Jones, for Riverstone Homes Reasonable Use To construct a single - family home on a 9,200 sq. ft. parcel that is completely constrained by a Type 3 wetland or wetland buffer. The applicant is proposing to use 3,149 sq. ft. of the parcel for the residential site with the remainder of the parcel to remain undeveloped. A wetland mitigation plan is pending approval. 4424 S. 118th Street, Tukwila E05 -002, (SEPA) D04 -371 (building permit) Low Density Residential Low Density Residential II. DECISION SEPA Determination: The City SEPA Responsible Official has: Li determined that this application does not require a SEPA threshold determination because it is categorically exempt. L determined that the project, as proposed, does not require a threshold determination under SEPA because it qualifies as a planned action pursuant to WAC 197 -11 -172, that the probable significant adverse environmental impacts of the project were adequately analyzed in the EIS previously prepared for the Page 1 of 3 05/27/2005 3:13 PM q: \cl \Riverstone Homes \Reasonable Use \NotDec.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Notice of Decision L05 -010 Riverstone Homes Reasonable Use May 27, 2005 planned action and will implement the conditions and mitigation measures imposed by the planned action approval. X determined that the project, as proposed, does not create a probable significant environmental impact and issued a Determination of Non- Significance (DNS), or determined that the project does not create a probable significant environmental impact if specific mitigation conditions are imposed on the project and issued a Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance (MDNS) requiring compliance with those mitigation conditions, or determined that the project creates a probable significant environmental impact and required preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the project..... Decision on Substantive Permit: The City Planning Commission has determined that the application for a reasonable use permit does comply with applicable City and state code requirements and has approved that application based on the findings and conclusions contained in the staff report, subject to any conditions which are set forth in the Decision. The staff report recommended one condition of approval: 1. Revise Mitigation Plan to: a. specify details on the removal, control and off -site disposal of Reed Canarygrass. b. specify details of live stake Red Ozier Dogwood (length, source, installation methods, etc.) III. YOUR APPEAL RIGHTS The Decision on this Permit Application is a Type 4 decision pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code 18.104.010. Other land use applications related to this project may still be pending. One administrative appeal to the City Council of the Planning Commission Decision is permitted. No administrative appeal of a DNS or an EIS is permitted. If an MDNS was issued, any person wishing to challenge either the conditions which were imposed by the MDNS decision or the failure of the Department to impose additional conditions in the MDNS must raise such issues as part of the appeal. IV. PROCEDURES AND TIME FOR APPEALING In order to appeal the Planning Commission decision on the Permit Application, a written notice of appeal must be filed with the Department of Community Development within 14 days of the issuance of this Decision, that is by Friday, June 10, 2005. The requirements for such appeals are set forth in Tukwila Municipal Code18.116. All appeal materials shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Appeal materials MUST include: 1. The name of the appealing party. 2. The address and phone number of the appealing party; and if the appealing party is a corporation, association or other group, the address and phone number of a contact person authorized to receive notices on the appealing party's behalf. Page 2 of 3 05/27/2005 3:13 PM q: \cl \Riverstone Homes \Reasonable Use \NotDec.doc Notice of Decision L05 -010 Riverstone Homes Reasonable Use May 27, 2005 3. A statement identifying the decision being appealed and the alleged errors in the decision. 4. The Notice of Appeal shall identify (a) the specific errors of fact or errors in application of the law in the decision being appealed; (b) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and (c) the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be limited to matters or issues raised in the Notice of Appeal. V. APPEAL HEARINGS PROCESS The City Council hearing regarding the appeal shall be conducted as a closed record hearing based on the testimony and documentary evidence presented at the open record hearing conducted by the Planning Commission. The City Council decision on the appeal is the City's final decision. Any party wishing to challenge the City Council decision on this application must file an appeal pursuant to the procedures and time limitations set forth in RCW 36.70C. An appeal challenging a DNS, an MDNS or an EIS may be included in such an appeal. If no appeal of the City Council decision is properly filed in Superior Court within such time limit, the Decision on this permit will be final. VI. INSPECTION OF INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at the Tukwila Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100, Tukwila, Washington 98188 from Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Carol Lumb, who may be contacted at 206 - 431 -3661 for further information. Property owners affected by this decision may request a change in valuation for their property tax purposes. Contact the King County Assessor's Office for further information regarding property tax valuation changes. Department of Community Development City of Tukwila Page 3 of 3 05/27/2005 3:13 PM q: \cl \Riverstone Homes \Reasonable Use \NotDec.doc 1 City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster; Director HEARING DATE: NOTIFICATION: FILE NUMBER: ASSOCIATED PERMITS /: ACTIONS APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING DISTRICT: SEPA DETERMINATION: STAFF: RECOMMENDATION: CL STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Prepared April 29, 2005 May 26, 2005 Notice of Application mailed April 8, 2005 to property owners within 500 feet. Notice of Hearing mailed May 11, 2005 to surrounding property owners and parties of record and posted May 11, 2005. Notice of Hearing published in Seattle Times May 13, 2005 L05 -010 (Reasonable Use Exception) E05 -002 (SEPA Determination) D04 -371 Building Permit Jeffrey S. Jones for Riverstone Homes To construct a single- family home on a 9,200 sq. ft. parcel that is completely constrained by a Type 3 wetland or wetland buffer. The applicant is proposing to use 3149 sq. ft. of the parcel for the residential site with the remainder of the parcel to remain undeveloped. 4424 S. 118th Street, Tukwila q: \Riverstone Homes \Reasonable Use \RUstaff- rpt.doc Low Density Residential (LDR) Low Density Residential (LDR) Determination of Nonsignificance issued April 28, 2005. Carol Lumb, Senior Planner Sandra Whiting, Urban Environmentalist Approval Pace 1 of 8 04/29/2005 1:13 PM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206: 431 -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665 L05 -010: Riverstone Homes Reasonable Use Staff Report April 29, 2005 ATTACHMENTS: A. Full Plan Set, including Wetland Mitigation Plan sheets prepared by Jeffrey S. Jones B. Applicant's Reasonable Use Narrative C. TMC 18.45.115, Exceptions D. SEPA Determination and Staff Report FINDINGS VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION Project Description: The applicant is proposing to construct a single - family home on a 9,200 sq. ft. parcel that is completely constrained by a Type 3 wetland or wetland buffer. The applicant is proposing to use 3149 sq. ft. of the parcel for the residential site with the remainder of the parcel to remain undeveloped. Existing Development: The parcel is undeveloped and the last on a short dead end street in the northeastern part of Allentown. The parcel is pictured below — the subject property is the long rectangular parcel next to the triangular parcel that abuts the BN property. CL q:\Riverstone Homes \L05- 010RUstaff- rpt.doc Page 2 of 8 05/05/2005 8:52 AM L05 -010: Riverstone Homes Reable Use Staff Report April 29, 2005 Surrounding Land Use: Residential development lies to the north, south and west; the BNSF Burlington Northern rail yard is located on the east side of the site. Topography: The site is flat. Due to' filling on the surrounding properties, the site is two to three feet lower than the parcel on the west and approximately four feet lower than the rail yard to the east. Vegetation: The site is vacant and composed completely of a Type 3 wetland and wetland buffer. The plant community is comprised of plants characteristic of wetlands — reed canarygrass, creeping buttercup, black cottonwood, pacific willow and Himalayan blackberry. Sensitive Areas: As noted under Plants, the entire property, 9,200 sq. ft. is either Type 3 wetland or wetland buffer. Approximately 35% of the site will be used for development leaving the remainder of the parcel undeveloped. The SEPA Checklist states that 3,750 sq. ft. of mostly reed canarygrass will be removed in the area of the building site. The mitigation plan for filling the wetland proposes enhancement of the remaining wetland. A variety of native trees and shrubs will be planted along the western side of the parcel, with invasive species removed by hand or with hand -held machinery. The undeveloped portion of the parcel will be surrounded by a split rail fence and signed to identify the presence of a wetland. BACKGROUND This application is the result of a building permit submitted in 2004 to construct a single - family residence. During review of the permit application, it was determined that the site contained wetlands. As a result, the applicant submitted a SEPA Checklist and Reasonable Use applications for review. The project is vested under the former environmental regulations in TMC Chapter 18.45. DECISION CRITERIA — REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION The reasonable use criteria established in TMC 18.45.115(C)(4), the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance, apply to this project since in order to construct the single family home, a Type 3 wetland and wetland buffer must be filled (TMC 18.45.080(C)(1)(b)). TMC 18.45.080 C. 2.11 states that in order to achieve the City's goal of no net loss of wetland functions and acreage, CL q:\Riverstone Homes\L05- 010RUstaff- rpt.doc Page 3 of 8 05/05/2005 8:52 AM L05 -010: Riverstone Homesfisonable Use Staff Report April 29, 2005 alteration of wetlands requires the applicant to provide a restoration, enhancement or creation plan to compensate for the impacts to the wetland and such compensation is to be at a ratio of 1.5:1. (emphasis added) In the following discussion, the reasonable use criteria from the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45.115 4.) are shown below in bold, followed by staffs comments. For the applicant's response to the criteria, see Attachment C. All of the criteria in TMC 18.45.115 4. must be met in order for a reasonable use application to be approved. (a) No reasonable use with less impact on the sensitive area and its buffer is possible; The zoning for this parcel is Low Density Residential (LDR), which permits the construction of a single - family home as the primary permitted use. The other permitted uses in the LDR are: animal veterinary if there is access to an arterial; public parks, trails, picnic areas and playgrounds; and shelters. Two of the uses would have more impact on the parcel than a single - family (shelters and animal veterinary); the parcel is not on the City's CIP list as a possible park site. The applicant is proposing to limit the size of the building footprint by constructing a two story dwelling to minimize the amount of area needed for the house and yard. (b) There is no feasible on -site alternative to the proposed activities, including reduction in size or density, phasing of project implementation, change in timing activities, revision of road and lot layout, and /or related site planning activities that would allow a reasonable economic use with fewer adverse impacts to the sensitive area and its buffer; The parcel is long (230 feet) and narrow (38.12 feet) comprising 9,200 sq. feet. The applicant is proposing to use 3,149 sq. ft. of the parcel to construct the residence, which has a 1,247 sq. ft. building footprint, provide the required 20 -foot front setback, five -foot side yard setback and a backyard area of 570 sq. ft. The remainder of the site will remain undeveloped. (c) As a result of the proposed development there will be no increased or unreasonable threat of damage to off -site public or private property and no threat to the public health, safety or welfare on or off the development proposal site; The site is lower than the properties adjacent on the west. Storm water run off will be directed off site to a ditch that lies across S. 118th Street. It does not appear that there will be an increase in the threat of damage to off -site public or private property, nor will there be a threat to the pubic health, safety or welfare if the single family home is constructed. CL q:\Riverstone Homes\L05- 010RUstaff- rpt.doc Page 4 of 8 05/05/2005 8:52 AM L05 -010: Riverstone Homes Reeable Use Staff Report April 29, 2005 (d) Alterations permitted shall be the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use of the property; As discussed above under b., the applicant is limiting the building footprint to 1,247 sq. ft. and using just over one -third of the parcel for the residence and the required setbacks. The site plan establishes a rear yard area of 571 sq. ft. (15 feet by 38.12. ft.), and leaves the remainder of the parcel — 158 feet by 38 feet or 6,051 sq. ft. - undisturbed. The wetland mitigation required to compensate for the development on the parcel will be located on the undeveloped portion of the parcel. (e) The proposed development is compatible in design, scale and use with other development with similar site constraints in the immediate vicinity of the subject property; The development to the north and west of this parcel is single family residential, the same as what is proposed on this parcel. The development on the east, in an area zoned Manufacturing Industrial Center/Heavy, is industrial in character. (1) Disturbance of sensitive areas has been minimized by locating the necessary alterations in the buffers to the greatest extent possible; (g) The entire site is comprised of Type 3 wetland with some wetland buffer on the edge of the parcel. The house has been sited to comply with the front yard setbacks required by the zoning code — 20 feet. The building footprint is 1,247 sq. ft., approximately 200 sq. ft. less than the home on the west. The inability to derive reasonable use of the property is not the result of actions by the applicant in segregating or dividing the property and creating the undevelopable condition after the effective date of the ordinance from which this chapter derives; and It does not appear that any actions on the property owner's part created the wetland conditions on the parcel. The wetland conditions on the parcel may have been impacted by development on adjacent properties, as this parcel is the last in this area to be developed. Other parcels appear to have used fill to raise the level of the property, which may in turn have directed more water onto the subject site. (h) Any approved alteration of a sensitive area under this section shall be subject to conditions as established by this chapter and will require mitigation under an approved mitigation plan. Approval of a reasonable use exception shall not eliminate the need for any other permit or approval otherwise required for a project, including but not limited to design review. CL q:Utiverstone Homes \L05- 010RUstaff- rpt.doc Page 5 of 8 05/05/2005 8:52 AM L05 -010: Riverstone Homes tilkonable Use Staff Report April 29, 2005 The applicant's proposal includes the enhancement of the remainder of the parcel under a wetland mitigation plan (as illustrated in Attachment A). The City's Urban Environmentalist has reviewed the mitigation plan. The planting plan proposed by the mitigation plan is acceptable, however, details on the removal of the Reed Canarygrass must be worked out. In addition, specifications for the live sakes of Red Ozier Dogwood must be provided. These details will be included in the final mitigation plan. The applicant's mitigation plan is subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development based on the criteria established in the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. No land altering or building permits will be issued until the mitigation plan has been approved. In addition, TMC 18.45.080(C)(2)(e) states that where feasible, compensatory mitigation projects shall be completed prior to activities that will permanently disturb wetlands and immediately after activities that will temporarily disturb wetlands. Construction of compensatory projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing wildlife, flora and water quality, and shall be completed prior to use or occupancy of the activity or development. REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION CONCLUSIONS Reasonable Use Guidelines: a. No reasonable use with less impact on the sensitive area and its buffer is possible; The zoning for the property is Low Density Residential, which has a limited number of permitted uses. Of the permitted uses in LDR, public parks and trails would have the least impact on the parcel, however the site is not on the City Park's Department CIP list. Of the remaining permitted uses, a single family home would have the least impact on the sensitive area and buffer. b. There is no feasible on -site alternative to the proposed activities, including reduction in size or density, phasing of project implementation, change in timing activities,, revision of road and lot layout, and /or related site planning activities that would allow a reasonable economic use with fewer adverse impacts to the sensitive area and its buffer; The parcel is 9,200 sq. ft. in size; of that, the applicant is proposing to use 3,149 sq. ft., just a little over one -third of the parcel, to construct a single family home with a small back yard. The building footprint is 1,247, 200 sq. feet less than the adjacent single family home. The back yard area is limited to 570 sq. ft. A split rail fence will be used to isolate the undeveloped portion of the property and prevent intrusion. Signage will be used to identify the location of the wetland and buffer areas. The house is as close to the road as allowed by the Zoning Code, so all means to minimize impacts have been taken. CL q:\Riverstone .Homes \L05- 010RUstaff- rpt.doc Page 6 of 8 05/05/2005 8:52 AM L05 -010: Riverstone•Homes Reasonable Use Staff Report April 29, 2005 c. As a result of the proposed development there will be no increased or unreasonable threat of damage to off -site public or private property and no threat to the public health, safety or welfare on or off the development proposal site; The proposal will not increase the threat of damage to property nor will it threaten the public health, safety or welfare, either on or off -site. Storm water run off will be directed off -site to a ditch that lies across S. 118th Street. d. Alterations permitted shall be the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use of the property; The building footprint is being limited to 1,247 sq. feet, with a back yard area of 570 sq. ft. This results in an effective lot size of 3,149 sq. ft., about the minimum reasonable for a single - family house. e. The proposed development is compatible in design, scale and use with other development with similar site constraints in the immediate vicinity of the subject property; The new house would be compatible with the existing adjacent houses. (1) Disturbance of sensitive areas has been minimized by locating the necessary alterations in the buffers to the greatest extent possible; (g) CL The entire site is comprised of Type 3 wetland with some wetland buffer on the edge of the parcel. The house has been sited to comply with the zoning code's requirement of a 20 -foot setback in the front. The inability to derive reasonable use of the property is not the result of actions by the applicant in segregating or dividing the property and creating the undevelopable condition after the effective date of the ordinance from which this chapter derives; and The parcel is Lot 26 of C.D. Hillman's Meadows Gardens, Division 1, a plat recorded November 1, 1905. It does not appear that any actions on the parcel owner's part created the wetland conditions on the parcel. The wetland conditions on the parcel may have been impacted by development on adjacent properties, as this parcel is the last in the immediate area to be developed. Other parcels appear to have used fill to raise the level of their property, which may in turn have directed more water onto the subject site. q:\Riverstone Homes \L05- 010RUstaff- rpt.doc Page 7 of 8 05/05/2005 8:52 AM L05 -010: Riverstone Homes ilk onable Use Staff Report April 29, 2005 (h) Any approved alteration of a sensitive area under this section shall be subject to conditions as established by this chapter and will require mitigation under an approved mitigation plan. Approval of a reasonable use exception shall not eliminate the need for any other permit or approval otherwise required for a project, including but not limited to design review. The applicant's proposal includes a wetland mitigation plan that has been reviewed by the City's Urban Environmentalist and found acceptable with two minor revisions that will be required. As part of the mitigation plan, the undeveloped portion of the site will have a split rail fence and signage to protect the wetland and buffer area. The mitigation plan is subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development based on the criteria established in the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. No land altering or building permits will be issued until the mitigation plan has been approved. REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION RECOMMENDATION Based on the information provided to -date by the applicant, staff recommends approval of the reasonable use request with the following condition: 1. Revise Mitigation Plan to: a. specify details on the removal, control and off -site disposal of Reed Canarygrass. b. specify details of live stake Red Ozier Dogwood (length, source, installation methods, etc.) INFORMATION ITEM: The project will be reviewed to determine the applicability of TMC 18.45.080(C)(2)(e), which requires, where feasible, compensatory mitigation projects be completed prior to activities that will permanently disturb wetlands and immediately after activities that will temporarily disturb wetlands. Construction of compensatory projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing wildlife, flora and water quality, and shall be completed prior to use or occupancy of the activity or development. CL q:\Riverstone Homes \L05- 010RUstaff- rpt.doc Page 8 of 8 05/05/2005 8:52 AM • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development / 6300 Southcenter BI, Suite 100 / Tukwila, WA 98188 / (206)431 -3670 DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) File Number: E05 -002 Applied: 02/17/2005 Issue Date: 04/28/2005 Status: ISSUED Applicant: JONES, JEFFREY S. FOR RIVERSTONE HOMES Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: SEPA FOR REASONABLE USE FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE Location of Proposal: Address: 4424 S 118 ST TUKW Parcel Number: 3347400720 Section/Township /Range: NE 10 -23 -04 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 14 Ay lz ( 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 y- 2g —o5— 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: DNS E05 -002 Printed: 04 -28 -2005 I, locuit Dept. of Community Development,. City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non - Significance Notice of Public Meeting. Mitigated Determination.'O Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Action Official Notice Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Notice of Application ;for, Shoreline ne Mgmt Permit Other Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this 2 year 2005 n Project Name: I I tih >ra___. )+(142,,(a_,- Project Number: 5 ODD. Mailer's Signature: Person requesting mailing: fl the 1/4): C2JLA,4,-( Lm.011) P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS DATE: June 16, 2005 CONTACT: Jeffrey S. Jones for Riverstone Homes RE: D04 -371 ADDRESS: 4424 South 118th Street Building permit D04 -371 is approved with the conditions listed below. If you have any questions, Carol Lumb is the planner assigned to the file and can be reached at 206-431 - 3661. 1. Prior to requesting final planning inspection, the wetland mitigation plan must be implemented and inspected by the City's Urban Environmentalist. The Landscaping Declaration and Checklist (attached) must be provided prior to requesting the inspection. 2. Prior to requesting final planning inspection, a maintenance bond in the amount of 150% of the cost of the wetland mitigation must be submitted to DCD. 3. Per TMC 18.45.200 (copy attached) the applicant must record the City approved site plan clearly delineating the wetland with King County Records and Elections. A copy of the recorded document must be submitted to the City prior to final planning sign -off. 4. The drainage ditch on the south side of S. 118th Street, to which the surface water run -off from the new house will be directed, must be cleaned out along the length of the ditch to 44th Avenue South. Attachments: Landscaping Declaration & Checklist Wetland Mitigation Plan Approval Memo with conditions TMC 18.45.200 CL q: \mydocs \general \2004- Memos \.D04 - 371 -doc Page 1 of 1 06/16/2005 2:00 PM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 June 14, 2005 • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director TO: Steve Lancaster, Director, �,DDepartment of Community Development FM: Carol Lumb, Senior PrarTiner Sandra Whiting, Urban Environmentalist RE: Approval of Wetland Mitigation Plan for Riverstone Homes BACKGROUND On May 26, 2005, the Planning Commission approved L05 -010, a reasonable use application submitted by Riverstone Homes for construction of a single- family home on a 9,200 sq. ft. parcel that is completely constrained with either Type 3 wetland or wetland buffer. The Commission approved the use of 3,149 sq. ft. of the parcel for construction of the home (building footprint of 1,247 sq. ft.) and yard with the remainder of the site, 6,051 sq. ft, to remain undeveloped. The undeveloped portion of the site will remain wetland, be fenced by a split rail fence and identified by signage as a•wetland. Invasive plants will be removed from the undeveloped wetland area and native plants will be planted to improve the wetland functions. This project is vested under the previous Sensitive Areas Ordinance. MITIGATION PLAN The original mitigation plan submitted by the applicant proposed to plant eight trees as mitigation for the filling of a portion of the wetland. Prior to presentation to the Planning Commission, the plan was revised to provide a variety of plantings on the western portion of the site with a mix of Sitka Spruce, Western Red Cedar and Oregon Ash trees and Nootka Rose and Twinberry shrubs and 70 Red Osier Dogwood cuttings. The Planning Commission approved the Reasonable Use application with the condition to revise the Mitigation Plan to: a) specify details on the removal, control and off -site disposal of Reed Canarygrass; and b)specify details of live stake Red Osier Dogwood (length, source, installation methods etc.). Invasive vegetation will be removed from the remaining wetland area, by hand if possible, otherwise hand held equipment will be used. Reed Canarygrass will be removed and disposed of CL q; \Riverstone Homes/Wetiand Mitigation Approval.doc Page 1 of 2 06/14/2005 3:13 PM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Steve Lancaster, Director Department of Community Development Riverstone Homes Wetland Mitigation Plan June 14, 2005 at a legal disposal site. The site will be monitored for three (3) years and a bond posted for 150% of the project costs or $7,544.31. A revised mitigation plan was submitted after Planning Commission approval of the Reasonable Use application. The Urban Environmentalist has reviewed this plan and determined that it does not completely address the condition of approval of the Reasonable Use application. As a result, three conditions are recommended as part of the approval of the Mitigation Plan. RECOMMENDATION Approve the mitigation plan submitted on June 2, 2005 with the following conditions: 1. All non - native plants (except existing trees) shall be removed from the entire remaining wetland, including the eastern side of the site. The preferred removal method is digging to remove roots. 2. To discourage re- establishment of invasive plants, the area on the eastern part of the site, beneath the existing trees and shrubs shall be planted with understory plants appropriate for the site conditions. Additional Cornus sericea cuttings and/or additional Twinberry could be used. The newly planted vegetation should be mulched as stated in paragraph 8.15. 3. The Cornus sericea stakes should be cut when the plant is dormant or in the fall. The bottom of the stakes should be cut at a 45° angle and the top horizontally. If not planted immediately, the stakes must be kept in cool, shaded, moist conditions and planted within two weeks, of cutting. The wetland consultant shall specify the planting method appropriate for soil conditions (pounding in vs. pilot hole). At least Y2 to 3/4 of the length of the stake should be below ground. Approved: S) Z61)5' Steve Lancaster, Director Date Department of Community Development CL q; \Riverstone Homes/Wetland Mitigation Approval.doc Page 2 of 2 06/14/2005 3:13 PM Gity of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MAY 12, 2005 CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PROJECT INFORMATION Jeffrey S. Jones, for Riverstone Homes, has filed a Reasonable Use application to construct a single - family home on a parcel located at 4424 S. 118th Street. This parcel is constrained entirely by a Type 3 wetland or wetland buffer. The site is 9200 sq. ft .in size and zoned Low Density Residential. The applicant proposes to use 3,149 sq. ft. for the house and a small yard; the remainder of the parcel would remain undeveloped. A wetland mitigation plan will be implemented on the undeveloped portion of the site. You are invited to comment on the project at the public hearing scheduled for Thursday, May 26, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. before the Tukwila Planning Commission. The hearing will take place at City Hall in the City Council Chambers, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard. To confirm the time and date before the hearing, call the Department of Community Development at 431 -3670. For further information on this proposal, contact Carol Lumb at 431 -3661 or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Other known required permits include: • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Preconstruction Notification FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The project files are available for review at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request them at the permit counter of the Department of Community Development, located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Please call 431- 3670 to make sure the files will be available. Application filed: Notice of Completeness Issued: Notice of Application Issued: CL February 17, 2005 March 29, 2005 April 8, 2005 Page 1 of 1 04/28/2005 12:44 PM q: \Riverstone I -Tomes \Reasonable Use \L05 -010 Hearing Notice.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 i City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development , Steve Lancaster, Director April 27, 2005 MEMORANDUM To: Steve Lancaster, Director Fm: Carol Lumb, Senii4P anner Re: Project File No. E05 -002: Riverstone Homes Project Description: The project is a proposed single family home, approximately 2400 sq. ft. on a parcel entirely constrained by a Type 3 wetland or wetland buffer. Proponent: Jeffrey S. Jones, for Riverstone Homes Location: 4424 S. 118th Street, Tukwila Date Checklist prepared: February 7, 2005 Lead Agency: City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development Challenges to Document: None Other Agencies of Jurisdiction: Department of Ecology U.S. Army Corps of Engineers !ATTACHMENT D CL Page 1 of4 04/28/2005 8:40 AM q: \Riverstone Homes \SEPA \SEPA Staff Rpt.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431. -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665 • SEPA Review — E05 -002 Riverstone Homes April 27, 2005 Recommendation: Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) Existing Environmental Information: Wetland Assessment of the Riverstone Homes Property, prepared by J.S. Jones and Associates, Inc., February 10, 2005 Wetland Mitigation Plan, prepared by J.S. Jones and Associates, Inc., February 10, 2005 Geotechnical Report prepared by Earth Consultants, February 2, 2005 Summary of Primary Impacts: Earth The site is flat with soils of sandy loam. Due to filling of the surrounding properties, the subject property is two to three feet lower than the property to the west and approximately four feet lower than the rail yard to the east. The geotechnical report and the wetland assessment both note the presence of groundwater on the site at a depth of 1 '/2 to 2 '/2 feet below existing grade. The applicant is proposing to fill in the area of the proposed house approximately 2 -3 feet to create a building pad. Approximately 50 cubic yards of structural fill will be imported to the site. Approximately 20% of the site will be covered by structure or driveway once the house is constructed. Due to the flat topography, erosion is not likely to occur during construction. Filter fences will be used during construction and straw mulch during periods of precipitation. Air Minor dust and internal combustion . engine emissions associated with use of construction equipment will occur during construction of the residence. Best management practices can be required during construction activities to reduce and control dust and air emissions. These practices may include covering soil stockpiles, sweeping or washing paved surfaces, minimizing exposed areas and using construction machinery equipped with standard mufflers. Water There will there be no surface water or ground water withdrawals or diversions on this site. No discharges of waste materials to surface waters will occur. Storm water from the residence will be directed to the south to a ditch that lies across S. 118th Street. CL Page 2 of q:\Riverstone Homes\SEPA staf rpt.doc 04/28/2005 8:40 AM r J SEPA Review — E05 -002 Riverstone Homes April 27, 2005 Plants The site is vacant and composed completely of a Type 3 wetland. The plant community is comprised of plants characteristic of wetlands — reed canarygrass, creeping buttercup, black cottonwood, pacific willow and Himalayan blackberry. Approximately 35% of the site will be used fora . ' -nment leaving the remainder of the parcel undeveloped: The original wetland mitigation p._<.; provided by the applicant proposed to plant eight trees to compensate for building on the site. The Checklist states that 3,750 sq. ft. of mostly reed canarygrass will be removed. The mitigat: n plan has been revised to provide additional plantings along the western side of the site. l r.c' mitigation plantings will be monitored for three years and monitoring reports submitted by December 31 of each year during the monitoring period. Animals The SEPA Checklist notes that songbirds have been observed on or near the site. It is likely that other small mammals such as rodents also frequent the project site. There are no known threatened or endangered species on or near the site. The site is within the Pacific Flyway migration route. Energy/Natural Resources The completed project will use electricity and natural gas for lighting, heating and cooking purposes. The residence will comply with the State Energy Code. Environmental Health Construction noise will occur during regular hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The site is subject to aircraft noise from the King County Airport. Construction equipment and all operations will be in accordance with City of Tukwila noise ordinances. Land /Shoreline Uses The project site, an 8,768 sq. ft. parcel, is located in a primarily residential area, with residential uses on all sides except the east. The Burlington Northern rail yard is located on the east side of the property. The zoning and comprehensive plan designations for the site are Low Density Residential (LDR). Historically, the site was part of dairy pasture land in the early- to mid- 1900's. As noted above, the entire site is Type 3 wetland or wetland buffer. This project is vested under the City's previous Sensitive Areas Ordinance, which requires a 50 foot buffer for a Type 3 wetland. The original mitigation plan submitted proposed to plant 8 evergreen CL Page 3 of 4 q: \Riverstone Flomes \SEPA staffrpt.doc 04/28/2005 8:40 AM SEPA Review — E05 -002 Riverstone Homes April 27, 2005 trees as compensation for the filling of 3,149 sq. ft. of wetland for the building site The mitigation plan has been revised to provide a range of plantings along the western side of the parcel with a mix of Red -Osier Dogwood, Twinberry, Oregon Ash, Western Red Cedar and Sitka Spruce. The existing, mature vegetation on the eastern portion of the parcel will be retained. Invasive plant material will be removed by hand if possible — if machinery is needed, hand held machinery will be used. The wetland mitigation area will be fenced off with split rail fencing and signed in three locations to indicate the presence , _ of a wetland on the property. The project is subject to Reasonable Use as the entire site is constrained by wetland or wetland buffer. The Reasonable Use application will be considered at a public hearing to be held on May 26, 2005 before the City's Planning Commission. Historic /Cultural Preservation There are no places or objects listed on or proposed for national state or local preservation registers on or near the site. Transportation The checklist estimates that the residence will generate 2 -8 trips daily. The number of trips generated will depend, in part, on the number of drivers residing in the new home. Public Services The new residence will probably generate a minor increased need for public services such as police, fire and schools. Utilities The site will be served by City of Tukwila sewer and water, PSE electricity and natural gas and Qwest telephone service. Recommendation Determination of Nonsignificance CL Page4of4 q:'\Riverstone Ffomes \SEPA statfrpt.doc 04/28/2005 8:40 AM J. S. Jones anc� Associates, Inc. April 25, 2005 Ms. Carol Lumb Senior Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 RECEIVED `APR 2 6 2005' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RE: L05 -010 Riverstone Homes Reasonable Use Application & E05 -002 SEPA Review Dear Ms. Lumb: Attached is a revised Wetland Mitigation and Landscape Plan, dated April 25, 2005. This plan addresses items 1 through 7 of the cities comment letter dated April 15, 2005. The pre - construction notification (PCN) has been sent to the COE, however a reply has not been received yet. The COE process is separate from the cities and should not hold up our application with the city. We made the changes to our SEPA checklist on page 7, B.3.c., as requested. The Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist, Part D is attached. Thank you for your assistance in process this application. Sincerely, Jeffery S. Jones Certified Professional Wetland Scientist, No. 1025 35316 28th AVENUE SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 253- 874 - 9588 / FAX 253- 874 -9579 J. S. Jones wind Associates, Inc. April 25, 2005 Ms. Suzanne Skadowski U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Branch P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, Washington 98124 -2255 RE: Riverstone Homes Pre - construction Notification, Single- family Nationwide Permit Dear Ms. Skadowski: This letter is a Pre - construction Notification for a single - family residence, as allowed in the Special Public Notice notification requirements. Permittee: Riverstone Homes, Inc., 35316 28th Ave. S. Federal Way, Washington 98003 phone number 253- 905 -5351 Location: 4424 S. 118th Street Tukwila, Washington Desciption: The property is 38.12 feet wide by 230 feet long. The entire parcel is seasonal wetland. The north half of the lot is willows and the south half is reed canarygrass. The applicant proposes to build one single - family residence on the south end of the lot, which minimizes impact to the wetland. Mitigation is in the form of vegetative enhancement on the remainder of the site. The project is current under review by the City of Tukwila. Legal Description: 26 3 Hillmans Meadows Gardens Div #1. Tax parcel no. 334740 -0720. The permitted does not own any other properties within a one mile radius of the subject property. Attached is a revised Wetland Mitigation and Landscape Plan, dated April 25, 2005. This plan addresses items 1 through 7 of the cities comment letter dated April 15, 2005. The pre - construction notification (PCN) has been sent to the COE, however a reply has not been received yet. The COE process is separate from the cities and should not hold up our application with the city. 35316 28th AVENUE SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 253- 874 - 9588 /FAX 253- 874 -9579 • Sincerely, ,16-c-) A Jeffery S. Jones Certified Professional Wetland Scientist, SWS No. 1025 April 2005 7 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. April 15, 2005 1 City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Jeffrey S. Jones J.S. Jones and Associates 35316 28th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 RE: L05 -010 Riverstone Homes Reasonable Use Application and E05 -002, SEPA Review Dear Mr. Jones: We have had an opportunity to review in more detail the SEPA and Reasonable Use materials you submitted for the Riverstone Homes project and have the following comments that must be addressed. Wetland Mitigation and Planting Plan In general, the mitigation plan is not sufficient and does not address loss or replacement of wetland functions. The following are specific comments. 1. The mitigation plan needs to be linked to the assessment, particularly in relation to wetland functions. It should describe what functions are being lost due to the project and what functions are being addressed /replaced by the mitigation. The goals of the mitigation plan should be clearly stated and the proposed actions should reflect the goals and indicate how lost functions are being replaced. 2. The mitigation plan should indicate what vegetation is being removed from the site and what is being retained. Existing native plants should be retained wherever possible. 3. There should be some discussion of how existing invasive plants will be dealt with as part of mitigation and what the ongoing management will be for their control (aside from hand weeding around the plantings, as described in the specifications). Will the site be cleared and the reed canary grass removed? If one of the intentions of the plan is to shade out the reed canary grass over time, the density of the proposed planting is probably not sufficient to accomplish this and additional planting should be proposed. 4. A greater variety of plant materials is required in order for the mitigation plan to be acceptable. The additional plant material must include some deciduous trees and shrubs like those that already exist on site. 5. Adequate irrigation will need to be provided for the Western Red Cedar to survive in full sun conditions, otherwise a different tree species should be specified. 6. The use of coarse bark mulch, in addition to compost mulch, is acceptable. 7. Plants should be container grown (as opposed to containerized) and container grown plants are preferable to balled and burlapped. However, if B &B plants are used, the root balls 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • Mr. Jeffrey S. Jones Riverstone Homes Reasonable Use April 15, 2005 must be inspected and root - pruned as described in the specifications (item 8.8) and the burlap must be removed completely from the root ball when planting. The planting detail shown on Sheet 1 of the mitigation plan does not coincide with what is stated in the specifications on Sheet 2 in item 8.18 with respect to removal of burlap from B &B plants. 8. Please provide a copy of the pre - construction notification (PCN) submitted to the Corps of Engineers for authorization under a Nationwide Permit and a copy of the written response provided to the applicant by the Corps for the files. SEPA and Endangered Species Checklist 1. For your own files, please correct your SEPA checklist, page 7, B.3.c. to indicate that the storm water will not be directed to the wetland with a dispersion trench system. The building permit approved by Public Works directs storm drainage including downspout runoff to the south to an existing ditch. I have made that correction already in the SEPA Checklist file copy. 2. The Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist submitted was missing responses to Part D, questions 3 -1 through 3 -8. Please complete the enclosed sheets and return them to me. The Reasonable Use application is tentatively scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning Commission on Thursday, May 26, 2005. In order to maintain that hearing date, I need to receive your response to the above comments and corrected mitigation plan by Tuesday, April 26, 2005. When you submit your materials, please make sure you direct them to my attention. If you have any questions, please call me at 206 - 431 -3661. Sincerely, a (w — Carol Lumb Senior Planner Enclosures cc: Sandra Whiting, Urban Environmentalist Nora Gierloff, Planning Manager David McPherson, Development Engineer, Public Works Department 2 ,q cpl \Riyerstone Homes\Correction Letter.doc MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING DEPT. — Carol Lumb, Senior Planner OHM FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. — David McPherson, Development Engineer DATE: April 14, 2005 SUBJECT: Riverstone Homes, Inc. (SFR) 4424 South 118th Street SEPA and Reasonable Use Comments SEPA — E05 -002 1. Related Building Permit — D04 -371 was approved by Public Works on March 22, 2005. Storm drainage including downspout runoff, flows to the South to an existing ditch. Plans submitted for SEPA, shows flow to the North and to a dispersion trench. 2. The Environmental Checklist should be revised (or) comments should be placed in SEPA file — see enclosed. 3. The Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist should be revised (or) comments should be placed in SEPA file — see enclosed. REASONABLE USE = L05 -010 Public Works has no comments. I litsSiour Dept. Of Community Developmen City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION: .HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Meeting Determination o on-Significance Mitigated Determination.bf Non= Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Short Subdivision Agenda Determination Notice Notice of Action Official Notice sign cance :. &.-`Scopi ng Notice of Appli cat; on4.:. Shoreline Mgmt Permit FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Notice of Application '= =;for Shore 1_ i ne_ Mgmt Permit Other Was mailed)o each of the addresses listed on this year 20 DS f4Project Name: � Vt-Q Project Number: L_OS ' Q /C7 & 05---00a Q0 D . #Ce(.9:e)fV-- Mailer's Signature: Person requesting mailing: 1 .` P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM • Cizy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION March 29, 2005 Jeffrey S. Jones J.S. Jones & Associates 35316 28th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 RE: Riverstone Homes Lot 26, L05 -010 and E05 -002 Dear Mr. Jones: Your application for reasonable use and environmental review for a single family home located at 4424 S. 118th Street has been found to be complete on March 29, 2005 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. The project is tentatively scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning Commission on May 26, 2005. 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 prepare and install the sign with your application packet. If you need another set of those instructions, you may obtain them at the Department of Community Development (DCD) or from the City's web site, www.ci.tukwila.wa.us under permit applications. Also, you must obtain a laminated copy of the Notice of Application to post on the board. Please call me 3 days prior to installing the notice board to arrange the pick up of the laminated Notice of Application. After installing the sign with the laminated notice, you must return the signed Affidavit of Posting to our office. This determination of complete application does not preclude the City from requesting additional plans or information if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. This notice of complete application applies only to the permits identified above. It is your responsibility to apply for and obtain any other necessary permits issued by other agencies. There may be permits from other agencies required which we have not identified. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 431 -3661. Sincerely, Carol Lumb Senior Planner cc: Nora Gierloff, Planning Manager Sandra Whiting, Urban Environmentalist q: \Riverstone Homes \Complete.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 -431 -3665 Earth contItants, Inc. lk 1'ri,HU` "' Geotecnnical Engineers, Geologists & Environmental Scientists Construct 101 i Testing & 1030 / Wn130 Inspection Services • Established 1975 February 2, 2005 E -1 1589 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 35316 — 28th Avenue South Federal Way, Washington 98003 Attention: Mr. Jeff Jones Subject: Dear Mr. Jones: Foundation Recommendations Proposed Single - Family Residence 4424 South 118th Street Tukwila, Washington RECEDED FEB 17 2005' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT As requested, Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) is pleased to present this letter containing our foundation recommendations for the proposed single - family residence to be constructed at 4424 South 118th Street in Tukwila, Washington. This letter presents the results of our subsurface exploration and our foundation recommendations. Scope of Services We performed this study in general accordance with the scope of services outlined in our December 9, 2004 proposal, which was authorized on January 21, 2005. On this basis, our study addresses: • Subsurface soil and groundwater conditions; and • Foundation design recommendations, including bearing capacity, lateral pressures, and estimates of potential total and differential settlement. Project Description We understand it is planned to construct a two -story single - family residence in the southern portion of an approximately 0.21 -acre undeveloped lot located at 4424 South 118th Street in Tukwila, Washington. Based on preliminary design information provided by the client, the proposed residence will have an approximate footprint of 1,260 square feet. We anticipate that the proposed residence will be of relatively lightly - loaded wood -frame construction with a combination of slab -on -grade and wood -joist floors. Access to the proposed residence will be off of South 118th Street, located at the south end of the subject site. 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 201, Bellevue, WA 98005 Bellevue (425) 643 -3780 FAX (425) 746 -0860 Toll Free (888) 739 -6670 Other Locations Fife J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. February 2, 2005 E -1 1589 Page 2 We understand site grades will be raised on the order of two (2) to three (3) feet within the vicinity of the proposed residence. If any of the above design criteria are incorrect or change, we should be consulted to review the recommendations contained in this letter. In any case, ECI should be retained to perform a general review of the final design. Surface Conditions The subject site consists of an approximately 0.21 -acre, undeveloped, rectangular lot located at 4424 South 118th Street in Tukwila, Washington. The subject site is bordered to the north and east by a northwest - southeast trending portion of the Burlington Northern Railroad line, to the west by an existing single - family residence, and to the south by South 1 18th Street. Topography across the majority of the property is relatively level. An east - facing, approximately two to three foot tall ascending slope is located along the southern third of the western property line. We understand that the site grades in the vicinity of the proposed residence will be raised to match the top of this existing slope. The subject site is vegetated primarily with tall grass. Subsurface Conditions Subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by excavating two test holes using a Toro Dingo with an auger attachment at the approximate locations shown on Plate 1. The test holes were excavated to a maximum exploration depth of ten (10) feet below existing grade. Please refer to the attached Subsurface Exploration Logs for a more detailed description of the subsurface conditions encountered at each test hole. The following is a generalized description of the subsurface conditions encountered. At each of our test hole locations we encountered a surficial layer of topsoil and sod. The topsoil and sod layer was approximately three to four inches thick and was characterized by its dark brown color, loose consistency, and the presence of abundant roots and organic debris. Underlying the existing topsoil and sod, we typically encountered an approximately three foot thick upper layer of loose mottled silt (Unified Soil Classification ML) underlain by interbedded sequences of loose to medium dense silty sand (SM) and poorly graded sand with silt (SP- SM). The fines content of the poorly graded sand with silt typically decreased with depth. Earth Consultants Inc. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. February 2, 2005 Groundwater E -1 1589 Page 3 At the time of our subsurface exploration in January of 2005, the groundwater table was encountered between one and one -half (1.5) and two and one -half (2.5) feet below existing grade at our subsurface exploration locations. Moderate to heavy groundwater seepage should be expected in site excavations greater than one and one -half (1.5) feet below existing grade, especially if the excavation is conducted during the wet season. The contractor should be made aware of the potential for groundwater seepage entering excavations and understand that groundwater levels are not static. There will likely be fluctuations in the groundwater table level and amount of seepage depending on the season, amount of rainfall, surface water runoff, and other factors. Generally, the water level is higher and seepage rate is greater in the wetter winter months (typically October through May). Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the results of our subsurface exploration and our experience in the area, it is our opinion that the proposed single - family residence can be constructed generally as planned, provided the recommendations in this letter are followed. Support for the proposed residence should be provided by a conventional spread and continuous footing foundation system bearing on at least two (2) feet of structural fill. Site Preparation and Earthwork Building, pavement, and areas to receive structural fill should be adequately stripped and cleared of any surface vegetation, topsoil or other organic matter, and other deleterious material. Based on the thickness of the topsoil and vegetative cover encountered at our subsurface exploration locations, we estimate a stripping depth of three (3) to four (4) inches in the vicinity of the proposed residence. The actual stripping depth should be based on field observation at the time of construction. In no case should the stripped materials be used as structural fill or mixed with material to be used as structural fill. The stripped materials may be "wasted" on -site in non - structural landscaping areas or they may be exported. Following the stripping operation, an ECI representative should observe the ground surface where structural fill or foundations are to be placed. Earth Consultants Inc. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. February 2, 2005 E -11589 Page 4 Structural fill is defined as compacted fill placed under load bearing areas. Structural fill used to raise the site grades and support the residence foundation should be compacted to a minimum of ninety (90) percent of its laboratory maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM designation D -1557 (Modified Proctor). The top twelve (12) inches of structural fill placed under floor slabs and pavements should be compacted a minimum of ninety -five (95) percent of maximum dry density. During dry weather, any non - organic compactable granular soil with a maximum grain size of four (4) inches can be used, provided it is near its optimum moisture content. Fill for use during wet weather should consist of a well graded granular material having a maximum grain size of four inches and no more than five (5) percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve. A contingency in the earthwork budget should be included for this possibility. ECI should review the gradation of imported soil intended for use as structural fill. Foundations It is our opinion that the proposed residence may be supported on a conventional spread and continuous footing foundation system bearing on at least two (2) feet of granular structural fill. This will require overexcavating at the perimeter and interior footing locations to a depth of at least two (2) feet below the foundation subgrade elevation and then backfilling the overexcavation with granular structural fill. The overexcavation should extend horizontally at least one (1) foot beyond the width of the foundation. Depending on the depth of the excavation and the time of year the footing excavation is completed, footing excavations may encounter the groundwater table. Structural fill should not be placed into standing water. Quarry spalls should be used to fill to above the elevation of the standing water. A granular structural fill material may be used above the quarry spalls. A non -woven geotextile fabric should be placed between the spalls and overlying structural fill to prevent the migration of fill into the spalls. With foundation support obtained as described, for design, an allowable soil bearing capacity of two thousand five hundred (2,500) psf for structural fill can be used. A bearing pressure of this magnitude would be provided with a theoretical factor -of- safety in excess of 3.0 against actual shear failure. For short-term dynamic loading conditions, a one -third increase in the above allowable soil bearing capacity can be used. Earth Consultants Inc. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. February 2, 2005 E -1 1589 Page 5 Continuous and individual spread footings should have minimum widths of sixteen (16) and eighteen (18) inches, respectively. For frost protection considerations, exterior foundation elements should be placed at a minimum depth of eighteen (18) inches below final exterior grade. Interior spread foundations can be placed at a minimum depth of twelve (12) inches below the top of slab, except in unheated areas, where interior foundation elements should be founded at a minimum depth of eighteen (18) inches. Based on preliminary design information provided by the client, the site grades will be raised on the order of two (2) to three (3) feet in the vicinity of the proposed residence. In order to follow the above recommended frost protection considerations and maintain two (2) feet of granular structural fill below the foundation elements, excavations into the native soil may range from six (6) inches to one and one -half (1.5) feet below existing grade. For the above design criteria, estimated settlements of foundations should be about one inch or Tess. Differential settlements are estimated to be on the order of one -half (0.5) inch. Most of the settlement should occur during construction as the dead loads are applied. Settlement of shallow foundations, however, can be expected as a result of liquefaction settlements. We estimate differential settlements resulting from liquefaction could be on the order of one (1) to one and one -half (1.5) inches. Adequate foundation bearing below the shallow foundations, however, should be maintained due to the recommendations that footings be supported on at least two (2) feet of granular structural fill. Horizontal loads can be resisted by friction between the base of the foundation and the supporting soil and by passive soil pressure acting on the face of the buried portion of the foundation. For the latter, the foundation must be poured "neat" against competent native soils or backfilled with structural fill. For frictional capacity, a coefficient of 0.35 can be used. For passive earth pressure, the available resistance can be computed using an equivalent fluid pressure of three hundred (300) pounds per cubic foot (pcf). These lateral resistance values are allowable values; a factor -of- safety of 1.5 has been included. As movement of the foundation element is required to mobilize full passive resistance, the passive resistance should be neglected if such movement is not acceptable. A representative of ECI should be retained to periodically observe the foundation overexcavation to verify that soil conditions are as anticipated at the time of this study and to provide density testing on structural fill. Earth Consultants Inc. i• J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. February 2, 2005 Limitations E -11589 Page 6 Our recommendations and conclusions are based the site materials observed, the design information provided us, and our experience and engineering judgment. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No warranty is expressed or implied. The recommendations submitted in this letter are based upon the data obtained from the test holes and our visual observations. Soil and groundwater conditions may vary from those encountered. The nature and extent of variations may not become evident until construction. If variations do appear, ECI should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations of this letter and to modify or verify them in writing before proceeding with construction. Additional Services As the engineering geologist of record, ECI should be retained to perform a general review of the final design and specifications to verify that the earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design and in the construction specifications. ECI should also be retained to provide geotechnical services during construction. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations, and to allow design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. We trust this letter meets your current needs. services, please call. Respectfully submitted, EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. Steven T. Swenson Staff Geologist STS /SDD /ddw If you have any questions, or need additional Scott D. Dinkelman, LEG Principal Attachments: Plate 1, Subsurface Exploration Plan Legend Subsurface Exploration Logs Earth Consultants Inc. LEGEND TH -1+ Lot 334740 -0690 Lot 334740 -0700 Lot 334740 -0705 Lot 334740 -0710 Lot 334740 -0715 Lot 334740 -0720 -- - - - -I- EXISTING SOUTH 118TH STREET Approimate Location of ECI Test Hole, ECI Proj. No. E- 11589, Jan. 2005 ( -I Subject Site Proposed Single - Family Residence NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. ECI cannot be responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. Approximate Scale 0 20 40 80ft %.c1 Earth Consultants, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering, Geology. Environmental Sciences '.,� Cnnstriirtinn Testing t6 ICBO / wAESO Inspection Services Gk )0∎ L' Subsurface Location Plan 4424 South 118th Street Tukwila, Washington Drwn. GAP Date Feb. 2005 Proj. No. 11589 Checked STS Date 2/2/05 Plate 1 MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH [SYMBOL LETTER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION • Coarse Grained Soils More Than ' 50% Material Larger Than 'No. 200 Sieve Size Gravel And Gravelly Soils More Than 50 °b Coarse Fraction Retained On No. 4 Sieve Clean Gravels (little or no fines) i' d < o p o 0 o V r1 ('L GW Well- Graded Gravels, Gravel -Sand Mixtures, Little Or No Fines M r 4 GP gp Poorly - Graded Gravels, Gravel - Sand Mixtures, Little Or No Fines Gravels With Fines ( appreciable amount of fines) GM gm Silty Gravels, Gravel -Sand- Silt Mixtures ♦ i'> gC Clayey y Gravels, Gravel - Sand- e Clay Mixtures Sand And • Sandy Soils More Than 50% Coarse Fraction Passing No 4 Sieve, Clean Sand ( little or no fines) .. '0 ' o ', c • C C a c o SW SW Well - Graded Sands, Gravelly Sands, Little Or No Fines .t s,! :: i> < • • 3 ?` "•::. •'•' ?•., •: :•p'•: S, Sp Poorly- Graded Sands, Gravelly Sands, Little Or No Fines Sands With Fines (appreciable amount of fines) , SM Sm Silty Sands, Sand - Silt Mixtures SC SC Clayey Sands, Sand - Clay Mixtures — Grained Graff Soils More Than 50% Material Smaller Than No. 200 Sieve Size' Silts Liquid Limit And Clays Less Than 50 I Srpl' I • ML Inorganic Silts & Very Fine Sands, Rock Flour,Silty- Clayey Fine Sands; Clayey Silts w/ Slight Plasticity. �j��/ CL CI Inorganic Clays Of Low To Medium Plasticity, Gravelly Clays, Sandy Clays, Silty Clays, Lean ( I I I "III!' i I I ' I l l t OI Organic Silts And 'Organic Silty Clays Of Low Plasticity Silts And Liquid Limit Clays Greater Than 50 I. MH mh Inorganic Silts, Micaceous Or Diatomaceous Fir& Sand Or Silty Soils CH Cil Inorganic Clays .Of High Plasticity, Fat Clays. / / / / 1 / //// OH oh Organic Clays Of Medium To'High Plasticity, Organic Silts Highly Organic Soils • "' I, L /„‘ /, .,‘1. PT pt Peat, Humus, Swamp Soils With High Organic Contents Topsoil ' y 4, y 4, Humus And Duff Layer Fill �� Hiyhly Variable Constituents C qu W P pcf LL PI The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of the material presented in the attached Togs. DUAL SYMBOLS are used to Indicate borderline soil classification. TORVANE READING, tsf PENETROMETER READING, tsf MOISTURE, % dry weight SAMPLER PUSHED SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED DRY DENSITY, lbs. per cubic ft. LIQUID LIMIT, % PLASTIC INDEX I 11 2" O.D. SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER 24" I.D. RING OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER WATER OBSERVATION WELL 2 DEPTH OF ENCOUNTERED GROUNDWATER DURING EXCAVATION Y SUBSEQUENT GROUNDWATER LEVEL W/ DATE Earth Consultants Inc. (H „i,, 11114 tli ,. fu d„gisIs & r.,s'Ir(1111 I..i,i.1 Scientists LEGEND Proj. No. 115891 Date ' Fa .2005 I Plate Al • • • SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOGS E -11589 Test Hole TH -1 Location: Near northeast corner of proposed residence Approximate topsoil and sod thickness: 3 inches Depth USCS USCS Soil Classification 0.0 — 3.0 ML Light brown mottled SILT, loose, wet 3.0 — 8.0 SM Black silty SAND, loose to medium dense, water bearing - iron oxide staining - decrease in fines at approximately 5.0 feet 8.0 — 10.0 SP -SM Black poorly graded sand with SILT, medium dense, water bearing Test hole terminated at 10.0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater table encountered at 1 .5 feet during excavation. Test Hole TH -2 Location: Near southwest corner of proposed residence Approximate topsoil and sod thickness: 4 inches Depth USCS USCS Soil Classification 0.0 — 3.0 ML Light brown mottled SILT, loose, wet 3.0 — 4.0 SM Black silty SAND, loose to medium dense, water bearing - iron oxide staining 4.0 — 7.0 SP -SM Black poorly graded sand with SILT, medium dense, water bearing Test hole terminated at 7:0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater table encountered at 2.5 feet during excavation. Earth Consultants Inc. • • Appendix A: Data Sheets for Depressional Outflow and Riverine Impounding Wetlands and Classification Key Procedures - Lowlands W WA Datasheets Part 2, August 1999 Wetland Name: Location: Data Collector: • • AU ID #: T /S/R: / 0 / zZ / O cl Date: 7/US- Use this data sheet for: DEPRESSIONAL OUTFLOW or RIVERINE IMPOUNDING wetlands in the Lowlands of Westerns Washington ., • Use in conjunction with: the written guidance provided in:Parts.1 and 2! • Record only numbers, y_es /no= answers:are;recordedas a,[I] or [0) • Estimate, Score/ or Rating 0 1/0 ha ha o % o LANDSCAPE DATA DO Do dikes surround the AU :and does it drain through a control structure that can be manipulated? DI Area of AU Z D2 Area of contributing basin (upgradient watershed) D3 Land use (as % of total area) within 1 km of AU (include contiguous AUs of different class) D3.1 Undeveloped forest (if previously clear -cut, cut at least 5 years ago) D3.2 Agriculture (tilled fields and pastures; includes golf courses) D3.3 Clear -cut logging ( <5 years since clearing) D3.4 Urban /commercial (any developed areas not identified as residential) D3.5 High density residential ( >1 residence /acre) D3.6 Low density residential ( <= 1 residence /acre) D3.7 Undeveloped areas, shrubland, other wetlands, and open water WATER REGIME 0 on D4 Channels, ditches, or streams in AU d 0/1 D4.1 Channels, ditches, or streams in AU have permanently flowing water (you see water flowing) D4.2 0/1 D4.3 The only surface outflow from the AU is through a culvert ( <60 cm) or vertical siphon 0 / 0 / 0 0/1 0/1 0/1 0/1 0/1 0/1 D5 D6 D7 D8 D8.1 Inundation Percent of AU that is ponded or inundated for >1 month D8.2 Percent of AU with permanent standing or moving water D8.3 Percent of AU with permanent open water (without aquatic bed vegetation) D8.4 Percent of AU with unvegetated bars or mudflats D8.5 Unvegetated bars or mudflats at least 100 square meters in size D9 Inundation regimes D9.1 Permanently flooded (include vegetated areas) D9.2 Seasonally flooded ( >1 month) D9.3 Occasionally flooded ( <= 1 month) D9.4 Saturated but seldom inundated D9.5 Permanently flowing stream D9.6 Intermittently flowing stream D10 Average height of annual flooding above lowest point of outlet or surface of permanent stream at outlet (round to 0.3 m) By definition: D8.I >= D8.2 > =D8.3 Chose all that apply that meet size criteria: area >0.1 ha (1/4 acre) or > 10% of AU if AU smaller than 1 ha (2.5 acres) Procedures - Lowlands W WA Datasheets Part 2, August 1999 DEPRESSIONAL OUTFLOW or RIVERINE IMPOUNDING Wetland Name: AU,:ID #• Dl l Cross section of AU in areas of seasonal inundation (record a 1 next to cross section that best fits) O 0/1 DIl.1 Cross section I 0/1 DI1.2 Cross section 2 0/1 D11.3 Cross section 3 1 2 \ 3 / D12 Categories of water depths in AU, areas permanently or seasonally, inundated /flooded 0/1 D12.1 1 -20 cm ( <8 in) 0/1 D12.2 20 -100 cm (8 -40 in) 0/1 D12.3 >100 cm ( >40 in) D13 Constriction of outlet on D13.1 Unconstricted or only slightly constricted 0/1 DI3.2 Moderately constricted 0/1 D13.3 Severely constricted O 0/1 DI3.4 Riverine Impounding only — Completely constricted (no surface outlet) Record a 1 for each category present if >0.1 ha (1/4 acre) or 10% of area If the AU has multiple outlets, judge the constriction as if all the outlets were combined into one large one. VEGETATION D14 Cowardin Classes (as % area of AU) % D14.1 Forest - evergreen 5'0 % D14.2 Forest - deciduous % D14.3 Scrub -shrub - evergreen 3o % DI4.4 Scrub -shrub - deciduous 30 % D14.5 Emergent O % D14.6 Aquatic bed O 0/1 D15 Does D8.3 + D8.4 + sum (D14.1 to D14.6) = 100? If not, give reason. 0 % D16 % area of herbaceous understory in forest and shrub areas (not % area in entire AU) 6 p % D17 % area of AU with >75% closure of canopy (SS, FO classes > 1 m high) D18 D19 Plant Richness # D19.1 Record number of native plant species found in AU • Include forest only if trees are rooted in AU. • If forest is a mix of deciduous and evergreen estimate the relative % cover of each and divide percentage between the two categories. • If vegetation classes are patchy, add the patches together for each class to get a total. • To count, a class must cover at least 0.1 ha or be more than 10% of the total area of the AU S ems— b� awe�f 3 # D19.2 Record number of non- native plant species found in AU 3 # D20 The # of plant assemblages in the AU with area >0.1 ha (1/4 acre) or >10% if AU <1 ha (if more than 12 record a 12) [1 -6] D21 Strata: The maximum # of strata present in any plant assemblage 0/1 D21.1 Is vine stratum dominated by non - native blackberries? A stratum must have 20% cover in assemblage Procedures - Lowlands W WA Part 2, August 1999 Datasheets DEPRESSIONAL OUTFLOW or RIVERINE IMPOUNDING 0/1 D22 Mature trees in AU Average DBH of 3 out of 5 largest trees of a species has to exceed size threshold D23 Sphagnum bogs b 0/1 D23.1 % area of Sphagnum bogs >75% • 0/1 D23.2 % area of Sphagnum bogs = 50 -75% C2 0/1 D23.3 % area of Sphagnum bogs = 25 -49% 12 0/1 D23.4 % area of Sphagnum bogs = 1 -24% t7 0/1 D23.5 % area of Sphagnum bogs = 0% D24 Dominance by non - native plant species / 0/1 D24.1 % area of non - native species >75% Q 0/1 D24.2 % area of non - native species = 50 -75% O 0/1 D24.3 %area of non- native species = 25 -49% Q 0/1 D24.4 % area of non - native species = 1 -24% 0/1 D24.5 % area of non - natives = 0% Tsuga heterophylla (western hemlock) >45 cm (18 ") Thuja plicata (western red cedar) >45 cm (18 ") Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas fir) >45 cm (18 ") Picea sitchensis (Sitka spruce) >45 cm (18 ") Populus balsamifera (black cottonwood) >45 cm (18 ") Acer macrophyllum (big -leaf maple) >45 cm (18 ") Alnus rubra (red alder) >30 cm (12 ") Fraxinus latifolia (Oregon ash) >30 cm (12 ") Pinus contorta (lodgepole pine) >30 cm (12 ") Salix lucida (Pacific willow) >30 cm (12 ") HABITAT CHARACTERISTICS [0 -3] D25 Number of structure categories in aquatic bed vegetation Applies only to aquatic bed species DO NOT count persistent emergents D26 jj 7 [4 -9] D26:1 pH of interstitial water (measure immediately after digging hole in non - inundated areas) 7 [4 -9] D26.2 pH of open or standing water (record the lowest pH, if you cannot measure record a [7J) 0 0/1 D27 Estuary: AU is within 8 km (5 mi) of a brackish or salt water estuary 0/1 D28 Large lake: AU is within 1.6km (1 mi) of a lake >8 ha (20 acres) Q 0/1 D29 Open field: AU is within 5 km (3 mi) of an open field (agriculture or pasture) >16 ha (40 acres) 0/1 D30 Preferred woody vegetation: AU has >1 ha (2.5 acres) of preferred woody vegetation for beaver in and within 100 m of AU Procedures - Lowlands W WA Part 2, August 1999 Datasheets DEPRESSIONAL OUTFLOW or RIVERINE IMPOUNDING 1 Wetland'Name: AU p#: / [0 -8] D31 Snags (record # of stages) Circle the categories present; minimum DBH of snag =10 cm (4") stage stage �eclinin; dead stage loose stage clean stage stage stage down stage bark upright broken decomposed material stump 0 0/1 D31.1 At least one of the snags above has a DBH greater than 30 cm (12 "). 0/1 D32 Overhanging vegetation, extending out for 1 m, for at least 10 m (33 ft) over stream or open water. O 0/1 D33 Upland islands of at least 10 square meters (100 square ft.) within AU boundary Islands need to be surrounded by at least 30 m (100 ft) of open water deeper than I m (3 ft) 0 0/1 D34 Undercut banks present for at least 2 m (6.6 ft.) rL [0 -4] D35 Key for rating egg- laving structures for amphibians 1. Does the AU have thin - stemmed vegetation or thin branches ( <8 mm) in at least 1/4 acre (or 10% of AU) of permanent or seasonally inundated areas? Thin - stemmed vegetation can include herbaceous species such as water parsley. NO— Score =0 YES got 2. Does the AU have at least 0.2 ha (1/2 acre) of thin - stemmed emergent vegetation or woody branches, 1 -4 mm in diameter? NO go to 5 YES go to 3. Does the area with thin stems contain open water interspersed in a patchwork of a ratio that is approximately 1:1 . more than a 40- 60% of the total area is open water)? O go to 4 YES - Score = 4 4. Is the area of open water between 25% and 75% of the total area in the zone of thin stemmed vegetation? (___N-11-:1— Score --7� YES — Score = 3 STOP 5. Does the AU have >0.1 ha (1/4 acre) of thin - stemmed emergent vegetation or woody branches, 1- 4 mm? NO — Score =1 YES go to 6 6. Does the area with thin stems contain open water interspersed in a patchwork of a ratio that is approximately 1:1 [no more than a 40- 60% of the total area is open water)? NO go to 7 YES — Score = 3 7. Is the area of open water between 25% and 75% of the total area in the zone of thin stemmed vegetation? NO — Score =1 YES — Score = 2 Procedures - Lowlands W WA Datasheets Part 2, August 1999 DEPRESSIONAL OUTFLOW or RIVERINE IMPOUNDING 0/1 D36 p 0/1 D37 0 [0 -3] D38 Tannins in surface waters >10% of water surface Steep banks for denning ( >30 degree slope, fine material, >10 m long, >0.6 m high) (may be a dike) Interspersion between erect vegetation and permanent open water (POW + AB) areas of AU None [0] Low [1] Moderate [2] Moderate [2] 2 [0 -3] D39 Interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes Low [1] High [3] Low [1] High [3] *A Us with only 2 classes can only score a moderate[2] or lower *A Us with 4 vegetation classes score a high [3] *A Us with 3 classes can score a moderate (2) or a high (3) None [0] Low [1] Moderate [2] High [3] Low [1] Moderate [2] High [3] High [3] Procedures - Lowlands W WA Part 2, August 1999 Datasheets DEPRESSIONAL OUTFLOW or RIVERINE IMPOUNDING Wetland Naive: D40 0 [0 -3] D41 Edge of AU: The characteristics of the edge between AU and uplands or adjacent wetlands. Choose the description that best fits the characteristics of the AU edge: 0 There are no differences in level of vegetation height as reflected by vegetation classes on each side of the AU for more than 50% of the circumference: record a [0] regardless of the sinuosity. Examples: emergent (or herbaceous) to emergent (or herbaceous), shrub to shrub, forest to forest. 1 There is a difference of one level in vegetation height as reflected by vegetation classes on each side of the AU and the edge is straight for more than 50% of the circumference: record a [1]. Example: emergent (or herbaceous) to shrub, shrub to forest 2 There is a difference of one level in vegetation height as reflected by vegetation classes on each side of the AU and the edge is sinuous for more than 50% of the circumference: record a [2]. Examples: emergent (or herbaceous) to shrub, shrub to forest. 2 There is a difference of more than one level of vegetation height as reflected by vegetation classes on each side of the AU and the edge is straight: record a [2]. Examples: emergent (or herbaceous) to forest, bryophytes to scrub /shrub or forest. 3 There is a difference of more than one level of vegetation height as reflected by vegetation classes on each side of the AU and the edge is sinuous: record a [3]. Example: emergent (or herbaceous) to forest, bryophytes to scrub /shrub or forest. 2 If no single category above extends for more than 50% of the circumference, and the edge is straight: record a [2] 3 If no single category above extends for more than 50% of the circumference, and the edge is sinuous: record a [3] l [0 -5] D42 Buffer of AU: Choose the description that best represents condition of AU buffer * Open water or adjacent wetlands are considered part of the buffer * Infrequently used gravel or paved roads or vegetated dikes in a relatively undisturbed buffer can be; gnored as a "disturbance" 5 00 m (330 ft) of forest, scrub, relatively undisturbed grassland or open water >95% of circumference. Clear -cut >5 years old is OK. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer. 4 100 m (330 ft) of forest, scrub, relatively undisturbed grassland or open water >50% circumference OR 50 m (170 ft) of forest scrub, grassland or open water >95% circumference. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer. 3 100 m (330 ft) of forest, scrub, grassland or open water >25% circumference, OR 50 m (170 ft) of forest, scrub, grassland or open water >50% circumference. 2 No paved areas or buildings within 25m (80 ft) of wetland >95% circumference. Pasture or lawns are OK. OR no paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland >50% circumference 0 Vegetated buffers are <2 m wide (6.6 ft) for more than 95% of the circumference 1 Does not meet any of the criteria above Procedures - Lowlands W WA Datasheets Part 2, August 1999 Wetland Name: 1 [0 -3] D43 • DEPRESSIONAL OUTFLOW or RIVERINE IMPOUNDING AU`1 #• Corridors of AU: Rate corridors using following key (record rating of 0, 1, 2, or 3) 1. Is the :..: of a riparian corridor (see text for definitions) o 5 YES go to 2 2. Is the wetland part of riparian corridor > 50 m wide connecting 2 or more wetlands within 1 km with at least 30% shrub or forest cover in the corridor? NO goto3 YES =[3] 3. Is the AU part of a riparian corridor 25 -50 m wide connecting to other wetlands with at least 30% shrub or forest cover in the corridor? NO goto4 YES =[2] 4. Is the AU part of a riparian corridor >5 m wide with relatively undisturbed veg. (grasslands, abandoned pasture are OK) that extends for more than 1 km? NO go to 5 YES = [1] 5. Is there a corridor >50 m wide with good ( >30 %) cover of forest or shrub ( >2 m high) to natural uplands or open water that is >100 ha in size? go to 6 YES = [3] 6. Is there a 10 -50 m wide forest or shrub corridor to a relatively undisturbed upland or open water that is >lO ha? oto7 YES =[2] 7. Is there a corridor of relatively undisturbed vegetation (grassland, abandoned pasture) >50 m wide to an undisturbed upland or open water that is >10 ha? o to 8 YES = [2] 8. Is there any vegetated corridor 5 -50 m wide between the AU and any relatively undisturbed area or open water that is >2.5 ha? NO = [0] 3 [0 -12] D44 # of categories of large woody debris in AU outside of perm. water Freshly cut' stumps are not included Diameter 10 -20cm (4 -8 ") 21 -50cm (8 -20 ") >50 cm ( >20 ") i -.�- ::.�vi�f�': • Log Class 1 Log Class 2 Log Class 3 Stump [0 -12] D45 # of categories of large woody debris in permanent water of AU (may include aquatic bed areas) Diameter 10 -20cm 21 -50cm >50 cm ':....■:vi if_ (4 -8 ") (8 -20 ") ( >20 ") Log Class 1 Log Class 2 Log Class 3 Stump Procedures - Lowlands W WA Part 2, August 1999 Datasheets DEPRESSIONAL OUTFLOW or RIVERINE IMPOUNDING / 0/1 • 0/1 0/1 • 0/1 O 0/1 o 0/1 / 0/1 • 0/1 SOILS and SUBSTRATES D46 Composition of AU surface D46.1 Deciduous, broad - leaved, leaf litter D46.2 Other plant litter D46.3 Decomposed organic D46.4 Exposed cobbles D46.5 Exposed gravel D46.6 Exposed sand D46.7 Exposed silt D46.8 Exposed clay Record a 1 for each category present if its area is > 10 square meters. Note: bare earth from animal tunnels does NOT count. D47 Soils present in top (15 cm) of A horizon (record [1] if 1 -49% area of AU, [2] if 50 -95 %, [3] if >95 %) Peat O [0 -3] D47.1 O [0 -3] D47.2 Q [0 -3] D47.3 o [0 -3] D47.4 D48 • 0/1 D48.1• 0 0/1 D48.2 0/1 D48.3 D49 • 0/1 D49.1 O 0/1 D49.2 D49.3 Organic Muck Mineral with clay fraction <30% Clay (clay fraction >30 %) Infiltration rate of top 60 cm of soil in seasonally inundated areas Fast >50% gravel and cobble and the rest a sand, loamy sand, or sandy loam Moderate >50% sand and rest cobble, gravel, loamy sand, or sandy loam Slow - muck, peat, or loams (except sandy loam), silts, and clays Substrate of streams Substrate of permanent stream or river in AU has at least 1 square meter of gravel Substrate of permanent stream or river in AU has at least 1 square meter of cobbles Record the least permeable layer if there are several down to 60 cm. Rating L.. L L Judgements of Opportunity (Ratings of High, Medium, Low) Functions Removing Sediments Removing Nutrients Removing Toxic Metals and Organics Reducing Peak Flows Reducing Downstream Erosion Recharging Groundwater General Habitat Anadromous Fish Habitat Procedures - Lowlands W WA Part 2, August 1999 Datasheets J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. WETLAND ASSESSMENT of the Riverstone Homes Property 4474 South 118th Street Tukwila, Washington Tax Parcel No.: 334740 -0720 Dated: February 10, 2005 Prepared by: Jeffery S. Jones, Certified Professional Wetland Scientist Lance Erickson, Environmental Designer Suzannah White, Ecologist and Devin Creek, Biotech RECEIVED 1FEB 17 2005 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 35316 28th AVENUE SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 253-874-9588 / FAX 253- 874 -9579 Table of Contents 1.0 Project Description 1 2.0 Site Address, Identification, and Directions 1 3.0 Methodology 1 4.0 General Site Description 1 5.0 Vegetation 3 5.1 Vegetation Methodology 3 5.2 Vegetation Results 3 6.0 Hydrology 4 6.1 Hydrology Methodology 4 6.2 Hydrology Results 4 7.0 Soils 4 7.1 Soils Methodology 4 7.2 Soils Results 5 -6 8.0 Wetland and Stream Determination 6 9.0 Functional Assessment 6 9.1 Methods 6 9.2 Results 7 10.0 Wetland Rating and Buffers 7 11.0 Authority 7 12.0 Limitations 8 13.0 References 9 Figures 1.0 Vicinity Map 2 2.0 Soils Map 5 Tables 1.0 Plant Indicator Status 3 Attachments Routine Field Data Forms AU Aerial Photo Functional Assessment Data Forms DOE Functional Assessment Spreadsheet Wetland Map Feruary 2005 1 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. • • 1.0 Project Description The applicant proposes to build a single - family residence on the subject property. This study was conducted to determine the type and extent of wetlands on and near the site. 2.0 Site Address, Identification, and Directions The property is located at the east end of S. 118th Street, in Tukwila, Washington (see Figure 1.0). The tax parcel number is 334740 -0720. The property is located in the N.E. quarter of Section 10, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, of the Willamette Meridian. Directions to the site from Seattle are as follows: head south on Interstate 5; take exit 156 and head northwest on Interurban Avenue; turn right and head north on 42nd Avenue S.; turn right and head east on S. 122nd Street; turn left and head north on 44th Avenue S.; turn right and head east on S.118`" Street. After a short distance the road starts to curve right and turns into 44th Place S. Do not follow the curve to the right; instead continue straight to the east where S. 118th Street dead ends. The subject property is the last property on the northeast corner where S. 118th Street dead ends. 3.0 Methodology The wetland assessment and delineation were performed using the Routine Small Area Methodology as described in Part IV, Section D of the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (COE, 1987) and the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (DOE, 1997). The Routine Small. Area Methodology is "used when the project area is small, plant communities are homogeneous, plant community boundaries are abrupt, and the project is not controversial." The wetland determination was based on the presence of the three criteria for jurisdictional wetlands: hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation. All three criteria must be present in order to classify an area as a wetland. The wetland assessment included a review of the King County Wetland Inventory (King County, 1990), and the USDA Soil Conservation Service's, Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (Snyder, 1973). The field delineation and data collection were completed on April 26, 2004. The wetland boundary was marked with consecutively numbered orange flagging. Wetland boundaries, wetland buffers, and sample locations are presented on the attached wetland map. 4.0 General Site Description The subject property lies adjacent to the west property boundary of Northern Pacific Railroad Company's rail yard (see attached Wetland Map). To the west of the subject property is a single - family residence. Due to filling of the surrounding properties, the subject property is two to three feet lower than the property to the west and approximately four feet lower than the rail yard to the east. The east side of the property has a deciduous forested plant community. The west side of the property is dominated by reed canary grass. No structures are present on the subject property. February 2005 1 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 117111 ST 1 [BFePIIPB;6 ?N S a PARR 11111111iii11® .▪ S AVON F • ST ST ' Riverstone Homes Site r' K S 1151H S T �rl JUNIPER R� ST .a PE .45 S 12LST S1 �i \ qt, 5 11.111D i4 Q r Riverstone Homes Property Tukwila, Washington Figure 1.0 Vicinity Map February 2005 2 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. • • 5.0 Vegetation 5.1 Vegetation Methodology Rules for determining dominant species were established in the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (DOE, 1997). Dominants are determined using the 50/20 rule. To use this rule, percent cover is added by order of descending cover until 50% cover is reached. These species are considered dominants. The next most common species is also included as a dominant if it has over 20% cover. Species with less than 5% cover are not considered dominant species. Hydrophytic vegetation has adaptations that allow these species to survive in saturated or inundated environments. These environments are classified according to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin, 1979). The probability of species being found in wetland environments has been determined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the National List of Vascular Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (USFWS, 1996). An indicator status was applied to each species according to its probability of occurring in wetlands (see Table 1.0). Table 1.0: Plant Indicator Status Indicator Category Symbol Occurrence in Wetlands Obligate Wetland OBL > 99% Facultative Wetland FACW 67 -99% Facultative FAC 34 -67% Facultative Upland FACU 1 -33% Upland UPL < 1% Note: FACW, FAC, and FACU have + and - values to represent species near the wetter end of the spectrum ( +) and the drier end of the spectrum ( -) (USFWS, 1996). 5.2 Vegetation Results At sample location 1 (SL -1), the plant community is dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FACW), black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera, FAC), pacific willow (Salix lasiandra, FACW +), and English Hawthorne (Crataegus monogyna, FAC -). The plant community is hydrophytic because more than 50% of the dominant species are FAC, FACW, or OBL. At SL -2, the plant community is dominated by Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, FACU), pacific willow (Salix lasiandra, FACW +), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), and morning glory (Convolvulus sp., NL). The plant community is hydrophytic because more than 50% of the dominant species are FAC, FACW, or OBL. February 2005 3 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 6.0 Hydrology 6.1 Hydrology Methodology The 1987 manual requires inundation, flooding, or saturation to the surface for at least 5% to 12.5% of the growing season to satisfy the hydrology requirements for jurisdictional wetlands (DOE, 1997). The growing season can either be defined by the number of frost -free days (temperatures above 28 °F), or the period during which the soil temperature at a depth of 19.7 inches is above biological zero (41 °F). Wetland hydrology indicators such as inundation, saturation, water - stained leaves, and sediment deposits in wetlands were assessed. The FAC - neutral test, which assesses the dominant plant species according to their probability of occurrence in wetlands, is an indicator for wetland hydrology when another indicator is present. 6.2 Hydrology Results SL -1 has seasonal wetland hydrology (see attached field data forms). The soil profile is dry throughout the upper 18 inches. The soil is saturated at 19 inches, and the water table is present at 25 inches. This location meets the hydrology criteria because two secondary indicators for wetland hydrology are present. The site is part of a drainage pattern for the area, due to its location in a depression that collects runoff from all the surrounding properties. The plant community passes the FAC- neutral test, in which the dominant plant species are assessed according to their probability of occurrence in wetlands. In addition, residents of the area have observed inundation of the property during normal years. SL -2 has seasonal wetland hydrology. The soil profile is dry throughout the upper 18 inches. The soil is saturated at 19 inches, and the water table is present at 25 inches. This location meets the hydrology criteria because two secondary indicators for wetland hydrology are present. The site is part of a drainage pattern for the area, due to its location in a depression that collects runoff from all the surrounding properties. The plant community passes the FAC - neutral test, in which the dominant plant species are assessed according to their probability of occurrence in wetlands. In addition, residents of the area have observed inundation of the property during normal years. 7.0 Soils 7.1 Soils Methodology Hydric soils are soils that are "saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part" (NTCHS, 1987). They are either organic soils (peats and mucks), or are mineral soils that are saturated long enough to produce soil properties associated with a reducing environment. These soils have low chroma (one chroma or two chroma with mottles), or have redoximorphic characteristics (characteristics related to an anaerobic environment) such as redox concentrations (mottles), redox depletions (gleying), or a reduced matrix (a matrix that changes color when exposed to air). February 2005 4 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. • • 7.2 Soils Results The subject property is located in an urban area, therefore soils on -site were not included in the Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (Snyder, 1973). Field investigation of this site indicates that the soil is most like a Renton silt loam (Re). Renton silt loam is classified as a somewhat poorly drained soil. Renton silt loam is on the Washington State hydric soils list. According to SCS soil scientists, approximately 60% of Renton silt loams are hydric soils and approximately 40% of Renton silt loams are non -hydric soils. "In a representative profile, the surface layer is very dark grayish brown silt loam about 6 inches thick. The subsoil is mottled dark grayish brown very fine sandy loam and fine sandy loam about 10 inches thick. The substratum is mottled black sand to a depth of 60 inches or more (Snyder, 1973)." Riverstone Homes Property Tukwila, Washington Figure 2.0 Soils Map April 2004 5 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. • • The soil at SL -1 is a hydric Renton silt loam (see attached field data forms). From 0 to 9 inches, the soil is a dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) silt loam. From 9 to 18 inches, the soil is a grayish brown (10YR 5/2) silt loam with common, medium, prominent yellowish brown (10YR 5/8) mottles. The soil is hydric because it has a two chroma matrix with mottles immediately below the "A" horizon or at ten inches, whichever is shallower (DOE, 1997). The soil at SL -2 is a hydric Renton silt loam. From 0 to 9 inches, the soil is a dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) silt loam. From 9 to 18 inches, the soil is a grayish brown (10YR 5/2) silt loam with common, medium, prominent yellowish brown (10YR 5/8) mottles. The soil is hydric because it has a two chroma matrix with mottles immediately below the "A" horizon or at ten inches, whichever is shallower (DOE, 1997). 8.0 Wetland Determination The subject property is entirely wetland and wetland buffer. A hydrophytic plant community is present every where on the property. The dominant plant species include reed canarygrass, English hawthorne, Pacific willow, and black cottonwood. Palustrine forested (PFO) and Palustrine emergent (PEM) wetland vegetation classes are present. The soil is not included in the Soil Conservation Service's, Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (Snyder, 1973). The soil is most like a hydric Renton silt loam. It has a two chroma matrix with mottles. The subject property has seasonal wetland hydrology. At this time of year, the soil profile is not saturated within the upper 18 inches, but the site meets the hydrology criteria because it has two secondary indicators, drainage patterns and a positive FAC- neutral test. In addition, residents of the area have observed inundation of the property during normal years. 9.0 Functional Assessment 9.1 Methods The wetland functions were assessed using the Methods for Assessing Wetland Functions developed by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Hruby, et. al., 1999). The method rates the wetland's ability to perform specific functions compared to standard wetlands in the western Washington lowlands area. The rating is presented on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the highest score. Each rating is produced by a mathematical model, which calculates the wetland's ability to function based on its physical characteristics (see attached spreadsheet). Wetland Assessment Unit (AU) was determined to be the area of the wetland system (see attached AU aerial photo). An aerial photo was used to divide up the area within one kilometer of the AU according to land uses: undeveloped forest, commercial, high- density residential, and other wetlands (see attached land use sketch). An aerial photo was used to estimate the average width and length of the AU. Aerials were used to determine the presence or absence of other habitats (estuary, large lake, or open field) in the vicinity in the AU. Information on vegetation, soils, hydrology, interspersion, woody debris, stream width and stream depth was collected through on -site investigation (see attached data sheets). It was determined that there are differences in the level of vegetation height around the edges of the AU. This is because the AU is adjacent to developed and undeveloped areas. February 2005 6 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. • • 9.2 Results Assessment Unit (AU) has a score of 5 out of 10 for its ability to remove sediment and nutrients from water (see attached Functional Assessment Data Forms). The AU has a score of 7 out of 10 for their ability to remove nutrients and 5 out of 10 for removing metals and toxic organics' from water. These scores are based on the length and width of the wetlands. It also takes into account the amount of cover of different vegetative classes in the wetlands. The score for removing metals emphasizes the amount of emergent plant cover. High levels of pollutants may enter the wetlands because they are located in an urban area, so the wetlands have the opportunity to filter them out and improve the water quality. Surrounding impervious surfaces drain to the wetlands, carrying nutrients, metals, and toxic organics. The AU has a score of 5 out of 10 for the ability to reduce peak flows. This score is based on the size of the wetlands versus the size of the contributing basins. AU has a score of 5 out of 10 for the ability to decrease downstream erosion. This score reflects the types of vegetation present and the absence of dikes. The AU has a score of 1 out of 10 for the ability to recharge groundwater. The low permeability of the soil in the wetlands and the size of the wetland are factors considered in groundwater recharge. Excess runoff enters the wetlands during floods, making hydrology in the wetland variable. The assessment methodology assumes that all wetlands in the western Washington lowlands have a high opportunity to recharge groundwater. The AU has a score of 3 out of 10 for the ability to provide general habitat. This score is based on the lack of buffers, the moderate canopy closure, the number of vegetative strata, the low interspersion of vegetation classes, the types of hydrologic regimes, and the small amount of woody debris. The general habitat score takes into account the scores for native plant richness and primary production. The AU has a score of 3 out of 10 for its ability to provide habitat for invertebrates and 1 out of 10 for amphibians. It has a score of 0 out of 10 for anadromous fish and 1 out of 10 for resident fish, even though none are present. The scores are 2 out of 10 for birds, 1 out of 10 for mammals, 3 out of 10 for plant richness, and 5 out of 10 for production and export. 10.0 Wetland Rating and Buffers The wetland is rated a Type 3, according to Title 18 Zoning, Section 18.45.020 of the Tukwila Municipal Code. Type 3 wetlands are defined as "Those wetlands which are equal to or less than one acre in size and that have two or fewer wetland classes." The subject property is approximately 9200 square feet. The two plant community classes present on this site are Palustrine forested and Palustrine emergent. Type 3 wetlands are required to have 25 -foot buffers. 11.0 Authority This wetland determination is in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the objective of which is to "maintain and restore the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the United States" (DOE, 1997). Wetlands are "areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water 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" (EPA, 40 CFR 230.3 and CE, 33 CFR 328.3). February 2005 7 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. • • 12.0 Limitations Wetland determinations and delineations are not final until approved by regulatory agencies and/or local jurisdictions. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. does not guarantee acceptance or approval by regulatory agencies, or that any intended use will be achieved. February 2005 8 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. • • 13.0 References COE. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksberg, Miss. Cowardin, Lewis M. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Jamestown, North Dakota. Department of Ecology. 1979. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication No. 96 -94. Washington State Department of Ecology. Olympia, WA. Federal Register. 1980. 40 CFR Part 230: Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites for Dredged or Fill Material. Vol. 45, No. 249, 85352- 85353. US Government 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. US Government Printing Office, Washington D.C. Snyder, Dale. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. King County. 1991. King County Wetlands Inventory. King County Environmental Division. Bellevue, Washington. King County. 2000. King County Zoning Code Title 21A. King County Department of Development and Environmental Services. Renton, Washington. MacBeth. 1990. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corporation. Baltimore, MD. USFWS. 1996. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. St. Petersburg, FL. February 2005 9 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Attachments February 2005 10 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. • DATA FORM 1 (Revised) • Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: l v iL i,J., I a.. Applicant/owner: `'t.) t tQQ;r-Sl Otx• 1.4 u r P-S Investigator(s): iti‘12-", "_" 0 \A t' .'" D (_rC! * Date: 2c _ R pr-11 , 0 Li County: ILIA State: 0)A S/T/R: $ to i r.2 3 N I;P,41 t . ,. Do Normal. Circumstances exist on the site? n Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes. Is the area a potential Problem Area? yes (p,p Explanation of atypical or problem area: Community ID: Transect ID: Plot ID: 5 Z VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vine) Dominant Plant Species Stratum • % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator pawI FtC cv,11o41 .1... -.1 F-1) Lw 'c, ; 3C Fi u 1 Kz . (Y\ orr•"Foc.) 0.)oty) l{ 5 /UL HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS of dominants OBL, FACW, &FAC (p `� �(0 (,) lA :2� 51 g L- ; a 5 u.)' DI. 4 p ' A°(Q/c -a. v 6'faLl - (A S a -f. 4_, 5/Q A.rd.2.d Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing in Physiological /reproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Wetland plant database Morphological adaptations Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Technical Literature Other (explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? (ire no Rationale for decision/Remarks: • 0-V S D 7 0-c vn i A ex,A. S. 5, -G C c{ D IS L HYDROLOGY .ls it the growing season? ye ) no Based on: soil temp (record temp ) Water Marks: yes no on Sediment Deposits: yes no Drainage Patterns:CA no Drift Lines: yes no K. other (explain) y' /J) 0, l d "vJ ti.-",.... Dept. of inundation: - inches" Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. es no Local Soil Survey: yes no Depth to free water in pit: — inches FAC Neutral: yes no Water- stained Leaves yes no Depth to saturated soil: — inches Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gage data: Other (explain): N Psi s I,\b by S 5 cx ! '" -! 5 f ?• Cc. e�(, S 1 Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? (' yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: .• `Al D 5 v . . . . 6..-,0--)n -r (.. , A c D~(S ( , , , A, e A ) i p i . . e . - ✓ + Ck. , f y~ ;`yiA ., t:Q 0 L 1,0 etr .S SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Taxonomy (subgroup) it u I I I C F v Vct.,,f fis Penton Sl li tom, Probe Description Drainage Class Pour if 6rw►ned Field observations confine mapped type? Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors (inches) (Munsell (Munsell moist) moist) 9 A ,vY : 3/Z q -1g� Mbttle abundance size & contrast Texture, concretions, Drawing :of soil . structure, .eto. .profile (match description) Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) Histosol Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low - Chroma ( =1) matrix Hydric soils present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: 1 L-(' 6Y\-". G_. _ Matrix chroma 5 2 with mottles Mg or Fe Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Organic. Streaking in Sandy Soils Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List Other (explain in remarks) LA) M 0 g �. Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soils present? Wetland hydrology present? Rationale/Remarks: Is the sampling point within a wetland? NOTES: Revised 4/97 • • Western Washington Wetland Classification Key Wetland Name: %) / S f AU ID #: ( Date: 2/ / I6- 1) Water levels in AU usually controlled by tides go to 2 Yes — Tidal Fringe phy is flat and precipitation is only source ( >90 %) of water to the AU go to 3 Yes — Flat 3) AU is contiguous with >8 ha open water, and water is deeper than 2 m over 30% of open water area go to 4 Yes — Lacustrine Fringe 4) water is <8 ha and >2 m deep, but AU is a fringe narrower than 'h the radius of open water go to `5 Yes — Lacustrine Fringe 5) i flow in AU is unidirectional on a slope, water is not impounded in the AU go to 6 Yes — Slope 6) AU is located in a topographic valley with stream or river in the middle —goto9 Yes —goto7 7) Have data showing area flooded more than once every 2 yrs.; or indicators of flooding are present: ❑ Scour marks common ❑ Recent sediment deposition ❑ Vegetation that is damaged or bent in one direction ❑ Soils have alternating deposits ❑ Vegetation along bank edge has flood marks No for all indicator — go to Yes for any indicator — go to 8 8) Flood waters retained No — Riverine Flow- through Yes — Riverine Impounding ❑ Depression in floodplain ❑ Constricted outlet ❑ Permanent water 9) Has surface water outflo De ressional Outflow no surface outflow — Depressiona se for Choices: Procedures - Lowlands W WA Datasheets Part 2, August 1999 Riverstone Homes, Inc. 4424 S. 118th St., Tukwila RECEIVED ►FEB. 17 2005 Reasonable Use Exception REEVE .o NAT Review Guidelines Criteria, TMC 18.45.115(4) a. No reasonable use with less impact on the sensitive area and its buffer is possible. The proposed application is for a two -story wood framed single - family residence. The entire parcel is wetland. The property is zoned residential, which is consistent with the neighborhood. There is no reasonable use with less impact on the property. b. There is on feasible on -site alternative to the proposed activities, including reduction in size or density, phasing of project implementation, change in timing activities, revision of road and lot layout, and/or related site planning activities that would allow a reasonable economic use with fewer adverse impacts to the sensitive area and its buffer. The neighborhood is single - family residences. No other economic use for this property is feasible. The foot -print of the house is minimized having two - stories. The foot -print will be less than the neighboring residence, which was permitted under the current code, in the wetland buffer. The foot -print will be located the minimum setback from the street, in a portion of the wetland dominated by reed canarygrass. The wetland is seasonally saturated. Construction will occur during the dry seasons of the year. Phasing will not be necessary. South Ilf Street is the only access to the property. c. As a result of the proposed development there will be no increased or unreasonable threat of damage to off -site public or private property and no threat to the public health, safety or welfare on or off the development proposal site. The wetland has been used as a dumping ground for building materials, garbage and landscape waste by the neighboring properties. A notice -on- title, split rail fencing and sign posting, and informed property owners should provide protection for the remaining wetland. The proposed single - family residence will not increase or threaten any other properties. There will be no threat to public health, safety or welfare as a result of the proposed development. d. Alterations permitted shall be the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use of the property. The proposed house foot -print is 24 feet by 42 feet, which is considerably smaller the residence on the adjoining lot. This small foot -print is similar to older homes in the neighborhood and is only economically feasible with a second story. The lot is long and narrow. The small impact for the house will be located the minimum setback for the street, leaving a 158 feet from the backdoor patio to the north property line. ATTACHMENT B • e. The proposed development is compatible in design, scale and use with other development with similar site constraints in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Three properties were constructed by F. Lee Stenson in the neighborhood. One of these adjoins the subject property to the west. To our knowledge none of these properties were required to undergo any environmental review, even though they have wetlands and/or wetland buffers. The proposed development is compatiable in design and use, but smaller in scale than the Stenson houses. The Stenson houses are roughly 60 feet deep and the lots were completely cleared, including wetland and wetland buffer. f. Disturbance of sensitive areas has been minimized by locating the necessary alterations in the buffers to the greatest extent possible. The lot is entirely wetland, with the exception of several feet of fill side slope from the adjoining property to the west. g. The inability to derive reasonable use of the property is not the result of actions by the applicant in segregating or dividing the property and creating the undevelopable condition after the effective date of the ordinance from which this chapter derives. No segregation or division of the property has occurred since the effective date of the City of Tukwila sensitive areas ordinance. h. Any approved alteration of a sensitive area under this section shall be subject to conditions as established by this chapter and will require mitigation under an approved mitigation plan. Approval of a reasonable use exception shall not eliminate the need for any permit or approval otherwise required for a project, including but not limited to design review. As mitigation for impacts to wetland, the applicant proposes to remove garbage, building materials and yard waste from the wetland. In addition the applicant will install split rail fence at the bsbl, post a wetland sign, and record a sensitive area notice -on- title. The applicant cannot provide creation of wetland as mitigation, because the remainder of the property is already wetland. However, the applicant proposes to enhance wetland with a tree planting. A wetland mitigation plan detailing these measures will be prepared by the applicants consultant. The applicant will also obtain a nationwide permit from the U.S. Army COE. 2 TITLE 18 — ZONING F. Abandoned Mine Areal 1. Development of a legal lot of record con- taining an abandoned coal mine area may be permitted when a geotechnical report shows that significant risks associated with the abandoned mine workings can be eliminated or mitigated so that the site is safe. Approval shall be obtained from the Director before any building or land - altering permit processes begin. 2. Any building setback or land alteration shall be based on the geotechnical report. 3. The City may impose conditions that address site -work problems which could include, but are not limited to, limiting all excavation and drainage installation to the dryer season, or sequencing activities such as installing drainage systems or erosion controls well in advance of construction. A permit will be denied if it is determined that the development will increase the potential of soil movement or result in an unacceptable risk of damage to the proposed develop- ment or adjacent properties. G. Areas Of Important Geological Or Archaeological Evidence. 1. Development on a legal lot of record determined to have historic or prehistoric geological or archaeological evidence, shall be prohibited until that . evidence has been studied or researched for any valu- able information about our history. Removal or salvage . of the evidence shall be done in accordance with RCW 27.53, and shall be performed in a timely manner. 2. Once the geologic or archaeological evi- dence or articles have been studied or researched, or the importance of the site is declared to be marginal or not of use to the scientific community, development shall be allowed on the site. Development shall not begin on such a site until the Director gives approval. H. Permitted Uses Subject to Exception Approval. Other uses may be permitted upon receiving a reasonable use exception pursuant to TMC 18.45.115. A use permitted through a reasonable use exception shall conform to the procedures of this chapter and be consistent with the underlying zoning. (Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) 18.45.090 Sensitive Areas Tracts A. In development proposals for planned resi- dential or mixed area use developments, short subdi - visions or subdivisions, and boundary line adjustments and binding site plans, applicants shall create sensitive areas tracts, in lieu of an open space tract, per the standards of the Planned Residential Development District chapter of this title. B. Applicants =proposing development involving uses other than those listed in TMC 18.45.090A, on parcels with sensitive areas or their buffers, may elect to establish a sensitive areas tract which shall be: 1. If under one ownership, owned and main- tained by the ownership, which protection of the tract; 2. Held •common ownership by multiple owners who shall collectively be responsible for main- tenance of the tract; or 3. Dedicated for public use if acceptable to the City or other appropriate public agency. (Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) 18.45.115 Exceptions A. General. With the approval of the Director, isolated-wetlands that are 1,000. square feet or,smaller in area, and which are low in value according to the rating methodology used in the City's Water Resource Rating and Buffer Study, may not require the compensatory mitigation standards of this chapter. B. Piping. Piping will be allowed in Type 1 and Type 2 watercourses only where relocation or alter- ation of a watercourse is denied and would result in denial of all reasonable use C. Reasonable Use Exceptions. 1. If application of this chapter would deny all reasonable use of the property containing wetlands, watercourses or their buffers, the property owner or the proponent of a development proposal may apply for a reasonable use exception. 2. Applications for a reasonable use exception shall be a Type 4 decision and shall be processed pursuant to Section 307. 3. If the applicant demonstrates to the satisfac- tion of the Planning Commission that application of the . provisions of this chapter would deny all reasonable use of the property, development may be allowed which is consistent with the general purposes of this chapter and the public interest. 4. The Commission, in granting approval of the reasonable use exception, must determine that: a. No reasonable use with less impact on the sensitive area and its buffer is possible; b. There is no feasible on -site alternative to the proposed activities, including reduction in size or density, phasing of project implementation, change in timing activities, revision of road and lot layout, and /or related site planning activities that would allow a reasonable economic use with fewer adverse impacts t� the sensitive area and its buffer; c. As a result of the proposed develop- ment there will be no increased or unreasonable threat of damage to off -site public or private property and no threat to the public health, safety or welfare on or off the development proposal site; d. Alterations permitted shall be the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use of the property; ATTACHMENT C Printed May 2004 Page 18 -91 n 4 TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODES e. The proposed development is compat- ible in design, scale and use with other development with similar site constraints in the immediate vicinity of the subject property; f. Disturbance of sensitive areas has been minimized by locating the necessary alterations in the buffers to the greatest extent possible; g. The inability to derive reasonable use of the property is not the result of actions by the appli- cant in segregating or dividing the property and creating the undevelopable condition after the effective date of the ordinance from which this chapter derives; and h. Any approved alteration of a sensitive area under this section shall be subject to conditions as established by this chapter and will require mitigation under an approved mitigation plan. Approval of a reasonable use exception . shall not eliminate the need for any other permit or approval otherwise required for a project, including but not limited to design review. (Ord. 1770 §25, 1996; Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) 18.45.120 Variances A. The Hearing Examiner shall review requests pursuant to the Variance chapter of this title for variance from the standards of this chapter unless excepted by TMC 18.45.115. B. If a variance is granted, it shall be the mini- mum necessary to accommodate the permitted uses of the underlying zoning districts proposed by the appli- cation, and the scale of the use may be reduced as necessary to meet this requirement. (Ord. 1796 §3(part), 1997; Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) 18.45.125 Appeals A. Any aggrieved party who objects to or disagrees with DCD decisions or conditions for development in a sensitive area shall appeal to the Planning Commission. Any such appeal shall be a Type 2 decision and shall be processed . pursuant to TMC 18.108.020. B. In considering appeals of decisions or condi- tions, the following shall be considered: 1. The intent and purposes of the sensitive areas ordinance from which this chapter derives; 2. Technical information and reports consid- ered by the DCD; and 3. Findings of the Director which shall be given substantial weight. (Ord. 1770 §26, 1996; Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) • 18.45.130 Recording Required The property owner receiving approval of a use or development pursuant to this chapter shall record the City- approved site plan clearly delineating the wetland, watercourse, areas of potential geologic instability or abandoned mine and their buffers designated by. TMC 18.45.020 and 18.45.040 with the King County Division of Records and Elections. The face of the site plan must include a statement that the provisions of this chapter, as of the effective date of the ordinance from which this chapter derives or thereafter amended, control use and development of the subject property, and provide for any responsibility of the property owner for the maintenance or correction of any latent defects or deficiencies. (Ord. 1758 §1(part), .1995) 18.45.135 Assurance Device A. In appropriate circumstances, the Director may require a letter of credit or other security device accept- able to the city, to guarantee performance and mainte- nance requirements of this chapter. All assurances shall be on a form approved by the City Attorney. B. When alteration of a sensitive area is approved, the Director may require an assurance device, on a form approved by the City Attorney, to cover the monitoring costs and correction of possible deficiencies. Monitoring of alterations may be required for up to five years. C. Release of the security does not absolve . the property owner of responsibility for maintenance or correcting latent defects or deficiencies. (Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) 18.45.140 Assessment Relief A. Fair Market Value. The King County . Assessor shall consider sensitive area regulations in determining the fair market value of land under RCW 84.34. B. Current Use Assessment. Established sensi- tive area tracts, as defined in the Definitions chapter of this title and provided for in TMC 18.45.090, shall be classified as open space and owners thereof may qualify for current use taxation under RCW 18.34; provided, such landowners have not received density credits, or setback or lot size adjustments as provided in the Planned Residential Development District chapter of this title. C. Special Assessments. Landowners who qualify under TMC 18.45.140B shall also be exempted from special assessments on the sensitive area tract to defray the cost of municipal improvements such as sanitary sewers, storm sewers and water mains. (Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) Page 18 -92 . Printed "May °2004" • CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (306) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan(ci.tukwila.wa.us • SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL RECE[VEpREVIEW FEB 17 2005 DCOMMUNiTY NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: /44314..“ 1 z6 1P12Y S, / /e'` =4' LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. zLIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. C�rI�O—"t [c / ( 4/4 24 Jam. //e T� sir 2_6 ? /47/4.4Cic,s-. /?leoa -eiaw 6 c -ice OAv if‘ / ./- r._c�s s 577A--e---7‘ S� //e / Quarter: 5C Section: /b TownshiF ti Range: 41L (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, an • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: J e 17e - s , Address: S 3 / (a ' 7-45.4 /�`e— 5 / /� � 4)4,-/ ki 4 9664 3 Phone: 2S ° e74 /-5'673 FAX: Z 6--"Z-°e73/- 7 i E -mail: Signature: b/ Lei) rev do,z-oirm.e r G-611.7 Date: 7- 1/705 G:\APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP \SEPAAPP.DOC, 09/11/03 FOR STAFF USE ONLY SIERRA TYPE P-SEPA Planner: File Number: 001D _ D D o\ Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: . i___,J 5 - Ui u NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: /44314..“ 1 z6 1P12Y S, / /e'` =4' LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. zLIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. C�rI�O—"t [c / ( 4/4 24 Jam. //e T� sir 2_6 ? /47/4.4Cic,s-. /?leoa -eiaw 6 c -ice OAv if‘ / ./- r._c�s s 577A--e---7‘ S� //e / Quarter: 5C Section: /b TownshiF ti Range: 41L (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, an • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: J e 17e - s , Address: S 3 / (a ' 7-45.4 /�`e— 5 / /� � 4)4,-/ ki 4 9664 3 Phone: 2S ° e74 /-5'673 FAX: Z 6--"Z-°e73/- 7 i E -mail: Signature: b/ Lei) rev do,z-oirm.e r G-611.7 Date: 7- 1/705 G:\APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP \SEPAAPP.DOC, 09/11/03 COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Public Works Department and the Department of Community Development. Please contact each Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived, or should be submitted at a later date for use at the public hearing (e.g. colored renderings). Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow starting project review and vesting the applicant's rights. However, they in no way limit the City's ability to require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. City staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 - 431 -3670 (Department of Community Development) and 206 - 433 -0179 (Department of Public Works). Check items submitted with application Information Required May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of Public Works and Planning APPLICATION MATERIALS: W°i L-- 1. Application Checklist (1 copy) indicating ite,': •.miffed with application. 2. Completed ESA Screening Checklist an Planned Action Criteria Checklist. ' ✓ 3. One complete set of 8 1/2" by 11" PMTs o . ,. •• - • , i t e Planned Action. tr 4. Application Fee $250. `(� 5. Underlying permit application that triggers SEPA Review. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS: 6. Vicinity Map with site location. 7. Provide four (4) copies of any sensitive area studies as needed per Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45). 8. Provide four (4) copies of any drawings needed to describe the proposal other than those submitted with the underlying permit. Maximum size 24" x 36 ". RECEIVED FEB 17 2005 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNED ACTION CRITERIA CHECKLIST To determine if the proposed project meets the criteria for consideration as a planned action please answer the following questions: 1. Is the proposal a permitted and/or accessory use located within the MIC/L (TMC 18.36) MIC/H (TMC 18.38) zones? Uses listed as "conditional" or "unclassified" are not elig e for the planned action process. co DEv 7 ?05 44T 2. Will all of the impacts of the proposal be mitigated by the time th project is complete? Please document all mitigation measures, using attachments if necessary `-/-e) 3. Is the proposal consistent with the applicable secs of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan? u ,aS 4. Is the proposal any of the following: a. an "essential public facili ' as defined in RCW 36.70.200 or TMC 18.06.270; ND b. a development related to the Regional Transit Authority light rail or commuter rail system; %.) 0 c. a decisio about the 16th Avenue Bridge improvement or disposition which would normal require a SEPA threshold determination; or 0 d. • development in which any portion includes shoreline modifications waterward of the ordinary high water mark? A f the answer to any of questions a through d is yes, the proposal is not eligible for the planned action process. FEB 171005 co STATE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 1 Please respond to all questions: Use separate sheets as necessary. An electronic version of this form is also available from the Department of Community Development. Applicant Responses: A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 2. Name of Ap licant: j�r(\k-ter5 3. Date checklist prepared: 2(.1 1 6 5 _ 4. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 5. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Cis S `�'Z'`- i- S r,'� - _ pc_ (( Zc�b 6. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. N 7. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. 5. J cvt es M —=` S � +^e , -S • , o ■e . S 5. A C,a`�ES Z . W „"±” tG+.' -'-LI 8. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Agency Comments Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 9. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Crf \Z � -1.4 Lk 5 c- c /J �. ,}, �� .,u ;�lee{�� 10. Give brief, complete description of your 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. e>,6.2aPQ 7, c_6,„ - yy -S "^-� te u- - Z y - e.Q4 - U vac W 00 A 0.1 -kAg j --1zc3 0 re.-S , TL I�t C)1e 11. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, the tax lot number, and section, township, and range. 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 reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. 267 3 /fill Dr'ti -/ p6,0.1 MO 3 3 7 Ito., (377--D -5 tlq - . l 0,-12-3 , R `1 12. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): later lling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: Agency Comments b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Cw� o(y t d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. N O e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. �lf�P�' YG�� ciGtfir-✓ y Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? g. If so, generally describe. ,AA f \ l b e About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? cVD h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: tA-tr 7-14-171-s pew x C Byte ` 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (for example, dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: IQ OW. 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, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. D p uLw cl ,- rte- r e - 114 i,t e. 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. ND 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. 57). c_.4 t - 024rc/5 M t„,)-te - Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. ( D 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. Id1 a 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. IQb OWert4Wo Di 5PNKsimWIT? 5lo, Cup imen U✓� Slum wavbti -�. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 2. Describe waste materials 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: c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and Ak ' disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If sod , describe. 1 n 12,u tL.�� rs G e W �(,( b e C reek 4-0 Le wktk j2ou -D 1-6 $o.tt 4 Agency Comments 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. 0 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: D y 6 40 - • Dbts a(tt -wAy 2v0, brio T� rn- .ev ♦ -tn�b - t r ? Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: !/ Deciduous treeCalc150 maple, aspen, other 6 lec ' e-46 #151 -t Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other v - Stirubi) w; f(a - J. L----- Grass a..cr6ee Cc -cl...7 s s Pasture Crop or grain . V Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil other '' / Other types of vegetation j ---..z. 4e�.s -r (. `e..G/c -' b. What kin and amount of or vegetation will be removed altered? g; 73-6 5 , 5 ;7,6 fr.&,_g_taved, c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. cl.-e pc d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Agency Comments • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Animals a. Circle any birds or animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: (/ Hawk, heron, eagleongbi , other: Mammals I.-- Deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: y's2i2Q, Fish Bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: Other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. PG-C4-7-11-e- y wav d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: 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. / 41)-r yz-e- rc --'S1 lwe Agency Comments • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Jio c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? �� t other proposed measures to reduce energy impacts, i �� C� 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. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. Nv 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? ejr-i-w.. r /4-1),--C-ref -1-y-6611-Z, 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. /___61-1 s fi- . AP- 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? -1-7) ( Nv tt-/ 56) ,1744-G4-- Crvd 1v /- b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. IsmahcAtAi kolas usft) As D4 PAS t — tarp • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments c. Describe any structures on the site. /U -c d. Will anyy structures be demolished? If so, what? e. What is the current zonin class'fication of the site? f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. y5, evi '41)-e 11- Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? N k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: /U c3 Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing? ©)'Le Io ?e Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: 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? b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: �LY Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? /2a.?/o ij 4 r /1-t b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? nn ,t / v 0 c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? /U a-. 4 saw- 44‘e-e.io I 4 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? 7-&Q Gam.- -Y; Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: t3 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. /vim b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. /vary, l vWyi c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Ov-e Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 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 an ,. y�t?A- . ' Misr - �s b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? \/ -S //ct `p c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? [ k.) p eta) Z —o 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). /U 0 e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Dvu Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: 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. %U b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. ,D 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: , septic Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 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. P5 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 decision. Signature: Date Submitted: (NON- PROJECT PROPOSALS (E.G., SUBURBAN PLANS AND ZONING CODE TEXT CHANGES) MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PAGES). Agency Comments CITY OF TUKWILA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SCREENING CHECKLIST Date: Z\ -7 1o5 Applicant Name: R (4 ° ""'"_, , 1-j.` e , Street Address: 7' I - 2 t' t1L--2- Alpc City, State, Zip: r= t )c (I‘) c ov Telephone: 5 7 y -9 S 3 3 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. 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) Chapter 18.06, Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Continue to Question 1 -1 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 YES Continue to Question 2 -1 3 -0 Will the project require work, during any time of the project, b- ,27--- • inary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or \• etland 1 rdinary high water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks s '. m 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). se circle appropriate response. i - Continue to Question 4-0 ontinue to Question 3-1 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. NO Continue to Question 5-0 ES - Continue to Question 5-0 5 -0 Will the project result in the withdrawal'ection r 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 invving prolonged construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor encltes, 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 - 0 ontinue to Question 6-0 OI-r ivlG� 5t-tnv , Z. c4eLeT •C.1 Sep, 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 the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle appropriate response. N — Checklist Complete Y 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. 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 Continue to Question 1 -4 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 the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. ^ L Continue to Question 2 -0 YES - Continue to Question 2 -0 Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. 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. 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 4L----- YES - 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 Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as any self - supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a 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 YES - Continue to Question 2 -3 2 -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 YES - Continue to Question 2 -4 2 -4 Will the project involve clearing within 100 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 1) YES - Continue to Question 2 -5 2 -5 Will the project involve clearing within 40 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 YES - Continue to Question 3-0 . 1J0,..! 1 S !NrII. IW Loin 70 gt 1 ,ue Ss t4 %7i 1+ Is Wet Part D: Please review each question below for projects that include work below the ordinary high water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish /Green or Black Rivers or in wetlands. 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. 3 -1 Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the area between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a stream, 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 - ontinue to Question 3-2 YES - Continue to Question 3-2 3 -2 Will the project involve any physical alteration to a watercours r wetland co ected to the Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose of this analysis, "connected to the river means" flowing into via a surface connection or culvert, or having other physical characteristics that allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts to areas such as sloughs, side channels, remnant oxbows, ditches formed from channelized portions of natural watercourses or any area that may provide off channel rearing habitat for juvenile fish from the Duwamish River. This includes both temporary construction alterations and permanent modifications. Watercourses or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwamish River that have a hanging culvert, culvert with a flap gate, diversion, or any entirely man -made or artificial structure that precludes fish access should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -3 ES - C tinue to Question 3-3 3 -3 Will the project result in the construction of a new structure or hydraulic condition that could be a barrier to salmonid passage within the watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, a barrier means any artificial or human modified structure or hydraulic condition that inhibits the natural upstream or downstream movement of salmonids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. NO - ntinue to. Question 3-4 • YES - Continue to Question 3-4 3 -4 Will the project involve a temporary or permanent change in the cross - sectional area of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, the cross- sectional area is defined as a profile taken from the ordinary high water mark on the right bank to the ordinary high water mark on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response. NO - ontinue to Question 3-5 YES - Continue to Question 3-5 3 -5 Will the project require the removal of debris from within the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, debris includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, Togs, shrubs, rocks, piles, rip -rap, submerged metal, and broken concrete or other building materials. Projects that would require debris removal from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers as part of a maintenance activity should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. N: - ontinue to Question 3-6 YES - Continue to Question 3-6 3 -6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or nd t 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 ntinue to Question 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 construction 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 YES - Continue to Question 4-0 • • 4s NORTH 0 10 20 SCALE: F#IVERSTONE HOMES, INC. - TUKWILA SITE 60 ' 33 740 -0610 1 r SEC. 10, TWP. 23N., RGE 4 E., W.M. L___ - -- - - - - -, 334740-0650 334740_0645 - -1 334740 -0590 334740 -0585 334740 -0580 334740 -0570 334740 -0565 334740 -0665 334740 -0670 SITE PLAN FEB 1 71005 Nr APPLICANT: RIVERSTONE HOMES, INC. ATTN: MARC JOHNSON 35318 28TH AVENUE SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 (253) 905 -5351 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: \ \\ Ne 3 HILLMANS MEADOW GARDENS DIV #1 PA CEL NUMBER: - - �; \ 334540 -0720 334740 -0685 /1 1 334740 -0690 ,\ in r 334740-u4 M 334740 - 0,175 ---•/ L..1 334740 -0710 —� \ 046 �\ \ \ \\`\ \ `\ \ \ \ \ \ \ `\ 18TH ST. � \\ ; \ N- _/---7----------- 34740 -0730 / 7- 334740 -0735 r - - - -- 334740 -1325 `, I / , \, ("-- OESGNEO BY. DENT: CONSU.TAN1: ° SCALE RIVERSTONE HOMES INC. Q MAY" BY 1" = 20' Eddam '°" °'° "AVE U€30053 FEDERAL 000. " ° "' "0100 °°°°' 253-9055351 RIVERSTONE HOMES, INC. C- IEQ:EO BY: "20ECT: TUKWILA SITE Quality Home Builder m JO boss °O°RO"FD3'" SHEET SITE PLAN 3531(, 18th Avrnue South Ferias] Way, Washington 98003 237.872-9588 FAX 257872-9579 1 of 1 onTE TAX PARCEL ID NO.: 334740 -0720 ° • • NOR . —SALE: I ° " = 20' \ - - - - --a 60 I RIVERSTpNE H MES INC. - tUKWILA SITE S SEC. 10, TWP. 23N., RGE 4 E., .M. ISITE 'LAN 158' ! 1 a. 1 o o I > o I z M Lu 1 w N 11 5' CLEARING LIMIT —' I WATER LINE POWER LINE WATER METER 0 z 0 0 B \5'I- \APPLICANT: RIVERSTONE HOMES, INC. ATT,,N: MARC JOHNSON 353128TH AVENUE SOUTH FEDERs4�L WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 (253) 905 -5351 LEGAL DESCRIPTION : 26 3 HILLMAN99\MEADO\V GARDENS DIV #1 PARCEL NUMBER 3.34740-0720 \ DRIVEWAY S. 20' SEWER LINE ._ .mi■A ..L. — ---- - - - - -- - - -- - - - - -- 18TH ST. SCALE 1" = 20' - 24C-JEGG -. 242141. RIVERSTONE HOMES INC. MIS 28TN AVENUE SOUTN FEDERAL WAN. WASHINGTON MOOT 361 ,:✓..1.. nVT: RIVERSTONE HOMES, INC. O 1 `.Endow L. Elan `-- -�4,Y. .1EO: TUKWILA SITE SITE PLAN TAX PARCEL ID NO.: 334740 -0720 SHEET 1 of 1 Jell Jones Quality Home Builder 35316 lath Mawr South Fadrial Wq, Waslti"y7ou 98003 253 -04 -7588 FAX 253-874-9379 m ""° ="E°" J ..*E 0/2vw VICINITY MAP RIVERSTONE HOMES PROPERTY Tax Parcel ID No.: 334740 -0720 Bond Quantity Worksheet for Sensitive Area Mitigations Date: April 25, 2005 Project Name: Riverstone Tukwila Lot Contact Name: J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Address: 35316 28th Avenue South, Federal Way, Washington 98003 Phone Number: 253 - 874 -9588 Project Number: Location: 4424 S. 118th St. PLANT MATERIALS: TREES Scientific Name Common Name Unit Price Qty Unit Price Qty Unit Price Qty Unit Price Qty Cost 4" pot 1 gallon 2 gallon 5 gallon Fraxinus latifolia Oregon Ash $13.54 $23.51 10 $235.10 Picea sitchensis* Sitka spruce $13.54 $24.15 8 $193.20 Thuja plicata* western red cedar $13.54 $23.51 8 $44.74 $188.08 TOTAL $616.38 SHRUBS .• Scientific Name Common Name Unit Price Qty Unit Price Qty Unit Price Qty Unit Price Qty t Cost cuttings 1 gallon 2 gallon 5 gallon Cornus sericea red -osier dogwood $2.00 70 $13.54 $23.51 $140.00 Lonicera involucrata black twinberry $13.54 15 $24.15 $203.10 Rosa nutkana Nootka rose $13.54 15 $23.51 $44.74 $203.10 TOTAL $546.20 TOTAL ' $1,092.40 GENERAL ITEMS Unit Cost Unit Qty. 1 1 Cost Fencing, split rail, 3' high (2 -rail) $10.54 LF 190 $2,002.60 Woody debris $50.00 Each 3 $150.00 Signs, sensitive area boundary 1 $2.50 Each 3 $7.50 TOTAL $2,160.10 SUBTOTAL: ( +) 30% CONTINGENCY & MOBILIZATION: $3,868.88 $1,160.66 TOTAL: _ $5,029.54 Bond_Quantity_Worlcsheet(1) Sensitive Areas Bond Quantity Worksheet Page 1 ®AA ' f/' /NORTH � I / . o j 5 10/ / 20 30 . SeALE:,' 1 n = 10! 1 f • 1 SYMBOL O RIVERSTONE HOMES, INC. - TUKWILA SITE EXISTING LINE OF VEGETATION - SEC. 10, TWP. 23N., RGE 4. E., W.M. EXISTING LINE OF VEGETATION 3 SBV MITIGATION AND LANDSCAPE PLAN so 4r, 6 DVD �� l 6 DVD 1JMG I DLY B' 1 1II STING LINE OF VEGETATION- WETLAND SIGN -- , PORCH —' HOUSE —PATIO 2,424 SF PLANT SCHEDULE. CCM^'ON STKA • W ST =2N 2> CiA2 OREGON• 6 NO0iK420SE- TW1NEDaRY DOGWOOD SCIENT1-C Nave *CEA SITCHENSLE . THU1A e1JC4TA FRANNUS IATIFOUA 20SA NUTKANA SPLIT RAIL FENCE 512E LONICERA. W VOWO2ATA - CO2NUS 5E0CE4 NOTE' EACH DOGWOOD SYMBOL EQUALS 2 CJTTV.IGS 10 a-6 rr 15 1 GAL 15 • 1GAL 70 CUTTNGS PLANTING-AND STAKING DETAIL MITIGATI'DN DESIGN BY J. S. JONES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Environmental Consultants We( de. Streams, and W1ldlifc WOODY DEBRIS DETAIL T9C.M. Wyk. a+011071. =DAR LCO Wino 41411114...3 • WOCCI,2110. 66.1•137 WETLAND SIGN DETAIL SPLIT RAIL FENCE DETAIL Wetland IMAMS> KW PLANT MATERIAL LEGEND Indoores Drove. Tolerant Giant Material Abrev. Cod. Nome trees EGA Emerald Green A-borvroe JiMG Japanese Mode -Green Red (_ .user Mope sires SSV '0o l4 Vburrum Soong 5cycoet Vibrrtn Botanical Nome T morurGreen' d0 Green' Acer oal Acer rubrum Tin' ;,u• er • Vtunwm do.idl Vlourrvm •1nus'SOrr% Bau.vr 161/7 cal.l5 &5-3 M8*-,r* k min 3 cpJSBraMmhed ot'6 brarch 17417 /corm. 24' h%Vo9r. ground cover. DLY 5 Doe Lly Hemer0CClis "Selo oe Orro' 1 goL/com. of 26' co or irbno,. sesrg Lmli 11rrosOorun Lithodoro dada 1 gal./conr. or 36' oc at trio-cub- spoons LAWN Hydroseed with Sne Lawn Rapid-Oro Lawn' from Erb, Grow. hc' with pkerrote bid for sod from 0oumry Green TrWty paprer e. Owe. WA • SITE SPECIFIC NOTES 7@MUULCH :MOW STRIP. estell mulch maw step, 6' ..1.'htt 7 don, crease of house pro farce. LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION NOTES 1. • Owner to secure 01 necessary 94949. oar Dry of Tukwila recskenvers. _' Al work performed shell conform with the City of Tukwila. landscape ad o 1go,on regl/remerns. codes and ipeoificamons. Locate, protect omd ovoid dlsrvpton of all above and relo.. grade vanes cod sere features prior to construction 0989 ror Is resporo sole for any resulting damages ossntp construction Call before you d% at 1(800) 424_5555. a. Glean segrode ay removng 01 undesirable veperpion Intpudbtp presses weeds, hwi.herr es. scotch broom onto 50010, seedlings including roots. Leove .sbgrode In landscape ord. nierrern 9' below do9r9 M sire bees 901 5' below pa4g lawn areas. Remove dl elbnis frem ire. 5. 2 amlaa nnwnwm 6' depth 60-40 94 from auger Sound TOO., ( 253) 833.0374 st d shrub beds.95041v shade by rotomllfr ptd odd topsoil on surfooe. Add odd/newt topsoil os needed V comae shrub beds ycfiMtp requred berms. . E. Fronde minimum 4' depth 80-40 mlx from auger Sound Toped ( 253) 833 -0374 in a bun beds. Sra4y Degrade by ' romelling Ord add topsoil on surface. Add 04840.al topsoil os needed To cp'sp,- and erne loves. ei,eresee4 with Fare Lo..n' Rapid Grow Lawn from Briar Group. Inc with alternate bid for sod from Canny Green Trinity Supreme from. pirrom WA 7. Provide minimum 7 de5M fine dens hem fir mulch to all doming beds. Mulch from Sawdust 598y : Kern; Woshlrgron. pl all alerting beds and bun oreos to 1P4n 1' of tap OF of curbs and woks. Slope all daring beds oral 98, arms to dram B. Prom.. ore 0) year worrpmy for al plum moterlds and wpnkma*Mp. 9. Verify all pupmees shown on the dam 1409 and alone. - M dscrepafdes exist between the prophic represemahon and the numeric totals. the groand repre0enrptpn Oa rte. .. 10. All dam materiels to be specimen duchy with full. synme51cal naYc 901 fdoge. ales* pher.4.. rated. Ferrate dl oldnnngs whh'Osp059,e' pbm pr9Wes. Ins961 2 CLOP per tree Iprper then 3'.1 cup per tree less Mon 3.1/2 an Per 5 p0. 1/4 per 2 o0d 1 gal., 1/8 cop per 6' and 4' oohs. Glxe on base of dam cher midi has been lona8ed. 11. Insure proper dranage of all doming heles Prior TO 11-098699 dam materials. If pbmrg Klee do nor dean or If henv 8.,- soils ore evident cormpo, landscape arpheect. 12. • Fill ell daring beds•nd lawn areas to within 1' of top of dl cabs and woks. • Berm d perm% beds old barn arms to drat. 13. Asph oit to be removed.7 4om behind errtrvded curb In plomrng•beds afar =AN is con*rred cod before oionr 9840 is instdad. - - LANDSCAPE DESIGN :BY Lauchlin R. Bethune Associates, Inc. • Landscape Architecture & Planning, ASLA P10. Box 1442 phone: (425) 432 -9877 Maple Valley, Washington 98038 • fax (425) 432 -9878 ( V/ • F- 0o V / Nut- ' RECEIVED • .1APR 2 6 2005 mopfralleiO4r 4140E IRE o°M1.,comilaaas NO DATE . By U N 0 Z 0. o CNA O w O F Z v N a z ..1 � Z 0 g F- 0 x as 1— • • • 9 m 1 6 J •I.0 Executive Summary 1.1 Project Dandelion: The applicm proposes to construct single- family residence on the subject property. The comae property is wetland and wve1 od • • buffer.' A the applicant will compkte a reasoabk use exemption for development of the subject propem•. Impact will be mitigated by ,noting • vsting•invasive vegetation and enhancing to remaining m-site wetland arm. • 1.2 Impact Assessment: 3.149 square fen of wetland and wetland buffer will be impacted by construction of a single family residence. Impost to the wetland unavoidable. No opportunity to mitigate on-line is a004abk. The loss in - on-site wetbnd storage area inn not be replace. The developed aura of the sit . v n be fenced with split -mil fencing and wetland signs will h posted to prohibit future intrusion into the rer mining on -site wetland arm. 1.3 Mitigation: Invasive vegetation will be removed from the ramammg wetland arm. Groove removal will be done by hand whenever possible: If • machinery is needed then only hand held equipment win be allowed. The consulting biologist will flog all existing native vegetation to remain in the enhancement area. The enhancement area will be planed with native plain species. Native plant spooks will increase plant diversity. wildlife habitat and prevent the establishment of evasive species. J.4 Gaels: The gonl Ofmw®tion is to improve the Xenon often wetland for areas with scores less than 5 out of 10 as determined in the function and values section of the wetland assessment report for the existing wetland system. The impact to areas that scored greaser then 5 out of 10 are insignificant dee to t the small size of impact end the way a which the welmd summa fmconns. The Foal is to improve general habitat by removing invasive minced, planting natives and 01.031)017 wooer debris without decreasing the other fnmetiwn or the wetland system. Woody debris will bereft birds and amphibian by providing habitat and an fleet food source. • 2A Project Location The progeny is located at 4424 S. 118th Stott in •Tnkw(a Washl:n m. 3.0 Responsible Partial Property Omen • Rivermone Home. Inc. 35316 28th Awame Sash Federal Way. Washington 94( (253) 905 -5351 . Environmental Cosuham Jefery S. Janes • - - . Certified Professional Web( ecirntot - 1. S. lines and Associates Inc. _ - 35316 28th Memo South - Federal Way. Washington 98003 (253J874 -9388 ' 4.0 Mindere • All wok and meiab shall curt to City of Tukwila standards and - - specifcatkm.'ad to the specifications and deohb shaman these plans. 5.0 Comranor Information • When a is avaiabk. coo,ot information dull be provided to the City of Tukwila that includes names. =eases and pica numbers of posm/fams that will be tespotmbk for grading the mi1gadmhestoatim am: moaning . - required planm ad pafmmang required maintenance and monitoring. 6.0 Contractor's Quanfeatkns• • . Conractor/ladaape Installer mom be experi ent= in mitigation and resmmtion work. The Permittee shag provide that nhre a coe person on the site t all tames during work and installation who is thoroughly familiar with the type of materials being installed and the best methods for rhea i sm0eum and who Mau annul all work being performed undo nee ea: armies This pmsm shall be experienced in installing native plant m iriab for wcbnd mitigation or restoration projects. monks otherwise allowed by the landscape Designer.. Wetland Biologist and/or City of Tukwila staff 7.0 Site Concretions • The Pemet., landscape Deeper and/or Wetland Biologist Mall immediately notify the Cloy of Tukwila of any discrepancies between the Alms and de six conditions. The locations of plants dewy may be modified M the field by the Landscape Designer, Wetland Biologist ode City 09Tnkwla mellowed on fold conditions at the time of planting. Changes should be dmansoed and as -1uio drawings submitted to the CM of Tukwila upon tegaa f rental • construction approval. - - - 8.0' Plants 8.1 Or(gim Pam materials shall be Northwest native plan.. moray grown e the Puget Sound region of Washington. Dug pham may any h used upon approval of City of Tukwila staff. 8.2 Handling: Plants shall be hadled e as to avoid all damage, kneading breaking braising TOOT damage. enbm. drying f lming or de injury. . . Plants mum be covered during t 0009011. -Pknts shell not be bound with woe or rope in a manner Cult could damage branches. 'Protect plant room with shade end wet soil in the time period between delivery and ®latiun. -Do not 0R • container stock by mmks, mans, or tops. Do not remove fm0 000100700 11102 ready to plant Water all plants as necessary m keep moisture keels apcopiete to the necks horticulture requirements. Rams shall retie allowed to dry out All pact shall be watered thoroughly i medaxy upon installation. Soak all containerized plants thoroughly prior to installation. Bane maw pests are abject 10 the following messiah requsemeas. and MU not be used rooks plaid between November I and Mooch 1. and ooy with the permission of dx Landscape Designer. and City ofTnkkwila staff. Bare foot plant mom have rough fibrous root to Mere peat survival. Rom must be covered at all times with mud and/or wet straw. mos. or other suitable pocking email until one of installation. Plants whoa roots have dried one f exposure will not be • accepted at installation inspection. . . RIVERSTONE HOMES, INC. TUKWILA SITE SEC. 10, TWP. 23N., RGE 4 E., W.M. MITIGATION TEXT 83 Storage: Pants moral by the Petmietee for longer than one meal prior to planting shall be planted in nursery rows. and craned ed in a moms sdmbk to that species toxaemia] requirements. -Plants mum be reinspected b) the Wetland Biologist and/or landscape Danner pie to Melaka 8.4 Damaged Ponta Damaged. dried out a Mewl= mishma l= Pis wig be rejected et installation inspection. Al) rejected plans doll h immediamh• moved from to site. - . 8S Plata Hams Pam names shat) comply with those gmmafy accepted in the native pant nursery wade. Any question regarding pant Neces or velem shall be refereed to the IJndsmpe Designer, Wetand Biolognn or City of Tukwila staff All plant materials shall be true to specks and variety and legibly tagged. 8.6 Pam Substitutions Plant substitutions are not permitted without the permission of de land mpe Designer, Wetland Biologist IM/or City of Tukwila surf Stone species substitutions of larger siae do not regent special _ Permission. However: small plants often =mime loss transplant shock and adapt more quickly to see conditions, resulting M o higher mutes rote. As sued smaller pants will be approved as sobmmdons baud on cumin Me 9900(c conditions (pees not less then 1 gallon size however). 8.7 Quality and Calditjno 'Plants shall be normal in pamo of growvth health•. well- branched, vigorous, with well - developed root systems. and fee of pest and diseases. Damaged, diseand, pem- infested, scraped. bruised, driedbut burned. broken. or defective parrs 0411 be rejected. Pant with pining wounds ova 1' in diameter will be rejected 88 Roma: All pants shall he boiled and borapped °re mi mead emit e g container. antes especity authorized by the Landscape Dsipor and/or Wetland Biologist Rootbaund pasta or B&B yams with damaged. sacked or brae rootballs (major damage) will h rejected. Immediately before installation pants with minor root damage (some broken and/or Palma:D mm be • root-pruned. Mated or circling room of containerized pboangs must be mired or stnigbteoed and the sides of the root ball mum be mochas= from rep to - 1o0omma depth o fepproxintaxly half and inch in two to f places. Bare • mot plantings of woody material is olkwed only with pmmissim from the Landscape Designer, Wetland Biologist a.d/nrCity of Tukwila oaf. 8.9 Sloes Pant sizes shall h the size indicated in the plant schedule. Larger stock my h acceptable provided that it has not been rot back to size ramified, and that the root ban is proportionate to ( .ize of the Mat Smalls nook may Ix acceptable. and under some cecrosmnas perfemble. bawd on despecifm conditions.' Measmemm¢ caliper. branching and balling and 1ulapping shall ' . conform to the American Standard of Nursery Seek by the American • Assoiciatim of Nurserymen (best edition). 8.10 Form: • Evergreen macs. ifreed, Al eve single trunks and symmetrical. .. well-developed form. Deciduous trees shag be single ranked unless specified es multi -stem in the pant schedule. Sbmbs shall have multiple stems, and be well-branched. 8.11 Planting:-.Planting Mall h done in accordance wah illustrated =mils b the mitigation/restoration plan set and accepted industry standards. ' 8.12 Timing of Panting: Unless otherwise approved by City of Tukwila off, - all planting shall occur between September 15 end )awary 15. Overall the earlier paresgointot r ground M the faR the moredone they have to adapt to the site and extend their root systems before the wax demmds of spring and ammo. 8.13 Weediop: Existing and exotic vegetation in the mitigation and bolter area will be had weeded from armed all newly installed plants at the time of installation ad on routine basis through monitoring period No thanks' control of vegetation on any portion of the tie is allowed wlhmn the minx permission of City of Tukwila oaf. 824 Soil Amendavente Unks otherwise specified and approved by City d Tukwila, organic maps ( Cedar Grove Pum C®poa or mart= equal) will be incorporated into the entire panting site. not bcledbg mem inside to dnipfine of axing tea and shrubs. One unit of loose we1wnpomcd organic material should be incorporated with two unit of loon sit to a dept of eight to en aches (only tree to four aches within three feet of existing drip !itemized -mixed thoroughly.. 8.15 Mulch: . AD landscaped urea denuded of vegetation and soil surface -sure diog all planting pit areas shall receive roles than r-c of arcane comport, coarse bark mulch. or notified weed-free maw alley planting Campton or certified wood -free straw shin he kept 11 away (et kart 2) from • the minks and stets of woody plants. Compost shall be Cedar Grove Pm - Comport or approved emmL . .8.16 Site Conditions: Contactor Mall immediately notify the Landscape Designer and/or Wetland Biologist of drainage or soil co,dmms Ailey to be - deterimmml to 40 growth or smvivol of pants. Pima: operations shall not be - conduced under the following conditions: freezing weather. when the ground is .'form, excessively wet weather. emceadve)4 windy weather, or in excessive' • bat 8.17 Pant Lon04= •Lorotims shall be as depicted in the approval pan net The Landscape Daigner and/or Wetland Biolologst may change de locations of plantings shown on pans based an fold conditions. • 8.18 Panting in Pitta Planting pits shall be circular or spore with venial sides. and shall be 6' deeper and ir larger M diameter than the root hall Ofnhe . plum. Break up the sides of the pit in compacted sails. -Sin pants upright in pits as illustrated M Meng detail Burlap shall h removed from to poring pit Backfdl shall be world back into holes such that air pocket am removed withom dver ey compacting down soils 8.19 Fertilizer. •Slow release fertilizer may be and if pre-approved by City d Tukwila staff. " Ferulizen deli be applied only ate has of plonMg ' underneath the required covering of mulch (that does not make mum with stmt of the plants). No soil amendment or fertilizers will be paced in panting holes • 820 W taco•. Plants shall h watered midway through hxkfdting and again upon completion of beckfmling. For spring plantings (f approved). a rim of earth shall be mounded around the base of the nee m th1ub no closer Wan to drip line. or no lea than 30' in dimnear. except on map slopes or in hollows. as illustrated in panting detail Plano shall be waxed a econd time within 24-48 hours after installation. The earthen riMdann sleuld 4 kwkd prior to the second gnnnvmg season. . 8.21 Stakbsg:' Most shrubs and many. trees do non teepee any Making. If the pant can send aloe without staling in a moderate wad do not use a sake. 1f the pant needs support. then strapping ar webbing should be uscd as low as possible on to trunk to loosely brace the um with two soles Ism Pbanbtg Detail). Do n° brace the nee tightly or ono high on the rod:. If de nee is unable to sway. it will further lose the ability to support emir. Do not tee wee el a rubber lose for strapping as a exerts ono much pressure on the bark. As soon as supporting the pant becomes unnecessary. femme the salon. All sakes mum be removed within two (2) years of installation .8.22 Intermediate Inspection= All poor shall h inspected and approved by the Landscape Designer and/or Wetland Biologist pie to mmaMtion Condition of mots of a roodono sample of pacts will be especial as well as all aboveground growth on all plant. Roots of any lone root pant. if permits= for will be inspected. Pam material may be approved at the note. at the discretion of the landscape Designer a od and/or Weto Biologist loo all material um.h re- inspected and approved on the she par to installation. Pam locations sha11 also be emceed and approved prior to =main • 8.23 Wildlife Cont rol.' As determined by the Landscape Designer a0/or Wetland Biologist (cooing or deer repelams may be medal to limit deer intrusion while inOa0ed plant ate becoming established. 9.0 Crass Sad'mg • Seeding is required 00 desem ed in approved plans. . 9.1 Timber Seeding shall not ok< pace mil compost has been applied. Contractor shall insure that areas to receive rood me clear of detro and that final grads one correct Seeding shall be performed after other pant 1maladon is complete. Sending is the fnml sap of the intiol i allooim; sire Ball be cased to all vehicles and foot traffic loll be meimbd after seeding is ^ wopke. Sontag shah! not take place when the grand is frozen ce in wetly other.. Seeds shall h had broadcast or by oo hmical hand powered Meader. with as even dismbotion as leasable. Awns wthe 6' -12' of inns of installed plant shall not be seeded. 9.2 Seed Mir Use specified native mix at rate specified. AO surd morals 10 be free of weed seeds or other foreign mars detrimental *plain growth ,.OTE: Seed mix should be ordered as early as pussnble to ensare and adequate • apply of specifncd native sad 9.3 Poo Seeding Erosion CowoL- Smoer r -2' of certified weed -free straw on ell bare ground after seeding is complete and inspected for coon control t1m Erasion Control Neal. . . . . . 10.0 Maintenance • - Maintenance shall be regomed a aecoidance with Coy of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Mitigation Guidelines and approved plans. Inrnasive 0eee000, w1) h removed taonoboot the maimdot area daring mark nainxnanne visit. 'maims vegetation will be removed by had whenever possible. If machinery is necessary. then only hand held equipment will he allowed. 10.1 Surviwh The Panties shall be responsible for 0e balm of 100r4 of s0 newly installed palm lee one growing season after installation has been accepted by City of Tukwila staff (see Performance Stands its). A growing mason for these purposes is defined as °cansag foe spring to aping Naze .15 to March 15. following tea). For fall installation (often required), the growing season will begin the following aping Ile Matinee shag nepace any plants that are ailing weak, defective in a manner of growth or deed during this growing season, as directed by the landscpe Designer. Wetland Riokgi, and/or Cay of Tukwila ref. . 103 Installation Timing for Rsfdamoml Kamm Replacement plmm Mao be estelled between September 15 and lamrry 15. unless °Unwise desermeed by the Landscape Desiper3Nedand Biologist mac Coy of Tukwila star.. 10.3 Duration and Extent In order to achieve =slime= mandmds. de Pennine shall have to megaton/restoration arm maetaeod for ge duration of to monitoring pniml. _ year. Meneenmm win include wowing weeding mood hee of emned plsna coming. repamam, emei nil, renooval eel classes of maxims weds lee Washington Stem Noxious Weds Litt WAC 16-730-005) as well as Himalayan blackberry. and any other measures needed to input pare survival. All nmaximre shall be directed by the landscape Designs and/or Wetland Biologist 10.4 Standards for Replacement P W or Replacement pant shag mat the pore 0ndads for six and type as those mended for original installation unks otherwise directed by to Landscape Design, Welled Biologist are/or . City of Tukwila star. Replacement pants shag h inmost m desmbd above for the original installation. 10.5 R.padmg:• Pant that have settled in their panting pits ono deep. too shallow. bon, or erooleed shall h replanted as dined by to laodwape Designer, Wetland Biologic and/or City aria -Ma self 10.6 Berbi,idedPertkido Chemical controls shell tit be used hi the mitigatiodrestootim area. 0e1000e •70.00 07 then bufon However. Need use of herbicides may be approve depending an site specific candekos. only if • approved by City of Tukwila tor. 10.7 ertigatk.)WateMog Water shall be provided during to dry eaten (July I-0ctaber13) for the Mt two years aka hotelman to =sum pare survival non establishment. Water should be provided by 0 nahm0oany above mend gallon Mum and/or water 01,01. Water shmI be applied eta nee of 1' of water two times a week for year I and 1' of amen one time a week dining 10.8 Geese: The PemmMr0 dull) include in general maintenance activities to • replacement of any vandalized or damaged signs hobom fumes, fences or other mental tal component of de meigmion site. . 11.0 Performance Standards - Pam Cove and Survive Plant survival and cove standards are established to measure mitigation success as follows: - Performance Standards • Year Year2 Year Shrub and Sapling Tree Cover' >I0% >l5% . >201. Snub and Sapling Tree Survival .1001. >85% >hm`/. Herbaceous Cover' >60%. >801. >901. ce Herboom Survival 1001. >85% 'Include beneficed native plants in that category that are naanaly recruiting >01001ms 12.0 Monitoring . Monitoring shall be conducted annually for 3 year en accordance with de ppmved Mitigotioo/Resmmtion Monitoring PM. 12.1 Vegetation Monitoring, Sample points or names will be established for vegetation monitoring, and photo -points established from which photos will be taken thmugbom the monitoring period. Linear mnects are the preferred method for vegetation monitoring for this sine. No Xs than one (1)100 -foo 0000001 per 10.000 square feet of area will be established in the mitigation/restoration area. Permanent transact location(s) mum be ideotifeed on mitigation/restoration site plans in the Bat ono eormg report (they may h drown on approved miligarnmhestoration plans by bred).. Plot located at the end of each nomad shall deal herb. shrub, and tree eerie) cover m nXii of Ie. 5m, and IOm respectively. using the Braun- BWhquet releve method or other acceptable field method. Monitoring of vegetation 171110¢cts shall occur =wall9 between May 15 and Sapanber 30 (prior to beef drop), unless 0themise specified. 122 Photapohns: No less than one (I) permanent photo poet per 10.000 square feet of mirigetwNreztoratbn area will be enable.= within the mitigatiodostoratioo arna.•Phomgmphs will be ohm Ben these poets to virally record the condition of one maigatio homodon arm. Photos stall be Men annually between May 15 and Septeeber 30 (prior to leaf drop). oaks oixnvise specified. 12.3 Reportm Monitioring report shall be submitted by December 31 of each year daring the monitoring period. As applimble, mothering reports mutt include decmf am fm • L Site pan mi ed n mention map ' ii. Historic description of project including date of ivso0etbn cmre a year of ' monitoring restatement of mitigationkstaotion gab, and pare:nem seder=s 16. Pant ,or,-...1. vigor. and aerial mane from every plat( amenity (=rem data), and explanation of monitoring methodology in oe COD= m assessing performance canards h.. Site hydrology. including extent of iodation. samadun, Meth to . groundwater. function of any hydrologic emcees. pkmmcer of staff gege if available. inputs. owlets. etc. • v. Slope condition site stability. any stemma or special Mures vi Buffer conditions, e.g. suoroomdwg ad use. use ben humane, wild and domak mmmres vil. Observed wildlife. melding amplubians. Mans and nest viii. Asemnem of nuimncaexotic biota and recommendations for ahmogemem • is. Soils, including texture. Menseg color. rooting and oddfd rhaoshpmes 0.. Receipt for of-site disposal of any dumping weeds or evasive plants 01. Receipt for any structural repot or replacement • sR 4'x6' color photograph okra from permanan photo -poets as Mena on Monitoring/Restoration pan. ill. Summary of maintenance and contingency measures proposed for next ' season and completed for pea seam 12.4 Deficient-et Any deficiency discovered during any monitoring or inspection visit must be corrected within 60 days of approval by City of • Tukwila. 12.5 Contingency Plan Should any monitoring report reveal the mutation has failed in whole or in part and should the failure h beyond to snipe of routine maintenance, a Contingency Pan will be submittal' The Conatgmcv. Pon may rouge M complexity from a list of plants sobnimod, to eon -makes -of proposed engi oared matures. Once approved. it may be installed. and will replace the approved mitig 000110morati 0 plan. Ude failure is substantial. the City of Tukwila may extend the monitoring period for dot mitigation.. 13.0 Bond Prior to beginning any work. the Pertain= mum amide a mitigauonhemoro m bred or assignment of funds per City of Tukwilb procedures. A bond quantity worksheet bin been completed based on ail element of the Mwgmion/Reammtion plan. The total Curt pis comegemy fees hes ban determined m be T 5 029.54 . which win he the mom ofd. mitigatioohenmration band the Permit= is required to provide. Noe that the approved bond will include required stem dam for mwgatim construction. Bonds are eligible for reduction to mainemance moms upon successful installation inspection, providing that it also meet performance standards established in the Mitigation Pon and City of Tukwila Seminve Amin Mitigation Guidelines. r LRE MIID 0113171 NO. DATE BY REVISION } 1 J P1 w -4 U kfi Z W W N 2 0'. N 1 • • NORTH 0 10 20 SCALE 40 60 , r� = 40' i ---- --- -- - - -- - - -- -- - - - --- T " f �\ RIVERSTONE HOMES, INC. - TUKWILA SITE SEC. 10, TWP. 23N., RGE 4 E., W.M. WETLAND MAP 334740 -0690 / .• r °' `, �\ 1 1 / 9 \1 t� 334740 - ®0 II 1 . , , ',, \ t uj ,_______ i /1 1 1 l r - �.s , > 334740-0705------ ,i UPLAND 334740 -0715 334740 -0710 S. 118TH ST. 334740 -1325 \ `. \' ( - 34740 -0730 APPLICANT: RIVERSTONE HOMES, INC. ATTN: MARC JOHNSON 353160 28TH AVENUE SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 (253) 005 -5351 - LEGAL DESCRIPTION : 266 3 HILLMANS MEADOW GARDENS DIV 141 NO DATE BY REVISION a 9 A w w = o