Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit L09-004 - CAMPY CHARLES - TREE MITIGATION PERMIT
CHARLES CAMPY Tree Mitigation APN 76616 -0028 L09 -004 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director NOTICE OF DECISION TO: Charles Campy, Applicant/Owner King County Assessor, Accounting Division Washington State Department of Ecology March 30, 2009 This letter serves as a notice of decision and is issued pursuant to TMC 18.104.170 on the following project and permit approval. I. PROJECT INFORMATION Project File Number: L09 -004 Applicant: Charles Campy Type of Permit Applied for: Tree Clearing Permit Project Description: Removal of trees within the buffer of a type IV stream. Location: King County Parcel 76616 -0028 Associated Files: None Comprehensive Plan Designation/Zoning District: Low Density Residential (LDR) II. DECISION SEPA Determination: The City SEPA Responsible Official has previously determined that this application does not require a SEPA threshold determination because it is categorically exempt. Decision on Substantive Permit: The City Community Development has determined that the application for a tree clearing permit does comply with applicable City and state code requirements and has approved that application, subject to the following conditions: 1. The planting locations of the Pacific Dogwoods and Oregon Ash shall be switched. 2. The applicant shall plant two additional Western Red Cedars. One of the Red Cedars shall be located on the north end of the property, within the buffer area and the second Red Cedar shall be located on the south end of the property within the buffer area. B. Miles Page 1 H: \Tree Permit \L08 - 059 \NOD Type 1.doc 03/30/2009 6300 Southcenter Boulevard. Suite #100 • Tukwila. Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • • III. YOUR APPEAL RIGHTS The Decision on this Permit Application is a Type 1 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 Hearing Examiner of the Decision on the Permititself is permitted. A party who is not satisfied with the outcome of the Hearing Examiner appeal process may file an appeal in King County Superior Court from the Hearing Examiner's decision. IV. PROCEDURES AND TIME FOR APPEALING In order to appeal the Community Development Director 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 April 13, 2009. The requirements for such appeals are set forth in Tukwila Municipal Code ch. 18.116. All appeal materials shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Appeal materials MUST include: 1. The name of the appealing party. 2. The address and phone number of the appealing party; and if the appealing party is a corporation, association or other group, the address and phone number of a contact person authorized to receive notices on the appealing party's behalf. 3. A statement identifying the decision being appealed and the alleged errors in the decision, including any specific challenge to an MDNS. 4. The Notice of Appeal shall identify (a) the specific errors of fact or errors in application of the law in the decision being appealed; (b) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and (c) the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be limited to matters or issues raised in the Notice of Appeal. 5. Appeal fee based on the current fee schedule. V. APPEAL HEARINGS PROCESS Any administrative appeal regarding the Permit shall be conducted as a closed record hearing before the Hearing Examiner based on the information presented to the Community Development Director, who made the original decision. No new evidence or testimony will be permitted during the appeal hearing. Parties will be allowed to present oral argument based on the information presented to the Community Development Director before their decision was issued. The Hearing Examiner's decision on the appeal is the City's final decision. Any party wishing to challenge the Hearing Examiner's decision on this application must file an appeal pursuant to the procedures and time limitations set forth in RCW ch. 36.70C. An appeal challenging a DNS, an MDNS or an EIS may be included in such an appeal. If no appeal of the Hearing Examiner's B. Miles Page 2 03/30/2009 H: \Tree Permit \L08 - 059 \NOD Type 1.doc decision is properly filed in Superior Court within such time limit, the Decision on this permit will be final. The City's decision to issue a DNS, an MDNS or an EIS is final for this permit and any other pending permit applications for the development of the subject property. VI. INSPECTION OF INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at the Tukwila Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100, Tukwila, Washington 98188 from Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Brandon J. Miles, who may be contacted at 206 - 431 -3684 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. VII. DISCLAIMER Removal of any tree that may be dangerous and pose an immediate threat to public safety or property maybe commenced without the need for a permit from the City. Compliance and mitigation may still be required for the removal of a tree deemed "danger s" if the tree is located with a sensitive area buffer. Department of Community Development City of Tukwila B. Miles Page 3 03/30/2009 H: \Tree Permit \L08 - 059 \NOD Type 1.doc Page 1 of 1 Brandon Miles - Campy planting inspection (L09 -004) From: Sandra Whiting To: Brandon Miles Date: 05/14/2009 10:58 AM Subject: Campy planting inspection (L09 -004) I inspected the planting this morning and everything looks good except for one vine maple that hasn't leafed out yet. I suggested that he watch it for a couple weeks and if it doesn't show any improvement, he should get the nursery to replace it. He said he would send an email letting us know that he did it. I also asked him to remove several small holly trees and to mulch the stream bank (which has exposed soils) with wood chips, jute matting or a combination to prevent erosion. Other than that, I think we can accept the planting and start his maintenance period. He asked about being able to tap into the fire hydrant for irrigating the plantings. I told him to contact Public Works about getting a deduct meter. Sandra file: / /C:\temp\XPgrpwise\4AOBF96Dtuk-mail�300-po 100130796C 113 3 631 \GW } 00001.... 05/14/2009 May 11, 2009 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Attn: Brandon Miles 6300 Southcenter Blvd Suite 100 Tukwila WA 98188 -8548 Re: Tree Clearing Permit, L /659 King County Parcel 7661600208 Dear Mr. Miles; RECEIVED M PY 11 2009 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the landscape plans presented to you regarding the above tree clearing permit have been completed. Enclosed, you will find photos of the wetland site on King County Parcel 7661600208. In addition to the photos, you will also find a list of materials purchased for the completion of these plans (receipts are available upon request). At this time, we ask that you review the work completed and contact us if you have any questions or concerns. My husband, Charles Campy, or I can be reached by telephone at (253) 845 -5645 or by email at chuck campy @yahoo.com. Date 4/2/2009 4/4/2009 4/8/2009 4/16/2009 4/18/2009 4/23/2009 4/25/2009 4/27/2009 4/27/2009 4/28/2009 4/3/2009 4/12/2009 10/2/2008 2/9/2009 8/25/2008 Merchant Item(s) Additional Details Dollar Amount Sound Native Plants Lowe's Sawdust Supply Co Lowe's McLendon Hardware McLendon Hardware Lowe's Fast Signs McLendon Hardware McLendon Hardware Woodbrook Nursery Go Natives Lee McMasters Landscape Architect Lee McMasters Landscape Architect DMP Total Spent on Project Trees, Shrubs, plants, etc... Staking Materials Wood Chips (Plant Mix) Split Rail Fence Materials Split Rail Fence Materials Split Rail Fence Materials Split Rail Fence Materials "Wetland Buffer Zone" signs Split Rail Fence Materials Split Rail Fence Materials Trees, Shrubs, plants, etc... Trees Landscape Buffer Plant Site Plan Landscape Buffer Plant. Site Plan Survey of Property 11 Red Osier Dogwoods; 13 Western Bleeding Hearts;23 Fringecup 4-6ft Tree Stakes; Utility Knife 5 yards bark 10 Cedar Split Posts 16 -10ft Cedar Split Rails 20 Cedar Split Rails 9 Cedar Split Rails; 1 Package Nails 2 Cedar Split Rail Posts 4 -10ft. Cedar Split Rails 24 Western Sword Ferns;3 Vine Maples;4 Western Red Cedar;11 Piggyback Plants;1 Red Flowering Currant;9 Nootka Roses;3 Serviceberry;1 Oregon Ash;11 Common Snowberry 4 Pacific Dogwood Trees Site Planning /Garden Design Site Planning /Garden Design Check # 1501; Invoice # 25151 $135.23 $20.10 $273.48 $77.91 $174.71 $218.38 $74.53 $332.88 $21.84 $43.76 $710.50 $20.00 $427.70 $441.61 $1,485.00 $4,457.63 • • March 26, 2009 TO: Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supervisor FM: Brandon J. Miles, Senior Planner RE: Approval of Tree Cutting Permit and Buffer Mitigation Plan for Charles Campy (L09- 004). BACKGROUND On October 24, 2008, the City became aware of illegal work within a stream buffer on King County Parcel 76616 -0028. A site visit on the site revealed that two trees had been removed within the buffer of a Type IV stream and the understory within the buffer had been disturbed. City staff posted a stop work order on the property and Code Enforcement was directed to begin compliance procedures against the property owner. On January 29, 2009, the City received a complete tree clearing permit application. The application included a landscaping plan and a report entitled "Draft Tree Mitigation Plan" dated January 29, 2009. TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN There were several trees that were removed on the site; however only two of the trees removed were within the buffer area of the adjacent stream. One of the trees removed was a cottonwood with a diameter of 122 inches. The species and diameter of the other tree removed is not known. The applicant had also requested to remove additional trees with the tree clearing permit application. Thus a total of five trees have or will be removed. The applicant's stream buffer planting plan indicates that nine trees will be planted within the buffer area of the stream. The nine trees included, three Vine Maples, three, Pacific Dogwoods, one Oregon Ash, and two Western Red Cedars. The nine trees were mitigation for the removal of only four trees (one previously removed and three trees to be removed). The City notified the applicant that an two additional trees needed to be planted, since two trees were already removed within the buffer area. The plan does not reflect the planting of a total of 11 trees; however a condition will be included on the Notice of Decision. The applicant's plan notes that tree #5 will be removed. Yet, the write up provided did not address the removal of this tree. Tree #5 provides a significant amount of shade and buffer function to the stream. When the discrepancy between the landscaping plan and the written report was brought to the applicant's attention he noted that at this time he did not want to remove tree #5. The City's Urban Environmentalist reviewed the plans and suggested that the placement of the Dogwoods and the Oregon Ash be switched. Oregon Ash is better at adapting to changing water levels compared to the Dogwoods. BM Page 1 of 2 03/27/2009 6:30:00 PM H: \Tree Clearing Permits \Tree Cutting Permit Approval.doc Additional mitigation measures for the removal of trees within the buffer include the installation of shrubs and groundcover. A split rail fence with approved signage will also be installed at the edge of the buffer area. The fence and sign will comply with TMC 18.45. INFORMATION NOTE: The lot that is subject to this permit application was created via a short plat (L02 -051) in 2005. The applicant is vested to the SAO requirements that were in place for five years from the date that the short plat was recorded. The property is currently vested to a buffer of 15 feet from the ordinary high water mark. RECOMMENDATION Approve the L09 -004, Tree Cutting permit for King County Parcel, 766160 -0208 with the following conditions: 1. The planting locations of the Pacific Dogwoods and Oregon Ash shall be switched. 2. The applicant shall plant two additional Western Red Cedars. One of the Red Cedars shall be located on the north end of the property, within the buffer area and the second Red Cedar shall be located on the south end of the property within the buffer area. Brandon -M Page 2 H: \Tree Clearing Permits \Tree Cutting Permit Approval.doc 03/30/2009 • Brandon Miles - Re: Tree mitigation From: Brandon Miles To: chuck_campy @yahoo.com Date: 03/02/2009 1:58 PM Subject: Re: Tree mitigation Charles, • Page 1 of 2 In looking at the email from your wife, reviewing the permit details, and visiting the site I am a bit confused as to what is actually happening on the site. • Your wife's email dated February 24, 2009 noted that tree number 12 is proposed to be removed. This is not reflected in any of the documents that the City has been reviewing. • Also, sheet L -2 indicates that tree #5 is proposed to be removed. However, the written report notes that the tree will be retained. No justification is provided for why the tree needs to be removed. This is a large tree that provides a significant amount of canopy and buffer function and should be retained. • It appears that 10 -inch diameter tree was removed from the north end of the site, next to tree #4, which is not accounted for the tree replacement count. An additional two trees will need to be planted. I think we can address these issues as conditions of the permit, however the City needs a clear understanding of the trees that have been removed and the trees that are proposed to be removed within the buffer area. if you have time to meet this week I am happy to meet with you to discuss. Best Regards, Brandon Brandon 3. Miles Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila tel (206) 431 -3684 fax (206) 431 -3665 bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us »> Chuck Campy <chuck_campy @yahoo.com> 02/27/2009 1:45 PM »> Thanks Brandon, now that I have a time frame I can place an order from my vendor. - -- On Fri, 2/27/09, Brandon Miles <bmiles@ci.tukwila.wa.us> wrote: From: Brandon Miles <bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Subject: Re: Tree mitigation To: chuck_campy @yahoo.com Date: Friday, February 27, 2009, 10:00 AM Chuck, The permit should be ready hopefully next Tuesday. I will be in touch. file: / /C:\ temp\ XPgrpwise \49ABE5FCtuk- mail6300 -po 100130796C 1121251 \GW } 00001.... 03/13/2009 • Brandon Brandon J. Miles Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila tel (206) 431 -3684 fax (206) 431 -3665 bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us • Page 2 of 2 »> Chuck Campy <chuck_campy @yahoo.com> 02/27/2009 9:39 AM »> Brandon, I was wondering if I could pickup the permit for my property ©7661600208 at this time or if it is still under review? I understand that you would like a copy of the tree assessment as well as the company removing the tree. The company removing the tree will be Washington pipeline WASHIP1935MJ and the assessment I will gladly give you a copy any time. What I am wanting to do is get the approval to start the replant process at the north end of the buffer following the plan provided and completing the southern section upon approval. I would like to start as soon as possible due to the fact that this is the best time for planting and soon the shrubs and trees will not be available until the fall. Thanks, Chuck 253 - 720 -2323 file: / /C:\ temp\ XPgrpwise \49ABE5FCtuk- mail6300 -po 100130796C 1121251 \GW} 00001.... 03/13/2009 Brandon Miles - Re: Campy From: Sandra Whiting To: Brandon Miles Date: 03/02/2009 12:16 PM Subject: Re: Campy Page 1 of 1 Brandon, Here are my comments. I visited the site on February 11th. I had a difficult time interpreting the tree survey - it didn't seem accurate. Nonetheless I believe we don't need to have it redone if the applicant agrees to the following. There is a discrepancy between the drawing and the tree list. Specifically the drawing sho s tree 5 b-ing removed, while the tree list shows it as retained. As this is a large tree that provides a lot o • : and buffer function, it should not be removed. It also appears that a 10 -inch diameter tree was removed from the north end of the site (next to tree 4) which is not accounted for in the tree replacement count. Therefore, it appears that two more trees are needed for replacement. I would recommend adding two Western Red Cedar trees - one near the southern end of the buffer (around where the planting plan shows Snowberry plantings) and one in the northern part (around the red - twigged dogwood plantings). I suggest moving the Oregon Ash closer to the stream edge, where a Pacific Dogwood is shown on the stream edge, as it is very adaptable to changing water levels. The Pacific Dogwood shown on the stream edge could be switched with the ash. We should require an inspection after planting. Sandra »> Brandon Miles 02/27/2009 12:22 PM »> How are the comments coming? He is wanting to pick up the permit. Brandon Brandon J. Miles Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila tel (206) 431 -3684 fax (206) 431 -3665 bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us file: / /C:\ temn\ XPgmwise\ 49ABCE14tuk- mail6300- no100130796C11211B1 \GW100001 ____ 03/26/2009 • • Brandon Miles - Fw: Re: Tree Clearing Permit Page 1 of 2 From: Nicole Campy To: Date: 02/24/2009 4:30 PM Subject: Fw: Re: Tree Clearing Permit CC: Good Afternoon Brandon, My name is Sonya Campy. My husband, Charles Campy, has been working with you in regards to a tree clearing permit for a lot we own in Tukwila. He has forwarded the below email to me and asked that I contact you, as he is working an extraordinary number of hours this week and could not email you himself. Charles would like to pick up the permit within the next couple of days. If at all possible, he would like to meet with you briefly to discuss a couple of things regarding the additional tree that needs to be remove (number 12 on the drawing created by Lee McMasters). The individual we plan to hire to remove the tree (once it has been approved for removal) will be Vann Lanz with Washington Pipeline LLC. In addition, we had a certified arborist assess the tree and a copy of the assessment form can be provided for you if you would like. Can you please call Charles (253- 720 -2323) as soon as you can to let him know when would be a good time to pick up the permit and to chat with you briefly about this project. We appreciate you help. Sincerely, Sonya Campy - -- On Tue, 2/24/09, Chuck Campy <chuck campy@a yahoo.com> wrote: From: Chuck Campy <chuck_campy @yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Tree Clearing Permit To: "Nicole Campy" <sonyanicole_campy @ yahoo.com> Date: Tuesday, February 24, 2009, 11:24 PM - -- On Tue, 2/10/09, Brandon Miles <bmiles@ci.tukwila.wa.us> wrote: From: Brandon Miles <bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Subject: Tree Clearing Permit To: chuck_campy @yahoo.com Date: Tuesday, February 10, 2009, 5:56 PM Hi Charles, file: / /C:\ temp\ XPgrpwise \49A4208Btuk- mail6300- po100130796C111F7F 1 \GW }00001.... 03/02/2009 • • Can you please clarify if any additional trees are proposed to be removed? If so, I would like to know the contractor doing the work. The permit should be ready in the next few days. Thanks, Brandon Brandon J. Miles Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila tel (206) 431 -3684 fax (206) 431 -3665 bmiles@ci.tukwila.wa.us Page 2 of 2 file : / /C:\temp\XPgrpwise\49A420 8Btuk- mail6300 -po 100130796C111 F7F 1 \GW} 00001.... 03/02/2009 • • CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community DevelopmenRECE V ED TREE 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Ni Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431-366.51M 2 ' ,--1 . E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us COMMUNITY PERMIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P -TREE Planner: File Number: / "—CO C-7 Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Tree, Al h Q Picts. for Farce f (,,,( 2g LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. Poxc4 104 i9OO 2Os LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). ��P I (oOO20b DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the owner /applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: C/IGxIeS Ca 3'l ,j GC Cailry0-Aj_ Address: 2D1 ! 2 ` NST—Z Y' U y a i 1 LA p (Ap n-- n7'& 3 Phone: 25 3 -) 20 - 2323 FAX: E -mail: CJi l t k aanipj cthoo • Cowt- Date:- //29/67 P: \Planninn Forms \ Applications \newTrecPermiu.doc April 6. 2006 • CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Conununity Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us • REc AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY rR r COMi.. f DEVELGa " "L.,141- STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 5.5i) 5 5 1 y' �S • 51- Ia.-4e( 4 7/( /, 05 - g for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the Toss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. 7 EXECUTED at �Ll W� (city), (state), on J(%b'vei 2 ( LQ4j , 20 Print Name ,� I) ' Address Z s 7 i%-. 5 (- / i+ L v ss 6-07 Phone Number ZS 3 7Z-0-7.-; Z3 Signature On this day personally appeared before me I -es to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she signed the same a� hir/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS Forms \Applications \newIrcePermii.rloc NOTARV'PUBLIC in and for the S Suss. residing at My Commission expires on fVbvz4)er ,20b &frOCic e of Washington (7 i L l 12400 April 6. 2006 COMPILE i'E APPLICATION C�IECKLIST 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. Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow project review to begin and vest the applicant's rights. However, the City may require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. RECEIVED City staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 - 431 -3670 (Department,offCommunity Development) and 206 - 433 -0179 (Department of Public Works). �f • 4 N.., <,j COMNIUNTY Check items submitted with application Information Required. DCVCt OPW;c;�T May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning APPLICATION MATERIALS: 1/ 1. Application Checklist_one (1)_conv, indicating items submitted with application. 2. Permit Fei SEE ATTACHED FEE SCH 3. Completed Application norm and drawings (4 copies). 4. Completed and notarized Affidavit of Ownership and Hold Harmless Permission to Enter Property (1 copy attached). 3 5. One set of all plans reduced to either 8 1/2" by 11" or 11" by 17 ". 2. 6. Written response to the approval criteria at TMC 18.54.130. 7. Written response to the exception criteria at TMC 18.54.140 if any exceptions are requested. am, 8. Professional review of the replacement plan by a landscape architect, surveyor or certified arborist per TMC 18.54.080 3. 9. Proposed time schedule of vegetation removal, relocation and/or replacement, and other construction activities which may affect onsite vegetation, sensitive areas, sensitive area buffers and/or the shoreline zone. SITE PLAN: �7 cc ,�.� 10 (a) The site plan must include a graphic scale, north arrow and project name. Maximum size 24" x 36 ". �,�. ,_5 "` (b) Existing and proposed building footprints and utilities. 5,4..E (c) Limits of construction. (d) Parking lots, driveways and fire access lanes. (e) Fences, rockeries and retaining walls. (f) Existing and proposed topography at 2 -foot contour intervals. (g) Location of all sensitive areas (e.g. streams, wetlands, slopes over 15 %, 200' river buffer, coal mine areas and important geological and archaeological sites) and their buffers and setbacks. (h) Diameter, species name, location and canopy, of existing significant trees. (i) Identification of all significant trees to be removed and/or relocated. LANDSCAPE PLAN. 11 (a) Landscape planting plan by a Washington State licensed landscape architect, surveyor or certified arborist. Maximum size 24" x 36 ". (b) Diameter, species name and location of all existing significant trees and vegetation to be retained. (c) Diameter, species name, spacing, size and location of replacement trees /vegetation to be used to replace vegetation cleared per TMC 18.54.130 3 b. P: \Planning Forms\ Applications \neccTreePermii.cloc April 6. 2006 Check items submitted with application Information Required. • . May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning (d) Proposed tree protection measures (for example fencing at drip line). (e) Identify measures proposed for mitigation of vegetation clearing in a sensitive area and/or its buffer per the Environmentally Sensitive Areas chapter of the Zoning Code, TMC 18.45. (f) Any other measures proposed to restore the environmental and aesthetic benefits previously provided by on -site vegetation. P: \PIannine Ivrms \Aoolicmions \ncw I rcePermit.doc Anril 6. 2006 Draft Tree Mitigation Plan Parcel # 7661600208 January 29, 2009 RECEIVED IJAN 2 9 Mg commumry DEVELOPMENT 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Charles and Sonya Campy own a 39,192 square foot parcel of land, number 7661600208. The lot is legally described as Seattle land company's 5 acre tracts lot 4, City of Tukwila short plat No. L02 -051, Recording No. 20050601900007 (being a portion of SW Qtr NW Qtr STR 23- 23 -04). The Westside property line is described as a wetland with a Type 0 Stream with a 15' buffer. The land owners have done some routine vegetation on the wetland portion. As part of this process the home owners had one black cottonwood tree removed that was considered to be a potential hazard to existing homes or future structures if the tree were to fall (see photographs in Appendix A). The land owners also removed noxious weeds per King County BMP (Bert Management Practices). The land owners had the remaining trees assessed by an arborist to meet City of Tukwila's requests in letter dated 11/17/08. The trees and brush removed create a number of issues, including the following: • The trees and brush are adjacent to non salmon bearing stream mapped by the City of Tukwila with a 15 foot setback • The trees and brush in the riparian provide shade while leaves and twigs contribute organic matter to stream. • One tree removed from inside buffers edge was completed without a tree permit. Request for Action RFA 08 308 • Have remaining trees assessed by a certified arborist per City of Tukwila request. 1.2 Site Conditions • The cutting and removal has occurred along the low gradient, perennial stream, about eight inches wide and drains a small depressional wetland north of the parcel. The area is characterized by vegetation typical of moist riparian conditions, although the northern section supports more upland plant species such as Himalayan blackberry (R.armeniacus = Rdiscolor) and Evergreen blackberry (R laciniatus) in the stream setback. Although the stream is not fish bearing, it appears to be suitable habitat for a number of amphibian species, most likely Pacific tree frogs (Pseudacaris regilla), rough skinned newts (Taricha granulose), Northwest Salamanders (Ambystoma gracile) and Long Toed Salamanders (A.macrodactylum). The property supports a variety of birds and ground animals. The area that has been cleared represents 120 square feet on the east side of stream. The tree also reduced the overhead canopy cover but did leave shrubs and other understory vegetation intact. Overall, it is estimated the tree clearing has reduced the overall canopy cover by about 6 %. Tree stumps will be cut close to the ground (less than 2 inches high) to avoid being trip hazard. The branches of trees to be felled will be chipped with residual chips blown on site less than 6 inches deep for mulch for new vegetation. 1 1.3 Goals and Objectives The overall goal of this plan is to mitigate the impacts of the tree and brush clearing along the stream on the west side of the property, and associated buffers as needed for a Tree Clearing Permit from the City of Tukwila. In addition, this plan will address the condition of the remaining trees. • Provide vital food source, shelter, and breeding ground for wildlife habitat. • Reduce the need for frequent vegetation maintenance and improve the long term integrity of the wetland, by improving the hydraulic continuity. • Address citizen concerns about maintaining a high quality wildlife habitat along the stream. • Address home owners concerns of hazardous trees leaning >20 degree angle or have cracks or splits in the trunk or major branches. 2.0 PLANTING PLAN 2.1 Plant Species Composition To mitigate the impact of tree remove along the stream the, Campys will plant a variety of native tree and shrub species suitable for the mixture of moist riparian and upland conditions of the site. Thirteen plant species (four different tree species) have been selected to provide vegetation cover and shade and to create both species and structural diversity (Table 1). Shrubs were selected for their ability to provide food for wildlife in the form of seed or fruits. The shrubs planted are expected to quickly shade the stream and benefit bird species that nest in scrub -shrub wetland in riparian habitats. Plants will be ordered as 1 -5 gallon container or B &B (bagged and bur lapped) stock. Table 1. Species selected for site planting Species Wetland Indicator Status Species Wetland Indicator Status Vine Maple (Acer Circinatum) FAC Nootka Rose (Rosa nutkana) FAC Pacific Dogwood (Cornus nuttallii) NI Snowberry (Symporocarpas alba) FACU Oregon Ash (Fraxinus Latifolia) FACW Pacific Bleeding Heart (Dicentra Formosa) FACU Western Red Cedar (Thuja Plicata) FAC Fringe Cup (Telima Grandiflora) NI Serviceberry (Amelanchler Alnifolia) FACU Piggyback Plant (Tolmiea Menziesii) FAC Red -Twig Dogwood (Cornus sericea) FACW Sword Fern (Polystichum munitum) FACU Red Flowering Currant (Ribes sanguineum) NI • 2 Wetland Indicator Status FACW Facultative Wetland FAC Facultative FACU Facultative Upland NI Non Indicator Usually occurs in wetlands (estimated probability 67% - 99 %), but occasionally found in non - wetlands. Equally likely to occur in wetlands or non - wetlands (estimated probability 34% - 66 %). Usually occurs in non - wetlands (estimated probability 67% - 99 %), but occasionally found on wetlands (estimated probability 1% — 33 %). Insufficient information was available to determine an indicator status. 2.2 Site Preparation Because the tree and shrub planting should not result in soil disturbance or removal of understory vegetation only two tasks will be needed to prepare the site for planting. • Debris Removal - tree crew will remove the branches that are left on site along the stream. This will make planting easier and will ensure that this material does not block the flow of the stream by capturing sediment and debris. All branches will be collected manually and removed from the site or chipped and left as mulch. One tree trunk will be left onsite to provide ground cover and wildlife habitat. • Weed Control - owners will treat the existing infestation of blackberry which is the most prevalent noxious weed on site. Although blackberry is not extensive it does have the potential to spread quickly in open conditions. Pending the City of Tukwila's approval, land owners propose using a combination of manual and mechanical, methods to control this species, Plants growing along the stream, which are easily accessible, would be cut to the ground prior to planting and the root systems manually grubbed out prior to sheet mulching areas of infestation. Additional grubbing and sheet mulching are expected in upon each years monitoring. All of these methods are approved for use near water. • Fence Installation —The owners will also install a split rail fence along the 15 foot stream buffer line. Owners will also install signs indicating the existence of a sensitive area every 30 feet along the split rail fence per TMC.18.45.60 2.3 Planting The overall objective of replanting the site is to restore native vegetation cover in the stream setback in a way that reduces the need for frequent vegetation maintenance, improves the quality of wildlife habitat, and satisfies land owners concerns. A formal landscape planting scheme has been prepared (see Stream Buffer Planting Plan on last page). Approximately 118 individual trees, shrubs, and ferns will be installed on the site. Plant placement will be in accordance to the landscape planting scheme. Planting will occur as soon as approved and the supplies are purchased. The work will be performed or directed onsite by land - owners. Photos of the site will be taken from fixed points to provide a basis for monitoring activities. • 3 3.0 MONITORING AND COORDINATION Land owners will monitor the site for 3 years to ensure the success of planting and weed control efforts. Because the site is densely stocked, additional planting will occur only if survival rate drops below 80 %. •Blackberry control using manual and mechanical treatment are expected to occur in each of the monitoring years. After each monitoring visit, land owners will prepare a brief report documentation the number of surviving plants, the methods used for weed control activities, and any issues related to the site. Photographs will be taken from the same fixed points established at planning and included in the report. The report will be sent to City of Tukwila Planning Department by December of each year (2009, 2010 and 2011). In addition, home owners will build a split rail fence meeting Tukwila Municipal Code 18.45.06 at a mutually agreed upon location and install wetland area signs. Signs will be replaced in each of the monitoring years, if necessary. • • 4 4.0 REFERENCES City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 18.54.050 tnkplan@citukwila.wa.us • Environmental Protection Agency. A Citizens Guide to Wetland Restoration; Approaches to Restoring Vegetation Communities and Wildlife Structures in Freshwater Wetland Systems. Seattle, WA Publication # EPA 910/R -94 -006. 1994 Harvey, Jr., R.D. and P.F. Hessburg. 1992. Long -Range Planning For Developed Sites in the Pacific Northwest. The context of hazard tree management. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, Oregon. 106 pp. How Ecology Regulates Wetlands. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication No. 97 -112. March of 1998 King County. 2005a. Critical Areas Ordinance. King County 2005b Best Management Practices. Evergreen blackberry and Himalayan blackberry. King County Department of National Resources and Parks, Water and Land Resource Division. Noxious Weed Control Program. http: / /dnr.metrokc.gov /weeds. Accessed August 23, 2008 United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. http : / /plants.usda.gov /wetinfo.html • • 5 APPENDIX A East side of property (looking west Northwest property corner (looking south) • 6 Hazard tree leaning at > 20 degree angle 53" Cottonwood • 7 1 • 24" Cottonwood 122" Cottonwood Removed September 2008 8 MAP 7661600242 'y 1� II • III Ii 7661600212 I� II Il II II 7661600207' 7661600206 7661600209 7661600211 3365900010 3365900005 76610 08 7661600220 � LTukwila 3365900096 33659005105 N 2111300010. 3355900100 < 2111300005 S 147TH ST 11572001.79 1157200170 1157200177 1157200176 8088600045 8088600030 8088600020 1157200171 1157200182 1157200178 1157200181 1157200184 1157200180 8088600035 8088600025 8088600040 S149THST 8088600060 8088600070 8088600085 8600055 8088600065 8088600075 8088600090 8088600080 8733000041 3779300130 0733000044. 8733000065 3779300180 1. 8733000045 8733000070 3779300140 3779300160 3779300/90 y 8739000040 8733000050 3779300/50 3779300/70 8733000005 1.0 yN y'. II, . I 7661.600185It - 7661600183 I1 (C) 2008 King County l lil ' 8733000075 8733000080 S 150TH ST 3779300120 3779300020 3779307RCT 3 3779300110 3779300030 3779300080 8733000095 8733000100 3779300090 3779300070 3779300050 3779300060 3779300040 3779300100 1157200189 7661600184 7661600180 1099900120 1099900130 109990.7RC T 1099900140 1099900110 1099900160 1099900150 1099900030 1099900170 1099900100 1099900090 1157200193 1099900070 1099900040 1099900080 1099900060 1099900050 01 ;, 1187ft The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is.subject to, change without'notice. King County makes no representations 9 or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness; timeliness, or rightslo the use of such informaton. This document is not intended use as a survey product. King County shall not be liable for any general; special, indirect, Incidental or consequential damages but not limited to, lost revenues or Lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the'informetion contained on this map. Any sale of this map or infor nation'on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County. ' Date: 9/4/2008. Source: King County-NAP - Hydrographic Information ( http:Uwww.metiokc.gov /GIS/IMAP) _ La King County V 47120'(c) 4.99'(R) 470.0t(M) rr-v 0 ... 1 ) DICENTRA FORMOSA PACIFIC BLEEDING HEART/ APPROX. LOCATION OF EX. TREES TO REMAIN, TYP., / 7 5 ' • . 0 K 1 " 0 r P DE. ....... APPROX. LOCATION OF / EX. TREES TO REMAIN, TYP. / POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM SWORD FERN ACE CIRCINATUM /./ VINE MAPLE /, / / / ,/ RIBES SANGUINEUM ..... ...... RED FLOWERING CURRANT 1 PLANTING RE0OMME PAnTI 0,45 I. ALL PLANTS TO BE PIT PLANIt1:9,W H gXIST:144G 14‘ATI", '74D:ti-ITiViNAt.s3OIL IS REQUIfik131::-:AFiRsksieNcrs , . RED-E TOPSOIL'S ElloR 425-1861P-r6q00. . 2. -" PIT TO BE APPROX. 2 TIMES ;45-1/411:5&:::A3•744 \ROOT44ALL/IOO-N4,1-PLANT TOO LOW. HOLD Tbe.-)ROOT:13AILLI\A CROWN OF PLANT 2" ABOVE E14-15,1 AQESQ TFN/AT A L-1.+A$:YIER OF MULCH CAN BE INSTALLED. 3. IF CONTAINER STOCK 16;TROO1T13-6L/NiD; t.,LAG-NRO0fS■siEkti-CALLY WITH A SHARP KNIFE ALONG. OUTSIDE OF BALL IN 3 PLACES BEFORE PLANTING. REMOVE ANY BURLAP OR TWINE AT GROWN OF PLANT. 4. HOLD PLANTS IN CENTER OF HOLE APPROX. 2" ABOVE NORMAL (GROWING POSITION 6 BACKFILL APPROX. HALFWAY. FILL HOLE WITH INATER AND ALLOW TO SETTLE. BACKFILL TO SUE/GRADE (GRADE BEFORE APPLYING MULCH). 5. PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM FINISH GRADE AT PLANT CROWNS, AFTER. PLANTING 1 SETTLING. FORM "EARTH SAUCER'. AROUND THE PLANTED PLANT APPROX. AT EDGE OF ROOTBALL, APPROX 2" HIGH. 1. PROVIDE UNIFORM MINIMUM 2" DEPTH OF COMPOSTED MULCH PRODUCT, SUCH AS CEDAR GROVE MULCH. KEEP MULCH AWAY FROM CROWN OF PLANTS. / 05A OM NA / NOOTKA ROSE TELIMA GRANDIFLORA FRINGE Gyp AO. ', 15. APPROX. LOCATION OF TREE $ / /AmELANCHIER ALN1FOLIA WESTERN SERVICEBERRY / / -Y. 1'1\ ROAC E 3 H \lb BEEN P iANT TC-) 58. 7 2 5 A ss: T TI SUPER AN) 1 EE, 70R. THE r" I 11 PLANT L 154r. TS E OF SH OWN — ... QTY. BOTANNICAL/COMMON NAME SWORD FERN SYMPHORICARF'OS ALBA / 5NOINBERRY ACER CIRCINATUM VINE MAPLE CORNUS NUTTALLII PACIFIC DOGWOOD FRAXINUS LATIFOLIA OREGON ASH THUJA PLICATA WESTERN RED CEDAR 16435'(M) 164. 3 AMELANCH1ER ALNIF0. SERVICEBERRY CORNUS SERICEA REDTWIG RIBES SANGUINEUM-' REI7 FLOWERING CURRANT ROSA NUTKANA NOOTKA ROSE SYMPHORICARPOS ALBA SNOINF3ERRY Groundc,overs 3 DICENTRA FORMOSA PACIFIC BLEEDING HEART 23 TELIMA GRAND1FLORA FRINGE CUP TOLMIEA MENZIESII PIGGYBACK PLANT POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM SWORD FERN 46' HT. MIN. 2 GAL. CONT. ,.1 2 L. 6ONT.:••' 3 STEMS MIN. FULL GROWTH SINGLE TRUNK FULL GROWTH SINGLE TRUNK FULL GROWTH 5 4 B or OONT. FULL GROWTH NOTE: PER TUKWILA'S REQUIREMENTS, EVERGREEN TREES TO BE A MINIMUM b' SHRUBS TO BE A MIN. 24" HT. 4 GROUNDCOVERS TO BE A MINIMUM I GAL. CONT. REQUIREMENT SIZE FOR DECIDUOUS TREES 15 2 1/2" GAL. IT 15 UNLIKELY THE TREES ABOVE CAN BE FOUND AT THIS SIZE. IT 15 SUGGESTED THE CITY PROVIDE HOMEOWNER W/LIST OF NURSERIES INHERE A 2 1/2" GAL. NATIVE ASH CAN 5E FOUND N88'30'04"W TYPE 0 STREAM BUFrER PLANTING PLAN SCALE = i " = 10'-0" 4616 0 5 10 20 40 NOTES: I. TOPOGRAPHIC/130UNDARY SURVEY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY DMP, INC., 253-333-2200. 2, SEE L-2 FOR APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF EXISTING TREES PROPOSED TO REMAIN 4 ONE TREE PREVIOUSLY REMOVED. NOTE THAT TREES SHOWN ARE IN APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS. R.E.CEN=D Gonnwor!TY CJEVELUPL-Af CAMPY REID:1\LE 5505 5. 144th TUKWILA, WA 18168 11602 42nd AVE. 5/11. Seattle, HA cfb156 T: 206-625-4014 F: 206-625-9881 STREAM E3UFER PLANT I NG PLAN DATE SEPT. 26, 2008 DRAM sr LEE REVISIONS: JAN. 21, 200FI PLANTING PLAN 4 LIST L-I 471.20(C) 470.99(R) 470.01W) 1 ... C K I \ E ECG 0 r / / / / A 7 0 1 / / / / / / / 1 / TREE TO/ REMAIN, TYF'. 5 /(81) //,(8‘, TREE TO BE REMOVED, TYP. TREE PREVIOUSLY REMOVED -) Li .3 I...1 E PECQ . E AkATE Is BSBL 5 8. TYPICAL) A E 1,..j 1\J D E E11, ..... .... - E E (11...2) A C. H VEL E S1:,. T FO PC1,1\1 /1 7 2 1115C, 1_1) SE 1") .11 LI:" A N S1 F.1.1..1 ED FOR, TH 1 1 V Et 1..1 • .) TH E TI1S OF T1- 1 3 F.:. OPT P: EXISTING TREE LIST 20" COTTONWOOD TO REMAIN 2 15.5" COTTONWOOD TO REMAIN • 13" CHERRY TO REMAIN 4 11" CHERRY TO REMAIN 5 as" COTTONWOOD TO REMAIN • 20.5" COTTONWOOD TO REMAIN • 52" COTTONWOOD TO REMAIN • CLUMP OF 4 COTTONWOOD TO REMAIN • 25" COTTONWOOD TO REMAIN 10 122" COTTONWOOD PREVIOUSLY REMOVED 22" COTTONWOOD TO REMAIN 12 be," COTTONWOOD TO REMAIN 13 52" COTTONWOOD TO REMAIN 14 51" COTTONWOOD TO REMAIN TREE SYMBOLS TREE PROPOSED TO REMAIN 1 H- ........ ........ 4 TREE PREVIOUSLY REMOVED : • o CO I (el 4r— CO 0 H 0 LJ I '- OE cn E, E z 0 I 00 -CDT - al 1 . I)] C , 1 0' ; ...... •-• z N8EM0'04"W - EXISTING TREES/TREE REMOVAL PLAN SCALE = I 101-0" 461.6T 0 5 10 20 40 NOTES: RECEIVED I. TOPOGRAPHIC/BOUNDARY SURVEY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY DMP, INC., 253-333-2200. 2. EXISTING TREES SHOWN ARE IN APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN LOCATED SY SURVEY. 3. SEE ARBORIST'S INFORMATION FOR TREE EVALUATIONS. LIST OF TREES PROVIDED BY OWNER. COW/UM-Pt DEVELOPhdENT