Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit L09-014 - BECKER BARRY - SPECIAL PERMISSION BUFFER REDUCTION
BERRY BECKER Buffer Reduction Mitigation 4300 S 133' St L09 -014 J May 10, 2010 NOTICE OF DECISION To: Barry Becker, Applicant and Owner Washington State Department of Ecology 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: I. PROJECT INFORMATION L09 -014 Barry Becker Type of Permit Applied for: Special Permission from the Director to reduce the required buffer width for a Type 2 Wetland and Type 2 Watercourse. Project Description: The applicant is proposing to remove illegal fill from a Type 2 wetland and watercourse buffer, restore and enhance a Type 2 wetland , restore and enhance a Type 2 wetland buffer, and restore and enhance a Type 2 watercourse buffer through removal of invasive species, plantings, mulching and addition of topsoil. The wetland and watercourse and their associated buffers occupy the eastern 75% of the subject property. Location: 4300 S. 133`d Street, Tukwila, WA 98168 (Parcel # 261320 -0131) per King County Assessor (or 4446 S. 131'. Place, Tukwila, WA 98188) Associated Files: RFA 08- 342 —Code Violation; L10- 002 — Rezone; L09- 067 — Comprehensive Plan Amendment; PW 10 -055 — Public Works (Applied for —Not yet issued as of 5/5/10) Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI) II. DECISION SEPA Determination: SEPA review is not required since the project is categorically exempt. Decision on Substantive Permit: The Community Development Director has determined that the application for Special Permission to reduce the buffer area of a Type 2 Wetland and Type 2 Stream complies with applicable City and state code requirements and has approved that application, subject to the following conditions: 1. Soil amendments. Prior to issuance of public works construction permit the Biologist shall provide a plan for the City's approval prior to planting, for soil amendments that may be needed for the buffer restoration. The plan shall include a description of how it will be determined that the amendments are necessary, the specifications for the amendments, and the volume. Amendments shall be tilled into underlying soils to a depth of at least 18 inches, except where tree roots would be harmed by tilling. 2. Grass mix. Prior to issuance of public works construction permitthe Biologist shall provide more detail about the native grasses to be planted in the potential future rain garden areas. Is this a seed mix or are plugs being proposed? Detail on species and seeding rate must be provided to the City for approval prior to planting. 3. Performance standard for shrub species: The performance standard for shrub species diversity shall be increased to 7 species. Rf 1 05/10/2010 H:\Becker -- Sp.Perm.BFFr-- L09- 014\L09- 014 -- Becker NOD.doc 1. 4. As -built drawing: An as -built drawing shall be provided to the City upon completion of planting and shall include locations of the transects for monitoring. Transects must include both wetland and buffer planting areas. Monitoring reporting shall be provided separately for buffer areas and wetland areas. If the Biologist prefers to propose separate performance standards for these areas, a proposal may be submitted to the City for approval. 5. Maintenance a. Prior to the acceptance of plantings, the applicant shall provide a more detailed maintenance plan indicating: 1) how the work will be done, 2) who will do it; 3) costs for implementation and 4) a detailed plan for watering during the dry season (frequency, amount, method). b. Maintenance shall include mowing of Reed Canarygrass until plants are well established. c. The "voluntary" planting for the wetland enhancement area shall be included in the maintenance and monitoring program since vegetation (blackberry) was previously removed from the wetland/stream buffer areas without an approved re- planting plan, 6. Inspection prior to planting: The applicant or biologist shall request an inspection by contacting DCD 2 weeks prior to planting for inspection of the site preparation and the layout of plants. 7. Schedule: The applicant shall adhere to the schedule laid out in the Wetland and Buffer Mitigation Plan (April 2, 2010). a. Phase 1 (Removal of unauthorized fill) and Phase 2 (Amend soil in buffer areas as needed) shall occur prior to June 30, 2010. b. Phases 3 (Planting for wetland enhancement areas) and Phase 4 (Planting for wetland restoration area) shall occur prior to August 31, 2010. c. Phase 5 (Planting for buffer restoration area) shall occur prior to December 31, 2010. 8. Financial Assurance Mechanism: A financial assurance mechanism approved by the City, shall be provided by the applicant. The amount of the bond or cash assignment shall be 150% of the cost all maintenance and monitoring activity for five years subsequent to planting. The cost estimate for maintenance and monitoring shall be subject to approval by the city. YOUR APPEAL RIGHTS The Decision on this Permit Application is a Type 2 decision pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code § 18.104.010. Other land use applications related to this project may still be pending. A party who is not satisfied with the outcome of the administrative appeal process may file an appeal in King County Superior Court from the Planning Commission decision. PROCEDURES AND TIME FOR APPEALING In order to appeal the Community Development Director's decision on the Permit Application, a written notice of appeal must be filed with the Department of Community Development within 14 days of the issuance of this Decision, which is by April 7, 2008. The requirements for such appeals are set forth in Tukwila Municipal Code 18.116. All appeal materials shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Appeal materials MUST include: Rf 2 05/10/2010 H:\Becker -- Sp.Perm.BFFr-- L09- 014\L09- 014 -- Becker NOD.doc 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. 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. APPEAL HEARINGS PROCESS Any administrative appeal regarding the Permit shall be conducted as an open record hearing before the Planning Commission based on the testimony and documentary evidence presented at the open record hearing. The Planning Commission decision on the appeal is the City's final decision. Any party wishing to challenge the Planning Commission decision on this application must file an appeal pursuant to the procedures and time limitations set forth in RCW 36.70C. If no appeal of the Planning Commission decision is properly filed in Superior Court within such time limit, the Decision on this permit will be final. 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 4:30 p.m. The project planner is Chris Beale, who may be contacted at 206 - 433 -7141, 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 De ' pment City of Tukwila Rf 3 05/10/2010 H:\Becker - -Sp. Perm. BFFr - -L09- 014\.09- 014 -- Becker NOD.doc _ e tg Department Of Community AFFIDAVIT of J uIw _ Development OF DISTRIBUTION I, Teri Svedahl HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non - Significance Project Name: Barry Becker Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Mailing requested by: Rebecca\Fo ,f/ /) Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice i Board of Appeals Agenda Packet K-{' Notice of Action (� Planning Commission Agenda Packet Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit _ _ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 X Other: Notice of Decision Was mailed to each of the addresses listed /attached on this _13 day of May in the year 2010 W: \USERS \TERIWFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC Project Name: Barry Becker Project Number: L09 -014 Mailing requested by: Rebecca\Fo ,f/ /) i Mailer's signature: ii f j K-{' (� W: \USERS \TERIWFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC � y c,uy of i ufcwua o Department of Community Development 2 6300 Southcenter Boulevard • Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 -2599 BARRY BECKER 4300 S 133rd STREET TUKWILA, WA 98168 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard • Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 -2599 WA DEPT OF ECOLOGY SEPA REVIEW SECTION PO BOX 47703 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 -7703 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard • Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 -2599 Department of Ecology NW Regional Office 3190 160th Ave SE Bellevue, WA 98008 x4- City of Tukwila Notice of Hearing Location -4300 S. 133 St., Tukwila, WA File #'s: L09 -067, LI0 -002 , E10 -013 Applicant/Property Owner:Macadam LLC/Barry Becker Project Planner: Rebecca Fox, 206 -431 -3683 or rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us Project Description: Amend the Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning on property located at 4300 S. 133rd St., Tukwila, WA (Tax # 2613200131) The request is to change the current Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning from Commercial/Light Industrial (C /LI) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). A Type 2 stream and Type 2 wetland are located on the property. Illegal fill and vegetation clearing had oc- curred on the site's wetland and buffers. The City of Tukwila Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 22, 2010 to take testimony from the public. Afterwards, the Planning Commission recommended approving the request with the condition that all required environmental mitigation and enhancement action in the wetland buffer be completed prior to December 30, 2010. Public Hearing —September 13, 2010: You are invited to comment on the Comprehensive Plan amend - ment/Zoning recommendation at a public hearing on September 13, 2010 at 7 p.m. before the Tukwila City Council, located in the City Council Chambers at 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA, 98188. After hearing from the public, the City Council will take action to adopt as is, modify or reject the recommendation. You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling 206 -431 -3683. Comments : The applications may be reviewed at the City of Tukwila, Department of Community Develop- ment (DCD), 6300 Southcenter Blvd 4100, Tukwila, WA. Persons who wish to comment may do so in writing, or by speaking at the hearingg. If you wish to provide written comments on the project, you may deliver them to the City Clerk's office, Tukwila City Hall. 6200 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila prior to 5:00pm on Sep- tember 13, 2010. You are receiving this notice because you are a property owner or tenant within 50011 of this project. City of Tukwila Notice of Hearing Location -4300 S. 133 St., Tukwila, WA File #'s: L09 -067, L10 -002 , E10 -013 Applicant/Property Owner:Macadam LLC/Barry Becker Project Planner: Rebecca Fox, 206431 -3683 or rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us Project Description: Amend the Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning on property located at 4300 S. 133rd St., Tukwila, WA (Tax # 2613200131) The request is to change the current Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning from Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). A Type 2 stream and Type 2 wetland are located on the property. Illegal fill and vegetation clearing had oc- curred on the site's wetland and buffers. The City of Tukwila Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 22, 2010 to take testimony from the public. Afterwards, the Planning Commission recommended approving the request with the condition that all required environmental mitigation and enhancement action in the wetland buffer be completed prior to December 30, 2010. Public Hearing —September 13, 2010: You are invited to comment on the Comprehensive Plan amend - ment/Zoning recommendation at a public hearing on September 13, 2010 at 7 p.m. before the Tukwila City Council, located in the City Council Chambers at 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA, 98188. After hearing from the public, the City Council will take action to adopt as is, modify or reject the recommendation. You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling 206 -431 -3683. Comments : The applications may be reviewed at the City of Tukwila, Department of Community Develop- ment (DCD), 6300 Southcenter Blvd 4100, Tukwila, WA. Persons who wish to comment may do so in writing, or by speaking at the hearing. If you wish to provide written comments on the project, you may deliver them to the City Clerk's office, Tukwila City Hall. 6200 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila prior to 5:00pm on Sep- tember 13, 2010. You are receiving this notice because you are a property owner or tenant within 50011 of this project. City of Tukwila Notice of Hearing Location -4300 S. 133 St., Tukwila, WA File #'s: L09 -067, L10 -002 , E10 -013 Applicant/Property Owner:Macadam LLC/Barry Becker Project Planner: Rebecca Fox, 206 -431 -3683 or rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us Project Description: Amend the Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning on property located at 4300 S. 133rd St., Tukwila, WA (Tax # 2613200131) The request is to change the current Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning from Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). A Type 2 stream and Type 2 wetland are located on the property. Illegal fill and vegetation cleari(eg had oc- curred on the site's wetland and buffers. The City of Tukwila Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 22, 2010 to take testimony from the public. Afterwards, the Planning Commission recommended approving the request with the condition that all required environmental mitigation and enhancement action in the wetland buffer be completed prior to December 30, 2010. Public Hearing — September 13, 2010: You are invited to comment on the Comprehensive Plan amend - ment/Zoning recommendation at a public hearing on September 13, 2010 at 7 p.m. before the Tukwila City Council, located in the City Council Chambers at 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA, 98188. After hearing from the public, the City Council will take action to adopt as is, modify or reject the recommendation. You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling 206-431 -3683. Comments : The applications may be reviewed at the City of Tukwila, Department of Community Develop- ment (DCD), 6300 Southcenter Blvd #100, Tukwila, WA. Persons who wish to comment may do so in writing, or by speaking at the hearing. If you wish to provide written comments on the project, you may deliver them to the City Clerk's office, "Tukwila City Hall. 6200 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila prior to 5:00pm on Sep- tember 13, 2010. You are receiving this notice because you are a property owner or tenant within 50011 of this project. City of Tukwila Notice of Hearing Location -4300 S. 133 St., Tukwila, WA File #'s: L09 -067, L10 -002 , E10 -013 Applicant/Property Owner:Macadam LLC/Barry Becker Project Planner: Rebecca Fox, 206 -431 -3683 or rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us Project Description: Amend the Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning on property located at 4300 S. 133rd St., Tukwila, WA (Tax # 2613200131) The request is to change the current Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning from Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). A Type .2 stream and Type 2 wetland are located on the property. Illegal fill and vegetation clearing had oc- curred on the site's wetland and buffers. The City of Tukwila Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 22, 2010 to take testimony from the public. Afterwards, the Planning Commission recommended approving the request with the condition that all required environmental mitigation and enhancement action in the wetland buffer be completed prior to December 30, 2010. Public Hearing —September 13, 2010: You are invited to comment on the Comprehensive Plan amend - ment/Zoning recommendation at a public hearing on September 13, 2010 at 7 p.m. before the Tukwila City Council, located in the City Council Chambers at 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA, 98188. After hearing from the public, the City Council will take action to adopt as is, modify or reject the recommendation. You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling 206 -431 -3683. Comments : The applications may be reviewed at the City of Tukwila, Department of Community. Develop- ment (DCD), 6300 Southcenter Blvd 4100, Tukwila, WA. Persons who wish to comment may do so in writing, or by speaking at the hearing. If you wish to provide written comments on the project, you may deliver them to the City Clerk's office, Tukwila City Hall. 6200 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila prior to 5:00pm on Sep- tember 13, 2010. You are receiving this notice because you are a property owner or tenant within 500ft of this project. a 1..i it 5 (Avila Department Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, Teri Svedahl HEREBY DECLARE THAT: R Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non - Significance Notice of Public Meeting Project Number: PL10 -073 Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Mailer's signature: Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet ( .. Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Packet Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit _ _ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other: Was mailed to each of the addresses listed /attached on this _ }� day of August in the year 2010 W: \USERS \TERIWFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC Project Name: Macadam LLC / Becker Comp Plan Amendment & Rezone Project Number: PL10 -073 Mailing requested by: Rebecca FO-i'\ ,/� /~ Mailer's signature: / /,/ ( .. W: \USERS \TERIWFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC OWNER_NAME R HOUSE CONSTRUCTION INC TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER GULLY,PAUL M RINEHART,LINNEA TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER CHURCH OF NEZIAH GILL,ANTONE & ERVINA LILJESTRAND,JAMES & DIANE K B HARTY,LAUREN G TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER SMITH,TODD R POIRIER,KONRAD JOANNE M TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER FOSTORIA PARK ASSOC LLC GANTZ,PATRICK A & KATHLEEN D TMACSONS LLC DELTA MASONIC SEBCO INC CHANTHAPHONE, PHAISANE GILLISPIE,CATHY D TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER GAYTHER,JIM TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER OWNER_ADDRESS 1001 N TACOMA AVE 13011 MACADAM RD S 13017 MACADAM RD S 13025 MACADAM RD S 13030 41ST AVE S 13031 MACADAM RD S 13039 MACADAM RD S 13045 MARADAM RD S 13103 MACADAM RD S 13111 MACADAM RD S 13119 MACADAM RD S 13130 44TH AVE S 13136 MACADAM RD S 13305 MACADAM RD S 13319 MACADAM RD S 13325 MACADAM RD S 13405 43RD AVE S 13407 42ND AVE S 15100 SE 38TH ST 792 22027 6TH AVE S 105 27013 PACIFIC HWY S 313 30923 36TH AVE SW 4020 E MADISON ST 320 4031 S 148TH ST 4116S131STST 4122 S 131ST ST 4123 S 130TH ST 4126 S 131ST ST 4130S131STST 4175 S 131ST ST 4310S131STST 4320 S 131ST ST 4385 S 133RD ST 4400 S 131ST PL 4404 S 133RD ST 4435 S 134TH PL OWNER_CITY OWNER_STATE OWNER_ZIP TACOMA " WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA SEATTLE WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA SEATTLE WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA SEATTLE WA TUKWILA WA BELLEVUE WA DES MOINES WA DES MOINES WA FEDERAL WAY WA SEATTLE WA TUKWILA WA SEATTLE WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA SEATTLE WA TUKWILA WA 98403 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98006 98198 98198 98023 98112 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 98168 BECKER,BARRY R TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA COMMUNITY MEMBER TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT EKBERG,ALLAN E & CAMOZZI KNUDSON,GERALD NORTH STREAM DEVELOPMENT SMITH,TODD R NORMED -SHAW PARTNERSHIP SEATTLE SMSA LIMITED PRTN STARK,BEN G & DARRYL J Barry Becker /Macadam LLC 4446 S 131ST PL 4487 S 134TH PL 4495 S 134TH PL 4640 S 144TH ST 4920 S 161ST ST 6402 S 144TH ST 1 720 4TH AVE 102 8129 HUDSON PL SW PO BOX 3644 PO BOX 91211 PO BOX 98638 4446 S. 131st StREET TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA TUKWILA WA SEATTLE WA TUKWILA WA KIRKLAND WA LAKEWOOD WA SEATTLE WA BELLEVUE WA SEATTLE WA TUKWILA WA 98168 98168 98168 98168 98188 98168 98033 98498 98124 98009 98198 98168 Cizy of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development NOTICE OF APPLICATION DATED April 20, 2009 Jack Pace, Director The following applications have been submitted to the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development for review and decision. APPLICANT: LOCATION: OWNER OF THE PROPERTY: FILE NUMBERS: PROPOSAL: OTHER INFORMATION: Barry Becker 4300 S. 133rd Street, King County Parcel # 261320 -0131 Macadam LLC L09 -014 The applicant has requested special permission from the Director to reduce prescriptive buffer for type II stream and a type II wetland. Additionally, the applicant has proposed an enhancement plan to mitigate buffer and possible sensitive area encroachments that have occurred on the property. None These files can be reviewed at the Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA. Please call (206) 431 -3670 to ensure that the file(s) will be available. OPPORTUNITY FOR AGENCY COMMENT You can submit comments on this application. If you have questions about this proposal contact Brandon J. Miles, Planners -in- charge of this file at (206) 431 -3670 or bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us. Anyone who submits written comments will become parties of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision by the City on a project or obtain information on your appeal rights by contacting the Department of Community Development at (206)- 431 -3670. DATE OF APPLICATION: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: NOTICE OF APPLICATION POSTED: April 10, 2009 April 17, 2009 April 20, 2009 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Page 1 of 1 Project Site I 1194ft ry CutyGES Copyright 02006 All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein is the proprietary property of the contributor supplied under license and may not be approved except as licensed by Digital Map Products. http: // maps.digitalmapcentral.com/ production /CityGIS /v07_01_059 /index.html 04/16/2009 • ea* of J ufi uiea Dept. Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, Teri Svedahl HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non - Significance Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance Project Name: Barry Becker Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Project Number: L09 -014 Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Notice of Action Mailing requested by: Brandon Mile • Planning Commission Agenda Packet Official Notice Mailer's signature: Short Subdivision Agenda 1 Ma...1 Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit _ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 X Other: Notice of Application Was mailed to each of the addresses listed /attached on this _20 day of _April in the year 2009 P: \USERS \TERIWFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC Project Name: Barry Becker Project Number: L09 -014 Mailing requested by: Brandon Mile Mailer's signature: l 1 Ma...1 f P: \USERS \TERIWFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC CHE 1ST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW /SHORELINE PET MAILINGS FEDERAL AGENCIES ( ) U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE () U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( ) U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. \NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( ) DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR .( ) DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. X.DEPT OF FISHERIES &•WILDLIFE KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #11 ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #2 ( ) K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION ( ) K.C. DEPT OF PARKS &REC ( ) K.C. ASSESSORS OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY ( ) RENTON LIBRARY • ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( ) QWEST ( ) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ()PUGET SOUND ENERGY () HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ()COMCAST SCHOOLS /LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) PUBLIC WORKS () FIRE ( ) POLICE ( ) FINANCE ( ) PLANNING ( ) BUILDING () PARKS & REC. () MAYOR ( ) CITY CLERK OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( ) SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE �) MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( ) CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM** FISHERIES PROGRAM** () ILDLIFE PROGRAM **Send SEPA Checklist and full set of plans w/ NOA MEDIA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL P:\ADMINISTRATI V E \FORMS \CHECKLIS T.DOC () DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. ( ) DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELAND DIV, NW Regional Office NDEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION* () FFICE.OF ATTORNEY GENERAL . * SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS * SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION ( ) HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTLE ( ) K.C. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL () K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY () K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ()HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT #20 ( ) WATER DISTRICT #125 ( ) CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS () BRYN MAWR- LAKERIDGE SEWERNVATER DISTRICT ( ) RENTON PLANNING DEPT () CITY OF SEA -TAC ( ) CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU ( ) STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE* * NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ... %(\,1DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE* ( ) P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY ( ) SOUND TRANSIT DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COALITION* * SENDNOTICE OF ALL APPLICATIONS ON DUWAMISH RIVER �Vtr 'J61L 6c#S ,11‘4N'L - () HIGHLINE TIMES IV )t ww‘AZ ( ) CLTUKWILA.WA.US. PUBIC NOTICE MAILINGS FOR PFITS SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings /Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The notice of Application for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the notice of application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Notice is sent to the NW Regional Office Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section, NW Regional Office State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) — Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements - Cross- sections of site with structures & shoreline — Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P:\ADMINISTRATIV E \FORMS \CHECKLIST.DOC Page 1 of 1 Sandra Whiting - Financial assurance for wetland mitigation maintenance and monitoring r From: Sandra Whiting To: ace_construct @yahoo.com Date: 01/19/2011 9:58 AM Subject: Financial assurance for wetland mitigation maintenance and monitoring CC: Celeste Botha; Rebecca Fox Attachments: Celeste Botha; Rebecca Fox Hi Barry, This is just a reminder that we still need a financial assurance to ensure the performance of the wetland and buffer mitigation that you just completed. Your official monitoring period will not begin until we receive it. This is also a condition of the rezone approval. The financial assurance can be any one of the following: a bond; assignment of account in your bank (we have a form for this); or a check payable to the City. The amount of the financial assurance is generally 150% of the amount needed for maintenance and monitoring for the 5 year period. Portions of the assurance can be released periodically prior to the end of the 5 year period, if the performance standards are being achieved. I understand that you will be doing your own maintenance, but the amount for the assurance should be based on the cost for hiring the work done. I am attaching a couple of sample worksheets that may help you in developing the costs (see the bottom section of the worksheet saved as a pdf file for the maintenance and monitoring example). Let me know if you have any questions. Sandra Sandra Whiting Urban Environmentalist City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206 - 431 -3663 file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \sandra.TUKWILA \Local Settings \Temp \XPgrpwise \4D... 01/19/2011 (01 /119/2011) Sandra Whiting - Becker Monitoring Contract From: "Celeste Botha" <wps @isp.com> To: "Sandra Whiting" <swhiting @ci.tukwila.wa.us >, "Barry Becker" <ace_constr... Date: 01/12/2011 11:00 AM Subject: Becker Monitoring Contract Attachments: WPS.jpg Hi Sandra - I'm attaching the signed monitoring contract for Barry's project. I have also amended the Maintenance and Monitoring schedule (below) to show the years when the work will occur. Monitoring An as -built plan will be submitted to the city immediately following planting. Monitoring shall continue for a period of five years according to the schedule in Table 6. Year 1 of the mitigation monitoring period will commence the quarter following the installation. Overview photos will be taken from the same vantage points each year to document overall appearance of the mitigation area before, during, and after construction. A full plant count will be conducted during the first fall monitoring event following installation to ensure that installed plants have survived planting shock. Thereafter, cover monitoring will use the permanent transects installed after initial planting. Table 6: Maintenance & Monitoring Schedules Year Maintenance Visits Monitoring Report due 1 Between January 1 and March 1 2011 AND Between April 1 and June 1 2011 AND Between July 1 and September 30 2011 AND Between October 15 and December 30 2011 Between July 1 and September 31 2011 October 30 2011 2 -5 Between April 1 and June 1 2012 - 2015 AND Between July 1 and September 30 2012 - 2015 Between July 1 and September 31 2012 - 2015 October 30 2012 - 2015 I think that completes the application materials for the time being. I'll submit an informal email notification of the results of the maintenance visit but Barry has notified me that some trees were blown down, one of which is lying across his silt fence. Well send photos and I'll let you know what we think should be done about it prior to taking action. Thanks! - Celeste Celeste Botha (01/19/2011) Sandra Whiting - Becker Monitoring Contract Page 2 Wetland Permitting Services 2025 S. Norman Street Seattle, WA 98144 Office: (206) 328 -7775 Mobile: (206) 240 -2413 Phones (206) Gelb (c6) 913 wriegt9'31 Proposal For Services To From Barry Becker Macadam LLC 4446 S. 131st Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Celeste Botha, WPS (206) 328 -7775 Date Proposal Name Becker Mitigation Location City of Tukwila Tax ID 261320 -0131 Subject Wetland Monitoring Services 1/5/2011 SCOPE OF WORK Monitoring tasks listed below, per the Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan prepared by WPS dated April 14, 2009 Task Total Total /5 Subtotal All Hrs /Miles times /Yr Yrs Rate Subtotal /Yr Years Maintenance visits + notifications (4 /yr) Fall Monitoring - Years 1 and 5 Monitoring (Years 2, 3, and 4) Report preparation (Years 1 and 5) Report preparation (Years 2, 3 and 4) Mileage Report Duplication & Distribution (3 @) 3 20 75.00 8 2 75.00 $ 450.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,350.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 4,050.00 $ 208.00 $ :100.00 $ .12,908.00 $ 600.00 3 75.00 $ 450.00 20 1 75.00 $ 1,500.00 18 1 75.00 $ 1,350.00 16 20 $ 0.65 41.60 5 $ 20.00 Estimated T&M Project Cost $ 4,411.60 Notes: one of the 4 annual maintenance visits will occur during fall monitoring; Years 1 and 5 include survivorship monitoring so will take longer to monitor and report than Years 2, 3, and 4; Year 1 report will take longer to prepare than subsequent years; Year 5 will be be the final year so the report will take longer to prepare. Terms: Hours and costs are estimates: billing will occur on a Time and Materials basis SUBMITTED BY Celeste Botha Wetland Permitting Services AUTHORIZED BY Barry Becker Macadam LLC "5":",./‘ Barry Becker LLC As -built plant count 11/17/10 Wetland Enhancement Area T -1 100' TRANSECT Trees Sitka spruce 2 Pacific willow Western red cedar Shrubs twinberry 10 Nootka rose Pacific ninebark 1 Prickly currant Red -osier dogwood 2 Sitka willow Wetland Restoration FPC T -1 Sitka spruce 3 3 Douglas fir 2 Western red cedar 1 1 Big -leaf maple 3 3 Black twinberry Nootka rose 18 3 Pacific ninebark 6 Red -osier dogwood Western hemlock Douglas spirea 29 7 salmonberry 5 Willow stakes 37 Barry Becker LLC As -built plant count 11/17/10 Wetland Buffer T -1 100' TRANSECT Trees .. - _ Big -leaf maple Cascara Chokecherry Douglas fir Paper birch Western red cedar Shrubs Black twinberry 1 Clustered rose 4 Douglas spirea Ocean spray Pacific ninebark 2 Pacific rhododendron 1 Pacific wax myrtle Red elderberry 3 Red - flowering currant 4 Red -osier dogwood 8 Salal 4 Salmonberry 1 Snowberry 1 Tall Oregon grape Vine maple 4 Western crabapple Groundcover False Solomon's seal 7 Swordfern 6 Western columbine Kinnikinnick Barry Becker LLC As -built plant count 11/17/10 Wetland Buffer T -2 100' TRANSECT Trees Big -leaf maple 3 Cascara Chokecherry Douglas fir 3 Paper birch 1 Western red cedar Shrubs Clustered rose 8 Douglas spirea Ocean spray 1 Pacific ninebark Pacific rhododendron Pacific wax myrtle Red elderberry Red - flowering currant Red -osier dogwood 9 Salal Salmonberry Snowberry Tall Oregon grape 1 Vine maple 1 Western crabapple 1 Groundcover False Solomon's seal 1 Swordfern Western columbine Kinnikinnick Barry Becker LLC As -built plant count 11/17/10 Wetland /Stream Buffer T -3 60' TRANSECT Trees Big -leaf maple Cascara Chokecherry 3 Douglas fir Paper birch Western red cedar Shrubs Clustered rose 6 Douglas spirea Ocean spray 3 Pacific ninebark 8 Pacific rhododendron 4 Pacific wax myrtle 2 Red elderberry Red - flowering currant 4 Red -osier dogwood Salal Salmonberry Snowberry 7 Tall Oregon grape 4 Vine maple Western crabapple 1 Groundcover False Solomon's seal Swordfern Western columbine Kinnikinnick Barry Becker LLC As -built plant count 11/17/10 Stream Buffer T -1 60' TRANSECT Trees Big -leaf maple Cascara Chokecherry 4 Douglas fir Paper birch Western red cedar Shrubs Clustered rose Douglas spirea Ocean spray 3 Pacific ninebark Pacific rhododendron 4 Pacific wax myrtle Red elderberry Red - flowering currant Red -osier dogwood 2 Salal 11 Salmonberry Snowberry Tall Oregon grape 3 Vine maple 4 Western crabapple Groundcover False Solomon's seal Swordfern 10 Western columbine 2 Kinnikinnick 9 Barry Becker LLC As -built plant count 11/17/10 Raingarden T -1 70' TRANSECT - includes12'of upland buffer on W side .' Herbs Oregon iris 1 skunk cabbage palmate coltsfoot 4 silverweed 4 small- fruited bulrush false Solomon's -seal slough sedge 21 hardstem bulrush golden eyed grass Shrubs Red -osier dogwood 8 Douglas spirea 10 Green -osier dogwood 7 Raingarden buffer Oregon grape 2 Western crabapple 1 Prickly rose 3 Snowberry 2 Ocean spray 1 Macadam LLC 11/18/10 Plants for 4300 S. 133rd Plants Installed Phase 1: Wetland Enhancement Area Pacific willow 75 stakes Western red cedar 25 1 gal. Black twinberry 25 1 gal. Nootka rose 25 1 gal. Pacific ninebark _. _ _ 25 1 gal. Prickly currant 25 1 gal. Red -osier dogwood 25 stakes Sitka willow 50 stakes 275 Phase 2: Wetland Restoration Area Black.twinberry 7 1 gal. Nootka rose 10 l .gal. Pacific ninebark 4 1 gal. Red -osier dogwood 7 1 gal. Western hemlock 2 2 gal. 30 Phase 3: Buffer: Restoration Area Big -leaf maple 15 2 gal. Cascara 15 2 gal. Chokecherry 25 2 gal. Douglas Fir 20 2 gal. Paper birch 60 2 gal. Western red cedar 20 1 gal. Clustered rose 75 1 gal. Douglas spirea 40 1 gal. Ocean spray 75 1 gal. Pacific ninebark 75 1 gal. Pacific rhododendron 50 2 gal. 1 2 Pacific wax myrtle 50 1 gal. Red elderberry 10 1 gal. Red - flowering currant 50 1 gal. Red -osier dogwood 50 1 gal. Salal 50 1 gal. Salmonberry 50 1 gal. Snowberry 75 1 gal. Tall oregon grape 100 1 gal. Vine maple 50 .2 gal. Western crabapple 30 1 gal. False solomon's seal 50 1 gal. Sword fern 100 1 gal. Western_ columbine 50 .4" pots Kinnikinnick 400 4" pots 1585 Rain Garden Star flwd solomen's seal 20 br. Palmats colts foot 20 br Silverweed 20 br Golden eye grass 25 br Taper tip rush 25 plug Slough sedge 37 br Hard stem bulrush 20 br Oregon iris 10 plug Red twig dogwood 24 1 gal. Variegated dogwood 15 1 gal. Midwinter fire dogwood 15 1 gal. Yellow twig dogwood 15 1 gal. Douglas spirea 15 1 gal. 281 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace. Director November 22, 2010 Mr. Barry Becker 4416 S. 131St Place Tukwila, WA 98168 Re: 4300 S. 133rd Street RFA08 -342 and L09 -014, Critical Area Sensitive Areas Special Permission Dear Mr. Becker, The City conducted an inspection on November 17, 2010 of the wetland and stream buffer restoration and enhancement work at the address referenced above and found the implementation of the Mitigation Plan (dated April 14, 2009) to be acceptable, pending receipt of the following: 1) Wetland biologist's "as- built" plan of the monitoring transects; 2) List of plants installed at the site; 3) Verification of the removal of the silt fence; and 4) Financial assurance mechanism (cash assignment or bond) in the amount of 150% of the cost of all maintenance and monitoring activity for five years. Please provide a cost estimate for maintenance and monitoring to the City for approval. The five -year maintenance and monitoring period for this mitigation area begins as soon as the City receives the above information and the financial assurance. You are reminded that you are responsible for installing some type of irrigation system to ensure plants get sufficient water during dry periods for 2 to three seasons, until they are established. The project must meet all performance standards as listed in the approved Mitigation Plan. The performance standard for invasive vegetation must be met in the entire project site, and not just in the monitoring transects. The contingency plan must be implemented when necessary. Initials Page 1 of 2 H:\Land Use permit memos & letters \Barry Becker wetlandbuffer\Barry Becker letter wetland mitigation plan implementation.doc 11/22/2010 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206 -431 -3670 • Fax: 206 -431 -3665 The approved mitigation plan the minimum monitoring and maintenance requirements are as follows: The violations noted in the January 29, 2009 Notice and Order have been resolved by the restoration and mitigation work completed under L09 -014. A copy of this letter may be filed with the King County Records Office as proof of compliance. Contact the Recorders office for requirements and associated fees. Feel free to contact me (206- 431 -3663; swhiting @ci.tukwila.wa.us) or Rebecca Fox (206 -431- 3683; rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us) if you have any questions. Sincerely, Sandra Whiting City of Tukwila Urban Environmentalist Cc. Rebecca Fox Kathy Stetson SW Page 2 of 2 11/22/2010 H:Sandra\Land use permit memos and letters\Barry Becker wetland buffer Activity Reporting Year 1 Maintenance (includes weed control, replacement of dead plants, repair of fencing or signage, additional mulching to control any erosion or weeds, etc.) Between Jan. 1 and March 1 Between April 1 and June 1 Between July 1 and September 30 Between October 15 and December 30 Email notification within 2 weeks Monitoring Between July 1 and September 31 Due October 30, 2011 Years 2, 3, 4, 5 Maintenance (includes weed control, replacement of dead plants, repair of fencing or signage, additional mulching to control any erosion or weeds, etc.) Between April 1 and June 1 Between July 1 and September 30 Email notification within 2 weeks Monitoring Between July 1 and September 31 Due October 30 of each year The violations noted in the January 29, 2009 Notice and Order have been resolved by the restoration and mitigation work completed under L09 -014. A copy of this letter may be filed with the King County Records Office as proof of compliance. Contact the Recorders office for requirements and associated fees. Feel free to contact me (206- 431 -3663; swhiting @ci.tukwila.wa.us) or Rebecca Fox (206 -431- 3683; rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us) if you have any questions. Sincerely, Sandra Whiting City of Tukwila Urban Environmentalist Cc. Rebecca Fox Kathy Stetson SW Page 2 of 2 11/22/2010 H:Sandra\Land use permit memos and letters\Barry Becker wetland buffer May 10, 2010 To: From: MEMORANDUM Jack Pace, Director Department of Community Development Rebecca Fox, Senior Planner Re: L09 -014 Special Permission Director, Request for a Sensitive Area Ordinance Deviation to allow a stream and wetland buffer reduction to restore and enhance the buffers of a Type 2 wetland associated with a Type 2 watercourse. SEPA: This project is exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act under WAC 197 -11 -800. BACKGROUND: In April, 2006, Planning Staff became aware that the owner Barry Becker had placed gravel and fencing on the property located just east of 13136 Macadam Rd., South, within a sensitive area buffer and was parking commercial vehicles in violation of TMC 18.45. The site contains a Type 2 wetland associated with a Type 2 stream, Southgate Creek, a salmon - bearing stream. The buffer for a Type 2 stream is 100 feet, and the buffer for a Type 2 wetland is 80 feet. A gravel driveway crosses over the stream and transects the buffer. This roadway has been in place over many years. It is not part of the code violation, and can be retained. The violation includes the following activities in the buffer areas, and in a portion of the wetland: 1) removal of invasive plants; 2) installation of beauty bark in the buffer and wetland; 3) placement of additional gravel to expand the roadway and form a parking area for construction vehicles; and 4) pouring a concrete berm across the gravel driveway. without permit or approval. For a time, vehicles from the owner's nearby construction business were parked in the buffer area on the newly -laid gravel. These have since been removed. Between April, 2006 and April, 2009, the owner had extended contact with staff, including a warning, an RFA, Notice and Order and Hearing Examiner hearing without the violation's being corrected. The owner applied for a Special Permission Director — Buffer Reduction in April, 2009. A Special Permission— Director Buffer Reduction is needed in order to permit the owner to perform work to address the violations. A 50% buffer reduction is sought in order to perform corrective work on the site. In December, 2009, the owner applied for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone from the current Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI) designation/zoning to Medium Density Residential (MDR). The applicant must show progress in addressing wetland buffer code violations in order to be considered for the Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone. Once the Special Permission— Buffer Reduction is granted, work can begin, and consideration of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone can proceed. SENSITIVE AREA ORDINANCE DEVIATIONS In order to mitigate the damage and restore the wetland and stream buffer, a reduction of the stream buffer and wetland buffer width must be approved. TMC 18.45.100 (G) permits the Director to reduce a watercourse buffer width based upon the following criteria: a) The reduced buffer does not contain slopes 15% or greater. The reduced buffer area proposed with this request does not contain slopes over 15 %. b) The buffer reduction is not greater than 50% A 50% buffer reduction is being requested. Rf 1 05/10/2010 H:\Becker -- Sp.Perm.BFFr - -L09- 014\.09- 014 -- BEcker -- Special. Perm. -- MEMORANDUM.doc • • Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct or indirect, short -term or long -term adverse impacts to wetlands or watercourses, and that: a. Additional protection to wetlands will be provided through the implementation of a buffer enhancement plan; A buffer mitigation and enhancement plan has been prepared by WPS — Wetland Permitting Systems. b. The existing condition of the buffer is degraded; The existing buffer has had gravel spread on portions of it, and blackberries have been removed. c. Buffer enhancement includes, but is not limited to the following: (1) Planting vegetation that would increase value for fish and wildlife habitat or improve water quality; (2) Enhancement of wildlife habitat by incorporating structures that are likely to be used by wildlife, including wood duck boxes, bat boxes, snags, root wads /stumps, birdhouses and heron nesting areas; or (3) Removing non - native plant species and noxious weeds from the buffer area and replanting the area subject to TMC 18.45. 080G.2. c. (1) above. Per the Mitigation Plan, buffer mitigation and enhancement includes removal of gravel and invasive plants, installation of topsoil for planting, installation of appropriate native plants in the wetland enhancement and restoration areas, and buffer restoration area. Mulching, watering and monitoring will also be provided. CONCLUSIONS 1) There are no slopes greater than 15% within the reduced buffer areas. 2) The requested buffer reduction is 50 %. 3) The Special Permission — Director is needed in order to correct, mitigate and enhance existing violations to the stream and wetland buffers. 4) The wetland analysis report and mitigation plan (WPS, 4/14/09 and 4/10/09) includes removal of gravel, invasive and non - native plants currently located within the buffer areas, and a mitigation plan for wetland and buffer impacts, and a buffer enhancement plan. 5) After the new gravel is removed, the long —term gravel driveway may remain in place, and may be used. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Special Permission permit with the following conditions: 1. Soil amendments. Prior to issuance of Public Works construction permit the Biologist shall provide a plan for the City's approval, for soil amendments that may be needed for the buffer restoration. The plan shall include a description of how it will be determined that the amendments are necessary, the specifications for the amendments, and the volume. Amendments shall be tilled into underlying soils to a depth of at least 18 inches, except where tree roots would be harmed by tilling. 2. Grass mix. Prior to issuance of Public Works construction permit the Biologist shall provide more detail about the native grasses to be planted in the potential future rain garden areas. Is this a seed mix or are plugs being proposed? Detail on species and seeding rate must be provided to the City for approval prior to planting. 3. Performance standard for shrub species: The performance standard for shrub species diversity shall be increased to 7 species. 4. As -built drawing: Rf . 2 05/10/2010 H:\Becker -- Sp.Perm.BFFr - -L09- 014\.09- 014 -- BEcker -- Special. Perm. -- MEMORANDUM.doc • • An as -built drawing shall be provided to the City upon completion of planting and shall include locations of the transects for monitoring. Transects must include both wetland and buffer planting areas. Monitoring reporting shall be provided separately for buffer areas and wetland areas . If the Biologist prefers to propose separate performance standards for these areas, a proposal may be submitted to the City for approval. 5. Maintenance a. Prior to the acceptance of plantings, the applicant shall provide a more detailed maintenance plan indicating: 1) . how the work will be done, 2) who will do it; 3) costs for implementation and 4) a detailed plan for watering during the dry season (frequency, amount, method). b. Maintenance shall include mowing of Reed Canarygrass until plants are well established. c. The "voluntary" planting for the wetland enhancement area shall be included in the maintenance and monitoring program since vegetation (blackberry) was previously removed from the wetland/stream buffer areas without an approved re- planting plan, 6. Inspection prior to planting_ The applicant or biologist shall request an inspection by contacting DCD 2 weeks prior to planting for inspection of the site preparation and the layout of plants. 7. Schedule: The applicant shall adhere to the schedule laid out in the Wetland and Buffer Mitigation Plan (April 2, 2010). a. Phase 1 (Removal of unauthorized fill) and Phase 2 (Amend soil in buffer areas as needed) shall occur prior to June 30, 2010. b. Phases 3 (Planting for wetland enhancement areas) and Phase 4 (Planting for wetland restoration area) shall occur prior to August 31, 2010. c. Phase 5 (Planting for buffer restoration area) shall occur prior to December 31, 2010. 8. Financial Assurance Mechanism: A financial assurance mechanism approved by the City, shall be provided by the applicant. The amount of the bond or cash assignment shall be 150% of the cost all maintenance and monitoring activity for five years subsequent to planting. The cost estimate for maintenance and monitoring shall be subject to approval by the city. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Site plan with topography 2) Mitigation Plan (April 14, 2009) 3) Mitigation Plan (April 2, 2010) Rf 3 05/10/2010 H:1 Becker -- Sp.Perm.BFFr - -L09- 014\.09- 014 -- BEcker -- Special. Perm.-- MEMORANDUM.doc Page 1 of 1 Rebecca Fox - preliminary comments on revised Becker wetland /buffer. mitigation plan From: Sandra Whiting To:- Rebecca Fox Date: 04/21/2010 10:59 AM Subject: preliminary comments on revised Becker wetland /buffer mitigation plan CC: Minnie Dhaliwal First, it will be important to see what areas are being mitigated to understand existing conditions, so my comments may change after that. 1. Sect. 2.2.3 Soil amendments. When and how will the decision be made regarding the need for soil amendments. If needed, the kind and amount of amendment will need to be specified. 2. Sect 2.2.6 Are the native grasses a seed mix or plugs? It doesn't say. What are the soil preparation steps prior to planting? 3. Section 2.3 Performance Standards. Plant cover - because volunteer species are going to be counted in the plant cover performance and a nice variety of native species are being planted, we would like to see an increase in the number of species required to be present to meet the performance standard. Two species of trees, and 4 species of shrubs seem too low, given that some 15 species are being planted. 4. Section 2.4. Monitoring and reporting should differentiate between performance in the buffers and the wetland. Consider the possibility of mowing /cutting the Reed Canarygrass to keep it from taking over newly planted shrubs. 5. Need irrigation plans. 6. We will need a performance bond or cash assurance for 150% of the value of the mitigation (which will be returned upon completion of planting) and another one for 150% of the value of the maintenance and monitoring for the entire 5 year period Some of these comments may be modified after the site visit. Sandra file: / /C:\ temp\ XPGrpWise \4BCEDACOtuk- mail6300 -po 100134633511E4761 \GW }0000... 04/22/2010 CONSTRUCTION 4446 South 131st PI. Tukwila, WA 98168 206 - 246 -4883 To. The City of Tukwila: 4 -19 -10 Here is a cost breakdown for fill removal, site preparation, Invasive plant control, planting and mulching. REMOVAL 1. Fill removal: a. Remove 150 yards of gravel: @ 20.00 per yard. $3000.00 2. Fill removal: b. Remove 50 yards of hog fuel/ bark @ 20.00 yd $1000.00 3. Invasive plant removal: 20 yards of sticker bushes and roots : @50.00yd $1000.00 TOPSOIL 1. Install 150 yards of topsoil for future planting: @ 25.00 per yard $3750.00 PLANTS 1. Install 275 plants in the wetland enhancement area: @ 20.00 each $5500.00 2. Install 30 plants in the wetland restoration area: @ 20.00 each $ 600.00 3. Install 1015 plants in the buffer restoration area: @ 20.00 each $ 20,300.00 4. Install 400 ground cover plants in the restoration area: @ 10.00 each $4000.00 FENCING 1.Install 500 feet of wetland barrier fence : @ 4.00 ft $ 2000.00 MULCHING 1.Install 80 yards of mulch: @ 25.00 per yard $2000.00 WATER 1. Water as needed till plants are established: $2000.00 The Estimated cost for this project is $45,150.00 • Rebecca Fox - Fwd: RE: Becker Mitigation Plan • Page 1 of 2 From: Brandon Miles To: Dhaliwal, Minnie; Sandra Whiting Date: 02/08/2010 11:18 AM Subject: Fwd: RE: Becker Mitigation Plan 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 »> "Celeste Botha" <wps @isp.com> 09/23/2009 2:22 PM »> Good to hear from you! I'll pass this information on to Barry so we can move forward as soon as possible. Unfortunately, this is an extremely busy time for me as I am in the throes of monitoring and preparing monitoring reports primarily for Sound Transit but also for several other clients. If I can tell him to move forward with the site prep work NOW before the weather turns wet, it would be awesome. Please let me know. Celeste Botha WETLAND PERMITTING SERVICES 2025 5. Norman Street Seattle, WA 98144 Orrice: (206) 328 -7775 Mobile: (206) 240 -2413 From: Brandon Miles [mailto:bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 11:16 AM To: wps @isp.com Cc: Sandra Whiting Subject: Becker Mitigation Plan Celeste- The City is working to. complete Mr. Becker's special permission application and there are two items that need to file: / /C:\ temp\ XPGrpWise\ 4B7BCC1Etuk- mail6300- po200200008711 FA7D1 \GW }0000... 04/19/2010 • Page 2 of 2 be addressed: 1. In order to reduce costs you have proposed to reduce planting densities and cluster the shrubs and groundcover. Please amend the plan to include this proposal and include a discussion on how Reed canarygrass will be able to be managed with this approach. If Mr. Becker is concerned about reducing costs the City would recommend that he obtain some of the vegetation by purchasing bare root plants from the King Conservation District plant sale in February , in addition to using container -grown plants for fall planting. 2. At this time the City is not willing to grant a buffer reduction. Mr. Becker has no development plans for his property. Access to the LDR portion of the property will likely be from 43rd Ave S. The City will consider a buffer reduction once Mr. Becker has a development application submitted to the City. Other than the comments specified above the City has no further issues that need to be addressed. We would like to be able to issue Mr. Becker's application in the next couple of weeks so that he can take advantage of the fall planting season, or at least begin invasive plant management activities in preparation for early spring planting. Best Regards, 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: \temp\XPGrpWise \4B7BCC 1 Etuk- mail6300- po200200008711 FA7D 1 \GW } 0000... 04/19/2010 RECEIVit City of Tukwila APR 1'.7 2009 Department of Community Development TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS P°9 -ply File Number LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM TO: I ❑I Building Planning Public Works n Fire Dept. Police Dept. n Parks /Rec Project: j tr1 t5ceir atc,r-, 1 Vc_I _4;4 Aocl,�L1. 1 Address: ` 3 D O 5, (33 5), transmitted: 41 Date [,, J(, I� " I Response requested by: 2G} f J j Staff coordinator: 12) /1 1 , I („r Date response received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60 -day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS (Attach j dditional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) 5rc A 91 . (Q_ LIA 1 C-6)11 J �II h I�ow-11- oxy W�� h '9)`L t - 0%13 ,4 b ( i4-zvL5 — .e/,9A/ Z. 37t/o \?,61 Ise2/) MA2 GoaviA44-e,p..6s Plan check date: Comments 5h ttte prepared by: 0 `� "" Update date: /LS/ot� PLAN REVIEW /ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: PW10 -055 DATE: 04/30/10 PROJECT NAME: Macadam LLC 4300 S 133r = S# SITE ADDRESS: Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter #. Response to Correction Letter # Revision # After Permit Is Issued DEPARTMENTS: Building Division Public Works n Fire Prevention Structural n Planning Division Permit Coordinator n DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) DUE DATE: 05/04/10 Complete Incomplete Not Applicable ❑ Comments: r if6g -r f- G1 A s j'1' po t tied/ Spec P IvniJ'°.vt Pife.e.A v . .; ft-ey- .,LcA 01-1 (life .'L &i -o/j), Do mz, I ss uyl,'/ fsP i.. -yr ti (.rfJ,7 Permit C @nt fUS k`. `-::.,,..:..r?..`. 4�...' ..:_� ? ,.,'.0 :cg_,.:,_ .. ' rrx S`i_.`_N is INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED: Departments determined incomplete: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: TUES/THURS ROUTING: Please Route ❑ Structural Review Required n No further Review Required REVIEWER'S INITIALS:' p_f; DATE: 01 to APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: Approved ❑ Approved with Conditions VI Notation: - (QC t-6we ) REVIEWER'S INITIALS: R DUE DATE: 06/01/10 Not Approved (attach comments) DATE: 614 (t7 .,,eertnif Center Use Only*. CORRECTION LETTER MAILED: Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: . Documents /routing s6p.doc 2-28-02 CITY OF TUKWILA Community Development Department Public Works Department Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 http://www.ci.tulcwila.wa.us Applications and plans must be complete in order to be accepted for plan review. Applications will not be accepted through the mail or by fax. * *Please Print ** C' King Co Assessor's Tax No.: ;6 / 3 2 0 (j /3/ —G�3 Site Address: 7 3Q� �/y ., /,S ?■2, >. S!� Suite Number: Floor: /TGC e..0,„STi,,,e_ ;°o•v `l /.44— tdsei,,,,,,,,r,) ,t..r,c, New Tenant: ❑ Yes Di] ..No Property Owners Name: 1414-x_ /} 4" l L C_ Mailing Address: 9 4'Yb S / 3 4p ,j ,22.4. c.v. 4,1 Tenant Name: Name: City who do;we contact whenyour permit readytobe issued; 9 -' 57 State Zip Day Telephone: - ) - e 2- 4` 6 -- 4i Mailing Address:. 5.. /37<z: P/. / r i%C c-u f' Cwt,• 9 8/E 6 State E -Mail Address: City �� 1 c l�G'/t f 2 (it:% vide e, Co-- Ce):-.A. Fax Number: di 6 — /l gr✓s" Zip GENERAL CONTRACTOR:INFORMATION - :(Contractor Information foi Mechanical (pg 4) "for Plumbing and Gas Piping (pg 5 Company Name: Mailing Address: to vc,. a ,•) vCt'(C />24 j. . Contact Person: 73 R t° C.�r c? /2 E -Mail Address: ,4G. Ci,154)S Zr i r • irkei . CCU Contractor Registration Number: C 6 C. c . L .7 / 12. w P City Day Telephone: Fax Number: Expiration Date: State Zip 206 -- ("6 — ? gv ARCHITECT OF RECORI) itli,plansmust be:wet stamped by Architect of Recor Company Name: Mailing Address: Contact Person: E -Mail Address: Company Name: Mailing Address: City Day Telephone: Fax - Number: State Zip Contact Person: E -Mail Address: H:V pplications\Porms- Applications On Line\2009 Applications11.2009 - Permit Application.doe Revised: 1 -2009 bh City Day Telephone: Fax Number: page 1 of 6 State Zip ,PUB ]JC WORKS PERMIT INFORMATION- -•206- 433 -0179 XScope of Work (please provide detailed information): �S i v JP wC/ tLLL 4— S Call before you Dig: 1- 800 - 424 -5555 • A -r,0 CV Q-:,; .e s G' is 07c ;F •l �,z �� Please refer to Public Works Bulletin #1 for fees and estimate sheet. Water District ❑ ...Tukwila ❑ ...Water District 4125 ❑ ...Water Availability Provided Sewer District ❑ ...Tukwila ❑ ...Sewer Use Certificate ❑ .. Highline 0... Valley View ❑ .. Renton ❑ ... Sewer Availability Provided ❑ .. Renton ❑ .. Seattle Septic System: ❑ On -site Septic System — For on -site septic system, provide 2 copies of a current septic design approved by King County Health Department. Submitted with Application (mark boxes which apply): ❑ ...Civil Plans (Maximum Paper Size — 22" x 34 ") ❑ ...Technical Information Report (Storm Drainage) ❑ .. Geotechnical Report ❑....Bond ❑ .. Insurance ❑ .. Easement(s) ❑ .. Maintenance Agreement(s) Proposed Activities (mark boxes that apply): ❑ ...Right -of -way Use - Nonprofit for Tess than 72 hours ❑ ...Right -of -way Use - No Disturbance ❑ ...Construction/Excavation/Fill - Right -of -way ❑ Non Right -of -way ❑ ❑ ...Total Cut ❑ ...Total Fill cubic yards cubic yards ❑...Traffic Impact Analysis ❑ ...Hold Harmless - (SAO) ❑ ...Hold Harmless — (ROW) ❑ .. Right -of -way Use - Profit for less than 72 hours ❑ .. Right -of -way Use — Potential Disturbance ❑ .. Work in Flood Zone ❑ .. Storm Drainage ❑ ...Sanitary Side Sewer ❑ .. Abandon Septic Tank ❑ ...Cap or Remove Utilities ❑ .. Curb Cut ❑ ...Frontage Improvements ❑ .. Pavement Cut ❑...Traffic Control ❑ .. Looped Fire Line ❑ ...Backflow Prevention - Fire Protection if Irrigation " Domestic Water ❑ .. Grease Interceptor ❑ .. Channelization ❑ .. Trench Excavation ❑ .. Utility Undergrounding ❑...Permanent Water Meter Size... WO # ❑ ...Temporary Water Meter Size .. WO # ❑ ...Water Only Meter Size WO # ❑...Deduct Water Meter Size ❑ ...Sewer Main Extension Public ❑ Private ❑ ❑...Water Main Extension Public ❑ Private ❑ ff FINANCE INFORMATION Fire Line Size at Property Line Number of Public Fire Hydrant(s) ❑ ...Water ❑ ...Sewer ❑ ...Sewage Treatment Monthly Service Billing to: Name: Day Telephone: Mailing Address: City State Zip Water Meter Refund/Billing: Name: Mailing Address: Day Telephone: City State Zip H:\Applications\Fonns- Applications On Line N.2009 Applications \I-2009 - Permit Application.dot Revised: 1-2009 bh Page 3 of 6 PLUMBING AND -GAS PIPING PERMIT INFORMATION 206 431 -3670 PLUMBING AND GAS PIPING CONTRACTOR INFORMATION Company Name: Mailing Address: City State Zip Contact Person: Day Telephone: E -Mail Address: Fax Number: Contractor Registration Number: Expiration Date: Valuation of Project (contractor's bid price): $ Scope of Work (please provide detailed information): Building Use (per Int'l Building Code): Occupancy (per Int'I Building Code): Utility Purveyor: Water: Sewer: Indicate type of plumbing fixtures and /or gas piping outlets being installed and the quantity below: Fixture T e• yp • _ .- � . Qty : Fixture Type : °. :' s Qty Fixture Type: .. Qty Fixture Type:; 1 Qty Bathtub or combination bath/shower Bidet Clothes washer, domestic Dental unit, cuspidor Dishwasher, domestic, with independent drain Drinking fountain or water cooler (per head) Food -waste grinder, commercial Floor Drain Shower, single head trap Lavatory Wash fountain Receptor, indirect waste Sinks Urinals Water Closet Building sewer and each trailer park sewer Rain water system — per drain (inside building) Water heater and /or vent Industrial waste treatment interceptor, including trap and vent, except for kitchen type grease interceptors Each grease trap (connected to not more than 4 fixtures - <750 gallon capacity) Grease interceptor for commercial kitchen ( >750 gallon capacity) Repair or alteration of water piping and/or water treatment equipment Repair or alteration of drainage or vent piping Medical gas piping system serving 1 -5 inlets /outlets for a specific gas Each additional medical gas inlets /outlets greater than 5 Backflow protective device other than atmospheric -type vacuum breakers 2 inch (51 mm) diameter or smaller Backflow protective device other than atmospheric -type vacuum breakers over 2 inch (51 mm) diameter Each lawn sprinkler system on any one meter including backflow protection devices Atmospheric -type vacuum breakers not included in lawn sprinkler backflow protections (1 -5) Atmospheric -type vacuum breakers not included in lawn sprinkler backflow protections over 5 Gas piping outlets H:\Applications\Forms- Applications On- Line\2009 Applications \t -2009 Permit Application.doc Revised: 1 -2009 bh Page 5 of 6 Iffifen B MAC MASS a AtiMI (T RI CZ - non sr qAr PE-OAA CAP t1Hit.MRY POOP GI =II EThar.:11 LlhEi :ae01E2211 r1 OIECUON 0011218105 g- erc. .4- 1 I i.,n7 1 ' • Wetland Restoration :`,/ area = 1,122 sf +` ` CS • J Tr. r 1.1A714 t1AO Or hawse row manta 155053911 NAP ToAS SO , f � SSO _ I • SO non Scale r• . so A ALGAL EKRIE%»N ZhoraL/ That portion of lot 11. Riverside Interurban Trade, as shown to Yofama 10 d Play Papa 94, Raaads of Eiod County. Inteldagto,a, Wag north of I3outb laird arrest, east of 42nd demos Suatb, amt mouth of tba south Bas of South 292nd Streak fq r with the asst UN et $ eatsd 49rd arras= a4►oiatsp. sad LamI =testa Lfpbwgr right - of -way. 211212 -11 That portion at lot us. Postal' (lard= Tract; ea shorn In Volume R of Plde, Pas o4 iltrardm at Eht�rmme�a County. 11sobloata�o, 6sad .wtad Swairwree4 thew/ north of of alma htr4/t by *Oman No, 0.292111 and unapt state IlIphsq► right-af-wa1• Wetland Enhancement areas =25,000 sf Note: Areas approximate with the exception of total onsite wetland (0.62 ac) and total onsite reduced buffer (0.74 ac) RESTORATION & ENHANCEMENT AREAS Note: All buffer areas shown are reduced by 50% from City of Tukwila standard buffer widths Buffer Restoration & Enhancement Areas = 30,000 sf 4. a a V7 t 0 -0 *)<1 4 A Portion of the NW 1/4 of the 1/4, Sec. 75, T 23 N, R 4 E, W.M. King County, Wad ington Section 15, T 2) N, 1 4 E VICINITY MAP srue r mar - 1/4 WI RECEIVED APR 3 0 2010 TUKVVILA PUBLIC WORKS OiOOS5 coa -11175E1 4446 South 131" PI. Tukwila, WA 98168 206 - 246 -4883 To. City OF Tukwila: 4 -30 -10 Ace Construction will remove 150 yards of gravel and 50 yards of hogs fuel and bark, out of the Buffer restoration & Enhancement area. We will then install 150 yards of topsoil in the same areas. All Invasive plants will be removed. We will then install new plantings. Please see map. Barry Becker RECEIVED ANK 3 Q ZU1U TUKVVILA PUBLIC WORKS WETLAND • BUFFER MITIGATION PLAN 4300 S.133R° STREET PARCEL. #261320-0131 TUKWILA, WASHINGTON FILE NUMBER: RFA08-342 PREPARED FOR: BARRY BECKER MACADAM LLC 4446 S. 1312' STREET TUKWI A, WA 98168 (206) 571 -2735 PREPARED BY: CELESTE BOTHA WETLAND PERMITTING SERVICES Phone: (206) 328-7775 Cell: (206) 240 -2413 wpe@isp.00m APRIL 2, 2010 1 hp-,- 2 ° J • CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 3 2. MITIGATION PLAN 4 2.1 Mitigation Goals 4 2.2 Construction & Planting Plan 4 2.2.1 Timing of Construction 4 2.2.2 Phase 1: Removal of Unauthorized Fill 4 2.2.3 Phase 2: Amend Soil in Buffer Areas As Needed 4 2.2.4 Phase 3: Planting Plan for Wetland Enhancement Areas 4 2.2.5 Phase 4: Planting Plan for Wetland Restoration Area 5 2.2.6 Phase 5: Planting Plan for Buffer Restoration Areas 5 2.2.7 Post Installation Measures 6 2.3 Performance Standards 6 2.3.1 Plant cover 7 2.3.2 Species diversity 7 2.3.3 Control of noxious and invasive species 7 2.4 Monitoring 7 2.5 Maintenance Plan 7 2.6 Contingency Plan 10 3. REPORT LIMITATIONS 10 2 1. INTRODUCTION The Macadam LLC property is located at 4300 S. 133rd Street (Parcel number 261320 -0131) in the City of Tukwila, WA as shown in Figure 1. The city issued a Notice and Order to Mr. Barry Becker on January 29, 2009 demanding that he remedy observed alterations to a regulated wetland buffer (and possibly direct wetland impacts) codified in Tukwila Municipal Code (TCM) 18.45, and that a complete permit application with required studies be submitted to the Department of Community Development. A Wetland Analysis Report and Mitigation Plan was prepared by WPS, dated April 14, 2009 that described the wetland delineation and stream and wetland categorizations, requested a buffer reduction, and presented a preliminary mitigation plan based on the buffer reduction. The site is zoned commercial /light industrial and Mr. Becker proposes to use it as a landscape contractor's storage yard, which use meets the zoning requirements. This use will require a buffer reduction to 50% of the standard buffer width, or 40 feet. This report presents the final restoration and enhancement plan within this 40 -foot buffer. FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP (COURTESY MAPQUEST) 3 2. MITIGATION PLAN 2.1 MITIGATION GOALS The goal of the mitigation plan is to conform to the Mitigation Standards outlined in TMC 18.45.090 F. 2.2 CONSTRUCTION & PLANTING PLAN Implementation of the mitigation plan will occur under the direct supervision of WPS who will be onsite throughout Phase 1, and at the beginning and prior to completion of Phases 2 through 5. Currently vegetated areas, such as the wetland buffer at the northwest corner and within the stream buffer adjacent to the existing residence, will be cleared of invasive species, specifically Himalayan blackberry, and inter - planted; no trees, whether native or non - native will be cleared from these buffer areas. Specific plant locations throughout all planting zones will be determined in the field by the supervising biologist. 2.2.1 TIMING OF CONSTRUCTION Phases 1 and 2 will occur prior to June 30, 2010. Planting will occur in two additional phases, Phases 3 and 4 will occur immediately following completion of Phase 2, and Phase 5 will occur in winter 2010. 2.2.2 PHASE I: REMOVAL OF UNAUTHORIZED FILL Removal of unauthorized fill material will occur as follows: 1. Install silt fence at the wetland boundary or, in the area of direct wetland impacts, at the extent of encroachment, and along the OHWM of the stream where it is outside of wetland boundaries. 2. Expose native soil surface by pulling back fill and stockpiling it outside the buffer in layers of gravel fill, hogfuel, and rock /gravel where separation of layers is possible. 3. Remove all filter fabric throughout areas of wetland and both wetland and stream buffers. 2.2.3 PHASE 2: AMEND SOIL IN BUFFER AREAS AS NEEDED It may be necessary"to amend the areas of the buffer where fill material was removed in order to create a smooth transition to the areas where fill will be allowed to remain. In these areas, high quality topsoil and compost will be installed prior to planting. 2.2.4 PHASE 3: PLANTING PLAN FOR WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AREAS The applicant proposes to voluntarily enhance the existing wetland through inter - planting western red cedar and Sitka spruce to provide coniferous cover as well as native shrubs throughout the wetland enhancement area as shown in the Mitigation Areas graphic in Appendix 1 with species shown in Table 1. Plant quantities are based on 15 -foot on- center spacing. A minimum 2 foot diameter area will be thoroughly cleared of all roots and rhizomes prior to planting. Plants will be installed according to standard industry specifications, and a minimum of five layers of newspaper will be placed in a ring around each plant. A minimum of 3 inches of bark mulch will be placed on top of the newspaper, extending beyond the edges of the newspaper to inhibit weed competition until the plants can become established. Wetland enhancement will occur immediately following completion of site preparation activities (Phases 1 and 2); willow and dogwood stakes will be installed along the stream banks during the dormant season of 2010/2011. As noted above, this enhancement is voluntary and unrelated to the violation or buffer reduction requests. Mr. Becker wishes to obtain approval to perform this enhancement concurrently with permit approval for these activities. 4 TABLE 1: PLANTING SCHEDULE FOR 25,000 SF WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AREA Plants Total Size Trees Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis 25 1 gal. Pacific willow Salix lasiandra 50 stakes Western red cedar Thuja plicata 25 1 gal. TOTAL 100 Shrubs Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata 25 1 gal. Nootka rose Rosa nutkana 25 1 gal. Pacific ninebark Physocarpus capitatus 25 1 gal. Prickly currant Ribes lacustre 25 1 gal. Red -osier dogwood Corpus stolonifera 25 Stakes Sitka willow Salixsitchensis 50 Stakes TOTAL 175 2.2.5 PHASE 4: PLANTING PLAN FOR. WETLAND RESTORATION AREA Plant numbers for the wetland restoration area, based on 5 -foot on- center spacing are shown in Table 2. TABLE 2: PLANTING SCHEDULE FOR 1,122 SF WETLAND RESTORATION AREA Plants Number Size Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata 7 1 gal. Nootka rose Rosa nutkana 10 1 gal. Pacific ninebark Physocarpus capitatus 4 1 gal. Red -osier dogwood Corpus stolonifera 7 1 gal. Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla 2 2 gal. TOTAL 30 2.2.6 PHASE 5: PLANTING PLAN FOR. BUFFER RESTORATION AREAS The 30,000 square foot buffer restoration /enhancement areas, illustrated in the Mitigation Areas graphic in Appendix 1, will be planted as shown in Table 3. Planting will occur at approximate 5 -foot on- center spacing for shrubs; trees will be planted randomly at minimum 15 -foot intervals; five areas of approximately 600 square feet each will be planted with a mixture of native grasses recommended by Frosty Hollow Ecological Restoration; these areas may ultimately be converted to rain gardens if a proposed rezone and housing development and their design are approved.. Kinnikinnick will be planted along both sides of the access road. TABLE 3: PLANTING SCHEDULE WITHIN 30,000 SF BUFFER RESTORATION /ENHANCEMENT AREAS (INCLUDING INTER - PLANTING AREA AT THE NW CORNER) 5 Plants Total Size Trees Big -leaf maple Acer macrophyllum 15 2 gal. Cascara Rhamnus purshiana 15 2 gal. Chokecherry Prunus virginiana 25 2 gal. Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 20 2 gal. Paper birch Betula papyrifera 30 2 gal. • Plants Total Size Western red cedar TOTAL Thuja plicata 20 2 gal. 125A Shrubs Clustered rose Douglas spirea Ocean spray Pacific ninebark Pacific rhododendron Pacific wax myrtle Red elderberry Red - flowering currant Red -osier dogwood Sala! Salmonberry Snowberry Tall Oregon grape Vine maple Western crabapple Rosa pisocarpa Spiraea douglasii Holodiscus discolor Physocarpus capitatus Rhododendron macrophyllum Myrica californica Sambucus racemosa Ribes sanguineum Cornus stolonifera Gaultheria shallon Rubus spectabilis Symphoricarpos albus Mahonia aquifolium Acer circinatum Malus fusca TOTAL Groundcover False Solomon's seal Swordfern Western columbine Kinnikinnick TOTAL Smilacina racemosa Polystichum munitum Aquilegia formosa Archtostaphylos uva -ursi 2.2.7 POST INSTALLATION MEASURES 75 1 gal. 75 1 gal. 75 1 gal. 75 1 gal. 50 1 gal. 50 1 gal. 10 1 gal. 50 1 gal. 50 1 gal. 75 1 gal. 50 1 gal. 75 1 gal. 100 1 gal. 50 2 gal. 30 1 gal. 890 50 100 50 200 400 1 gal. 1 gal. 1 gal. 4 in. pots Following installation of plants as described above, the entire buffer restoration /enhancement area with the exception of areas noted above with existing tree cover will be mulched with a minimum of 3 inches of Animal - Friendly Hogfuel or its equivalent to reduce competition from weeds and retain moisture in the soil. In the exception areas, mulch rings will be placed around all newly - installed plants. Permanent transects will be established to divide the enhancement areas to aid in developing as -built plans and for future monitoring. Overview photographs will be taken, as well as photos from one end of the monitoring transects. Five nest boxes (details to be determined) will be placed in the wetland enhancement area. A split -rail or 3 -foot cyclone fence will be placed around the buffer and sensitive areas signage will be placed at 50 -foot intervals along the buffer boundary; no fencing will be placed within the buffer where the access road crosses through the buffer 2.3 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS When evaluated against monitoring data, performance standards are used to determine the relative success of the mitigation project. Failure to meet these general minimum standards throughout the monitoring period will result in implementation of contingency measures. Performance standards for the wetland restoration and buffer enhancement areas are as shown in Table 2. No monitoring is proposed of the voluntary wetland enhancement area. 6 TABLE 4: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR WETLAND & BUFFER RESTORATION /ENHANCEMENT AREAS Criterion Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Minimum total native plant cover ( %) N/A 30 50 75 85 Minimum native woody plant cover ( %) N/A 20 40 60 75 Plant survivorship 100 Species diversity (see below) Non - native, invasive plant cover ( %) (see below) 2.3.1 PLANT COVER Plant cover goals both within wetland and buffer restoration areas will be achieved through a combination of planted material and volunteer native species. 2.3.2 SPECIES DIVERSITY The following minimum standards apply to species diversity of plants, including both planted and volunteer native species, within the various strata: Trees = 2 species Shrubs = 4 species Ground covers = 3 species 2.3.3 CONTROL OF NOXIOUS AND INVASIVE SPECIES Noxious weeds (identified on state noxious weeds lists) in the buffer areas must be entirely and properly eliminated and disposed of prior to installation of native material, and may not exceed 10% cover throughout the monitoring period. No attempt will be made to control ubiquitous reed canarygrass or creeping buttercup in the wetland enhancement areas as such an attempt would be futile. 2.4 MONITORING An as -built plan of the wetland restoration and buffer enhancement areas will be submitted to the city immediately following planting. Monitoring shall continue for a period of five years according to the schedule in Table 5. Year 1 of the mitigation monitoring period will commence the quarter following the installation. Overview photos will be taken from the same vantage points each year to document overall appearance of the mitigation area before, during, and after construction. A full plant count or an estimate derived through use of belt transects will be conducted during the first fall monitoring event following installation to ensure that installed plants have survived planting shock. Thereafter, cover monitoring will use the permanent transects installed after initial planting. TABLE 5: MAINTENANCE & MONITORING SCHEDULES Year Maintenance Visits 1 Between January 1 and March 1 AND Between April 1 and June 1 AND Between July 1 and September 30 AND Between October 15 and December 30 2 - 5 Between April 1 and June 1 AND Between July 1 and September 30 Monitoring Between July 1 and September 31 Report due October 30 Between July 1 and September 31 October 30 2.5 MAINTENANCE PLAN Over the monitoring period, a rigorous semiannual maintenance program will be implemented according to the schedule provided in Table 5 or as needed to eliminate undesirable plants and to protect shrubs and small trees 7 from competition from weeds or predation, repair fences, repair or replace any buffer and interpretive signage, replace dead plants, etc. An informal notification (e.g. email correspondence) of completion of this task shall be provided to the city within 2 weeks of each maintenance visit. A formal monitoring report shall be submitted to the city. 2.6 CONTINGENCY PLAN In order to provide for the contingency that performance standards may not be met during the five -year monitoring period, it may be necessary to provide supplemental plantings. Plant attrition can be remedied by evaluating the cause, and replanting with the same or a more appropriate and approved species. The landscaping contractor should guarantee 100 percent survivorship for one year from initial planting for losses due to defects in materials or workmanship. All plants that are used for replacement must meet or exceed the standards of the initial plantings. The causes of any mortality will be evaluated, and, based upon the results of this evaluation, alternate species selection may occur, predation barriers installed, or additional mulch applied. All dead plants will be replaced with the same or a more suitable species throughout the monitoring period. Replacement will be subject to the same conditions and be made in the same manner as specified for the original planting. 3. REPORT LIMITATIONS The information contained herein is, to our knowledge, correct and accurate. It should be recognized that the establishment of wetland boundaries is an inexact science. Wetlands are, by definition, transition areas, and wetland boundaries often change with time. The presence of wetland indicators may also vary depending on the time of year. Additionally, individual professionals may disagree on the precise location of wetland boundaries or the functions and values or categorization of a wetland. All stream and wetland boundaries, classifications, and buffer widths should be considered subject to change until reviewed and approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies with jurisdiction. We recommend obtaining jurisdictional approval before completing final site plans and /or beginning construction activities. We are not responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope -of -work, we warrant that this study was conducted in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and criteria in effect at the time of this study. The results and conclusions of this report represent the authors' best professional judgment based upon information provided by the project proponent and information obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. 8 1 RECEIVED DEC 3 0 2009 COMMUNITY DEVELOPN1ENT WETLAND ANALYSIS REPORT & MITIGATION PLAN 4300 S. 133' STREET PARCEL, #261320 -0131 TUKWILA, WASHINGTON FILE NUMBER: RFA08-342 PREPARED FOR: BARRY BECKER MACADAM LLC 4446 S. 131sT STREET TUKWILA, WA 98168 (206) 571 -2735 PREPARED BY: CELESTE BOTHA WETLAND PERM I'I'f ING SERVICES Phone: (206) 328 -7775 Cell: (2o6)2.-4o-941t3 wpJisp.com APRIL 14, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 4 2. SITE DESCRIPTION & ALTERATIONS. 4 3. WETLAND DELINEATION METHODS 5 3.1 Wetland & Stream Classifications 6 4. WETLAND ANALYSIS RESULTS 7 4.1 Preliminary Data Review 7 4.2 Results of Current Investigation 7 4.2.1 Vegetation 7 4.2.2 Soils 8 4.2.3 Hydrology 8 4.3 Stream & Wetland Determination and Categorizations 8 5. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS 9 5.1 Watercourse Buffers 9 5.2 Wetland Buffers 10 6. PROPOSED BUFFER REDUCTION 10 7. MITIGATION PLAN 10 7.1 Mitigation Goals 10 7.2 Construction & Planting Plan 11 7.2.1 Phase 1: Removal of Unauthorized Fill 11 7.2.2 Phase 2: Amend Soil in Buffer Areas As Needed 11 7.2.3 Phase 3: Planting Plan for Wetland Enhancement Areas 11 7.2.4 Phase 4: Planting Plan for Wetland Restoration Area 11 7.2.5 Phase 5: Planting Plan for Buffer Restoration Areas 12 7.2.6 Post Installation Measures 12 7.3 Performance Standards 13 7.3.1 Plant cover 13 7.3.2 Species diversity 13 7.3.3 Control of noxious and invasive species 13 7.4 Monitoring 14 7.5 Maintenance Plan 14 7.6 Contingency Plan 14 8. REPORT LIMITATIONS 14 7 TABLE OF TABLES Table 1: Planting Sch edule for 25,000 SF Wetland Enhancement Area 11 Table 2: Planting Sch edule for 1,122 SF Wetland Restoration Area 12 Table 3: Planting Sch edule Within 30,811 SF Buffer Restoration /Enhancement Areas 12 Table 4: Performance Standards for Wetland & Buffer Restoration Areas 13 Table 5: Cover Stand -ard in Wetland Enhancement Area 13 Table 6: Maintenance & Monitoring Schedules 14 TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1: Vicinity Map (Courtesy MapQuest) 4 Figure 2: City of Tukwila GIS: Mapped Sensitive Areas 5 Figure 3: Coho Distribution (WDFW) 7 Figure 4: Edge of Fill on April 3, 2009 8 Figure 5: Tributary Stream along North Property Boundary 9 1. INTRODUCTION The Macadam LLC property is located at 4300 S. 133rd Street (Parcel number 261320 -0131) in the City of Tukwila, WA as shown in Figure 1. The city issued a Notice and Order to Mr. Becker on January 29, 2009 demanding that he remedy observed alterations to a regulated wetland buffer (and possibly direct wetland impacts) codified in Tukwila Municipal Code (TCM) 18.45, and that a complete permit application with required studies be submitted to the Department of Community Development. This report presents the findings of a wetland investigation, a mitigation plan for wetland and buffer impacts, and a buffer enhancement plan. Becke�'Tikwila;tvcinit; �fl Dawamian waianvay 1IV C11011.•.1 rf SIYl.51 • , 3 urn yr v1 3t i '.A .oxerle, �, ? .F' L•Y447 A l uyi.. K1:muK+•em.1.. ( 01 pYp yryry f � { rl R �• Y,, Perry d' L OTv s.rrr•..wwMVq ra�uwi.4 WM• a r1 Om men be onlbed In Ye y ter. r.e .a�O..anaore.rsedge °'7naenn o:11r.rtml rn`.. rOlb e:+ uur. :r..r.r`os.�:r`:sauwn�...,�I:. r,a Kin Cou 9 ^tYa FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP (COURTESY MAPQUEST) 2. SITE DESCRIPTION &. ALTERATIONS The subject parcel is currently being used as a landscape storage yard; gravel surfaces cover nearly the entire central portion of the parcel. Landscaping, primarily lawn, is present to the west and south of the existing structures. A forested area occupies most of the east half of the site and along the north side of the stream upstream of the culvert. 4 boundary'. The delineation occurred on April 3 and 7, 2009. The specific atypical methods that were used on the subject property to evaluate wetland criteria are excerpted from the Washington State Manual below. Vegetation Criteria Many types of activities result in only partial removal of the previous plant communities, and remaining species may be indicative of hydrophytic vegetation. In other cases, plant fragments (e.g. stumps, roots) may be used to reconstruct the plant community types that occurred prior to site alteration. Sometimes, this can be determined by examining piles of debris resulting from land - clearing operations or excavation to uncover identifiable remains of the previous plant community. Circumstantial evidence of the type of plant communities that previously occurred may sometimes be obtained by examining the vegetation in adjacent areas. If adjacent areas have the same topographic position, soils, and hydrology as the altered area, the plant community types on the altered area were probably similar to those of the adjacent areas. Soils Criteria Dig a hole and determine whether the entire surface layer (A- horizon) has been removed. If so, examine the soil immediately below the top of the subsurface layer (8- horizon) for hydric soil characteristics. As an alternative, examine an undisturbed soil of the same soil series occurring in the same topographic position in an immediately adjacent area that has not been altered. Look for hydric soil indicators immediately below the A- horizon or 10 inches (whichever is shallower), and record findings on DATA FORM 32. Hydrology Criteria Certain field indicators of wetland hydrology may still be present. Look for watermarks on trees or other structures, drift lines, and debris deposits. Record these on DATA FORM 3. If adjacent undisturbed areas are in the same topographic position and are similarly influenced by the same sources of inundation, look for wetland indicators in these areas. c. Aerial photography. Examine any available aerial photography and determine whether the area was inundated at the time of the photographic mission. Consider the time of the year that the aerial photography was taken and use only photography taken during the growing season and prior to site alteration. d. Historical records. Examine any available historical records for evidence that the area has been periodically inundated. Obtain copies of any such information and record findings on DATA FORM 3. The wetland delineation occurred on April 3, 2009. During the evaluation, numerous pits were excavated with the aid of a backhoe. Fourteen detailed data points were established (data point 7 of 15 was skipped inadvertently), five at one of the pits excavated by backhoe and the other nine on either side of the boundary established in part through that means; additional soil pits were excavated with a shovel and hand auger. Field observations at each data point were compiled on preformatted Wetland Data Sheets, which are provided in Appendix 2. The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) was flagged on both sides of the stream south of the culvert, but on the south side only north of the culvert. The survey of the wetland and OHWM of the stream was conducted by Aspen Land Surveying LLC on April 7, 2009. A reduced copy of the survey is provided in Appendix 3 and a full -size copy is attached. The extent of alterations to sensitive areas, as shown in the photo in Appendix 1, was extrapolated from aerial photography and superimposed onto the survey. 3.1 WETLAND & STREAM CLASSIFICATIONS 1 Unauthorized activities. Unauthorized discharges requiring enforcement actions may result in removal or covering of indicators of one or more wetland parameters. Examples include, but are not limited to: (1) alteration or removal of vegetation; (2) placement of dredged or fill material over hydric soils; and /or (3) construction of levees, drainage systems, or dams that significantly alter the area hydrology. 2 Note: the correct data form number is Data Form 2; there is no Data Form 3 in the Washington State Manual. 6 Wetlands and streams identified on the site were categorized using the City of Tukwila's typing system. 4. WETLAND ANALYSIS RESULTS 4.1 PRELIMINARY DATA REVIEW A number of sources were consulted to provide information about wetlands and streams on the subject site. • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW): Figure 3 is an inventory of Coho salmon use; no other salmonid species were documented on this stream segment. FIGURE 3: COHO DISTRIBUTION (WDFW) • City of Tukwila Inventory: the City's map is provided in 2, above. • King County IMAP data: Aerial photographs from 1963 to 2008 are provided in Appendix 1. • Natural Resource Conservation Service: Soil within the study area was not mapped by NRCS. 4.2 RESULTS OF CURRENT INVESTIGATION 4.2.1 VEGETATION As seen in the photos provided in Appendix 1, clearing has been occurring on the site prior to the 2005 aerial photograph, primarily at the northwest corner of the site (prior to the current ownership), and on either side of the stream west of the culvert both onsite and within the road' ROW; this latter area appears to have previously been vegetated with monotypic Himalayan blackberries but at least one tree was removed. In addition, grading and fill occurred in areas previously vegetated primarily with grasses, such as in the southeast corner north of the access road (which was also overrun with blackberries in patches) and west of the tree -line at the wetland boundary. Currently, all of these areas are essentially unvegetated and filter fabric overlain with either gravel or hogfuel (or both) inhibits revegetation — as well as evaporation. Figure 4 shows the edge of fill along the wetland boundary. The forested area occupying most of the east half of the site is comprised of nearly equal proportions of red alder (Alnus rubra), black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), and Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra) in the overstory. There 7 • is virtually no understory; the ground layer is comprised primarily by creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens) and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinaceae); poison hemlock (Conium maculatum) and Himalayan blackberry grow along the margins and stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) and horsetail (Equisetum sp.) and Watson's willow -herb (Epilobium ciliatum) are ubiquitous. This is a hydrophytic plant community. FIGURE 4: EDGE OF FILL ON APRIL 3, 2009 4.2.2 SOILS Soil within unaltered areas of the site is quite uniform, comprised of a dark surface silt loam underlain by a gray to gleyed silt loam or silty clay loam. Hogfuel was up to 3 feet deep at the north end of the site. Gravel fill material within the area directly west of the forested area varied in depth from a few inches to up to 2 feet at the delineated wetland boundary. In places, the gravel was underlain by gravel mixed with quarry spall and in some places by hogfuel or both hogfuel and quarry spall /gravel. At the southeast corner filter fabric is overlain by a shallow layer of gravel. 4.2.3 HYDROLOGY Inundation was observed only in small pools primarily along the north property boundary but saturation was observed within the surface 10 inches of native soil (below fill material) in the lower elevation, level areas in the north and east portions of the site. Saturation was observed at levels below 15 inches in some of the deeper backhoe pits. 4.3 STREAM & WETLAND DETERMINATION AND CATEGORIZATIONS Stream ratings are defined in TMC 18.45.100 as: A. WATERCOURSE RATINGS — Watercourse ratings are based on the existing habitat functions and are rated as follows: 1. Type 1 Watercourse: Watercourses inventoried as Shorelines of the State, under RCW 90.58. These watercourses shall be regulated under TMC 18.44, Shoreline Overlay. 2. Type 2 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have perennial (year - round) or intermittent flows and support salmonid fish use. 3. Type 3 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have perennial flows and are not used by salmonid fish. 4. Type 4 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have Intermittent flows and are not used by salmonid fish. Southgate Creek has documented Coho habitat as shown in Figure 3 and thus rates Type 2 according to the City of Tukwila stream typing criteria. The ordinary high water mark of Southgate Creek was delineated as shown on the R survey prepared by Aspen Land Surveying. A small tributary stream flows along S 1315` Street near the north property boundary; the two streams converge at a point approximately due north of the western edge of the wetland. A fish barrier to this second stream exists at this convergence point, as shown in the photo on the right in Figure 5. Because the tributary stream has intermittent flow and does not support salmonids, this stream is rated Type 4. WPS also identified and delineated the western edge of a wetland within the study area. The wetland is rated Type 2 based on criteria in TCM 18.45.080: 2. Type 2 wetlands are those wetlands that meet any of the following criteria: a. The wetland is equal to or greater than one acre in size; b. The wetland has three or more wetland classes and is less than 5 acres; c. The wetland is characterized by the presence of nesting sites for priority species as listed by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife; or d. The wetland is hydrologically connected (non- isolated) to a Type 1 or Type 2 watercourse. Stream located outside north property boundary. Fish barrier at the location of convergence of the small The tributary stream in the background converges tributary and Southgate Creek. Note the gradient and with Southgate Creek, shown in the foreground, vegetation in the channel. just past the sign. FIGURE 5: TRIBUTARY STREAM ALONG NORTH PROPERTY BOUNDARY 5. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS 5.1 WATERCOURSE BUFFERS The standard buffer for Type 2 watercourses is 100 feet and the standard buffer for Type 4 watercourses is 50 feet; watercourse buffer widths can be reduced by 50% under specific instances as noted in TMC 18.45.080 F as follows: F. VARIATION OF STANDARD WATERCOURSE BUFFER WIDTH — q 1. The Director may reduce the standard watercourse buffers on a case -by -case basis, provided the buffer does not contain slopes 15% or greater. The approved buffer width shall not result in greater than a 50% reduction in width. Any buffer reduction proposal must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director that it will not result in direct, indirect or long -term adverse impacts to watercourses, and that: a. The buffer is vegetated and includes an enhancement plan as may be required to improve the buffer function and value; or b. If there is no significant vegetation in the buffer, a buffer may be reduced only if an enhancement plan is provided. The plan must include using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the watercourse functions and values. 5.2 WETLAND BUFFERS The standard buffer for Type 2 wetlands is 80 feet. Similar conditions to those for watercourses are applied to variations to wetland buffers per TMC 18.45.080 G: G. VARIATION OF STANDARD WETLAND BUFFER WIDTH — 1. The Director may reduce the standard wetland buffers on a case -by -case basis, provided the reduced buffer area does not contain slopes 15% or greater. The approved buffer width shall not result in greater than a 50% reduction in width. 2. Buffer reduction with enhancement may be allowed by the Director as a Type 2 permit if: a. Additional protection to wetlands will be provided through the implementation of a buffer enhancement plan; b. The existing condition of the buffer is degraded; c. Buffer enhancement includes, but is not limited to the following: (1) Planting vegetation that would increase value for fish and wildlife habitat or improve water quality; (2) Enhancement of wildlife habitat by incorporating structures that are likely to be used by wildlife, including wood duck boxes, bat boxes, snags, root wads /stumps, birdhouses and heron nesting areas; or (3) Removing non - native plant species and noxious weeds from the buffer area and replanting the area subject to TMC 18.45.080G.2.c.(1) above. 6. PROPOSED BUFFER REDUCTION Access to the (demolished) barn and house from South 131` Street was shown in the 1936 aerial photos and 1963 WSDOT survey. This point of access is the only viable access to Parcel 261320 -0131 so the applicant is requesting authorization to allow these buffer encroachments and the impervious surfaces required to utilize the access. Additional permanent buffer impacts totaling 790 square feet would allow access to the upland area north of the culvert by extending the authorized fill beyond the previously- existing barn, as shown in the Impact Areas graphic in Appendix 4. To mitigate for unauthorized impacts and to qualify for these proposed permanent buffer impacts, the applicant proposes to enhance or restore the entire reduced buffer as well as a 1,903 square foot area (representing 2.4 to 1 ratio of replacement to loss) Tying outside the reduced buffer at the southeast corner. In addition, the applicant proposes to enhance the wetland to further qualify for the buffer reduction. This proposal is illustrated in the Mitigation Areas graphic in Appendix 4 and appears to be consistent with all conditions for buffer reductions outlined in TMC 18.45.080 G2 quoted above. 7. MITIGATION PLAN 7.1, MITIGATION GOALS The goal of the mitigation plan is to conform to the Mitigation Standards outlined in TMC 18.45.090 F. 10 7.2 CONSTRUCTION & PLANTING PLAN Implementation of the mitigation plan will occur under the direct supervision of WPS who will be onsite throughout Phase 1, at the beginning and prior to completion of Phase 2, and at the completion of Phase 3. 7.2.1 PHASE 1: REMOVAL OF UNAUTHORIZED FILL Removal of unauthorized fill material will occur as follows: 1. Install silt fence at the wetland boundary or, in the area of direct wetland impacts, at the extent of encroachment, and along the OHWM of the stream where it is outside of wetland boundaries. 2. Expose native soil surface by pulling back fill and stockpiling it outside the buffer in layers of gravel fill, hogfuel, and rock /gravel where separation of layers is possible. 3. Remove all filter fabric throughout areas of wetland and both wetland and stream buffers. 7.2.2 PHASE 2: AMEND SOIL IN BUFFER AREAS As NEEDED It may be necessary amend the areas of the buffer where fill material was removed in order to create a smooth transition to the areas where fill will be allowed to remain. In these areas, high quality topsoil and compost will be installed prior to planting 7.2.3 PHASE 3: PLANTING PLAN FOR. WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AREAS The applicant proposes to enhance the existing wetland through inter - planting Western red cedar to provide coniferous cover as well as 150 native shrubs throughout the wetland enhancement area as shown in the Mitigation Areas graphic in Appendix 4 with species shown in Table 1. Plant quantities are based on 15 -foot on- center spacing. A minimum 1% foot diameter area will be thoroughly cleared of all roots and rhizomes prior to planting. Plants will be installed according to standard industry specifications, and a minimum of five layers of newspaper will be placed in a ring around each plant. A minimum of 3 inches of bark mulch will be placed on top of the newspaper, extending beyond the edges of the newspaper to inhibit weed competition until the plants can become established. Willow and dogwood stakes will be installed during the dormant season of 2009/2010. TABLE 1: PLANTING SCHEDULE FOR 25,000 SF WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AREA Plants Number per 1,000 sf Trees Western red cedar Thuja plicata . Shrubs _ .. ....._._. Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata Pacific ninebark Physocarpus capitatus 1 Red -osier dogwood Corpus stolonifera 1 Prickly currant Ribes lacustre 1 Nootka rose Rosa nutkana 1 Sitka willow Salix sitchensis 1 2 TOTAL 6 Total Size 50 1 gal. 25 25 25 25 25 25 200 7.2.4 PHASE 4: PLANTING PLAN FOR WETLAND RESTORATION AREA 1 gal. 1 gal. Stakes 1 gal. 1 gal. stakes The same species used in the Wetland Enhancement Area will be used in the Wetland Restoration Area. Plant numbers, based on 5 -foot on- center spacing are shown in Table 2. 11 TABLE 2: PLANTING SCHEDULE FOR 1,122 SF WETLAND RESTORATION AREA Plants Number Size Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata 7 Pacific ninebark Physocarpus capitatus 10 Red -osier dogwood Cornus stolonifera 7 Nootka rose Rosa nutkana 10 TOTAL 34 1 gal. 1 gal. 1 gal. 1 gal. 7.2.5 PHASE 5: PLANTING PLAN FOR BUFFER. RESTORATION AREAS A total of 154 trees and 1,263 shrubs will be planted within the buffer restoration /enhancement area illustrated in Mitigation Areas graphic in Appendix 4, as shown in Table 3. Planting will occur at approximate 5 -foot on- center spacing for shrubs; trees will be planted randomly at approximately 15 -foot intervals. Currently vegetated areas, such as the wetland buffer at the northwest corner and within the stream buffer adjacent to the existing residence, will be cleared of invasive species, specifically Himalayan blackberry, and inter - planted; no trees, whether native or non - native will be cleared from these buffer areas. Specific plant locations will be determined in the field by the supervising biologist. The plant quantities provided in Table 3 shall be planted within 1,000 square foot polygons as shown; total plant numbers are calculated based on 30,811 square feet total. TABLE 3: PLANTING SCHEDULE WITHIN 30,811 SF BUFFER RESTORATION /ENHANCEMENT AREAS Plants Trees Western red cedar Chokecherry Big -leaf maple TOTAL Shrubs Salmonberry Red -osier dogwood Pacific ninebark Western crabapple Douglas spirea Clustered rose Red - flowering currant TOTAL Groundcover Swordfern TOTAL Thuja plicata Prunus virginiana Acer macrophyllum Rubus spectabilis Corpus stolonifera Physocarpus capitatus Malus fusca Spiraea douglasii Rosa pisocarpa Ribes sanguineum Polystichum munitum Number (per 1,000 sf) 2 2 1 Total 62 62 31 6 154 7 5 5 5 5 7 7 216 154 154 154 154 216 216 41 1,263 Size 2 gal. 2 gal. 2 gal. 1 gal. 1 gal. 1 gal. 1 gal. 1 gal. 1 gal. 1 gal. 20 616 1 gal. 20 616 7.2.6 POST INSTALLATION MEASURES Following installation of plants as described above, the entire buffer restoration /enhancement area with the exception of areas noted above with existing tree cover will be mulched with a minimum of 3 inches of Animal- 17 Friendly Hogfuel or its equivalent to reduce competition from weeds and retain moisture in the soil. In the exception areas, mulch rings will be placed around all newly - installed plants. Permanent transects will be established to divide the enhancement areas to aid in developing as -built plans and for future monitoring. Overview photographs will be taken as well as photos from either end of the monitoring transects. Five nest boxes (details to be determined) will be placed in the wetland enhancement area. A split -rail or 3 -foot cyclone fence will be placed around the buffer and sensitive areas signage will be placed at 50 -foot intervals. 7.3 PER STANDARDS When evaluated against monitoring data, performance standards are used to determine the relative success of the mitigation project. Failure to meet these general minimum standards throughout the monitoring period will result in implementation of contingency measures. Performance standards for the buffer enhancement areas are as shown in Table 4. TABLE 4: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR WETLAND & BUFFER RESTORATION AREAS Criterion Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Plant Cover (%) N/A 20 - 30 40 - 70 70 - 90 100 Native woody plant cover ( %) N/A 20 - 30 40 - 60 60 - 80 80 - 85 Plant survivorship 100 Species diversity (see below) Non - native, invasive plant cover ( %) (see below) 7.3.1 PLANT COVER 50 The cover standard for installed trees and shrubs within the wetland enhancement areas will be as shown in Table 5. TABLE 5: COVER STANDARD IN WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AREA Criterion Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Installed shrub cover ( %) N/A 10 20 30 30 Plant cover goals both within wetland enhancement and buffer restoration areas will be achieved through a combination of planted material and volunteer native species. 7.3.2 SPECIES DIVERSITY The following minimum standards apply to species diversity of plants, including both planted and volunteer native species, within the various strata: Trees = 2 species Shrubs = 4 species Ground covers =1 species To meet this standard, at least one half of the total number of each planted species must be present at the end of the monitoring period, regardless of plant cover from volunteers. 7.3.3 CONTROL OF NOXIOUS AND INVASIVE SPECIES Noxious weeds (identified on state noxious weeds lists) in the buffer areas must be entirely and properly eliminated and disposed of prior to installation of native material, and may not exceed 10% cover throughout the 1A monitoring period. No attempt will be made to control ubiquitous reed canarygrass or creeping buttercup in the wetland enhancement areas as such an attempt would be futile. 7.4 MONITORING An as -built plan will be submitted to the city immediately following planting. Monitoring shall continue for a period of five years according to the schedule in Table 6. Year 1 of the mitigation monitoring period will commence the quarter following the installation. Overview photos will be taken from the same vantage points each year to document overall appearance of the mitigation area before, during, and after construction. A full plant count will be conducted during the first fall monitoring event following installation to ensure that installed plants have survived planting shock. Thereafter, cover monitoring will use the permanent transects installed after initial planting. TABLE 6: MAINTENANCE & MONITORING SCHEDULES Year Maintenance Visits 1 Between January 1 and March 1 AND Between April 1 and June 1 AND Between July 1 and September 30 AND Between October 15 and December 30 2 - 5 Between April 1 and June 1 AND Between July 1 and September 30 Monitoring Between July 1 and September 31 Report due October 30 Between July 1 and September 31 October 30 7.5 MAINTENANCE PLAN Over the monitoring period, a rigorous semiannual maintenance program will be implemented according to the schedule provided in Table 6 or as needed to eliminate undesirable plants and to protect shrubs and small trees from competition from weeds or predation, repair fences, repair or replace any buffer and interpretive signage, replace dead plants, etc. An informal notification (e.g. email correspondence) of completion of this task shall be provided to the city within 2 weeks of each maintenance visit. A formal monitoring report shall be submitted to the city. 7.6 CONTINGENCY PLAN In order to provide for the contingency that performance standards may not be met during the five -year monitoring period, it may be necessary to provide supplemental plantings. Plant attrition can be remedied by evaluating the cause, and replanting with the same or a more appropriate and approved species. The landscaping contractor should guarantee 100 percent survivorship for one year from initial planting for losses due to defects in materials or workmanship. All plants that are used for replacement must meet or exceed the standards of the initial plantings. The causes of any mortality will be evaluated, and, based upon the results of this evaluation, alternate species selection may occur, predation barriers installed, or additional mulch applied. All dead plants will be replaced with the same or a more suitable species throughout the monitoring period. Replacement will be subject to the same conditions and be made in the same manner as specified for the original planting. 8. REPORT LIMITATIONS The information contained herein is, to our knowledge, correct and accurate. It should be recognized that the establishment of wetland boundaries is an inexact science. Wetlands are, by definition, transition areas, and wetland boundaries often change with time. The presence of wetland indicators may also vary depending on the time of year. Additionally, individual professionals may disagree on the precise location of wetland boundaries or the functions and values or categorization of a wetland. All stream and wetland boundaries, classifications, and buffer widths should be considered subject to change until reviewed and approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies with jurisdiction. We recommend obtaining jurisdictional approval before completing final site plans and /or beginning construction activities. We are not responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. 14 Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope -of -work, we warrant that this study was conducted in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and criteria in effect at the time of this study. The results and conclusions of this report represent the authors' best professional judgment based upon information provided by the project proponent and information obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. 1.5 APPENDIX 1: HISTORICAL PHOTOGRAPHS & MAPS Photo 1: 1936 (Courtesy King County GIS); note the ditched stream through the center of site as well as what appear to be additional ditches. Photo 2: 1963 WSDOT survey showing site features; note that the stream was still ditched. The portion of the stream east of the culvert has been relocated from the north /south orientation to its current orientation, flowing northeasterly from the culvert; this relocation occurred prior to 1998 (photo available but not provided here). A southern entrance to the site was clearly present in 1963 and mapped by WSDOT. 1f a. Photo 3: 2002 (Courtesy King County GIS). Note that the tree line bordering the wetland shown here in 2002 is essentially unchanged in subsequent photographs but the forested area at the northwest corner is smaller in the photograph below. Photo 4: 2005 (Courtesy King County GIS). Note the structures identified by WSDOT in Photo 2, above, that the city required the applicant to demolish. Note also progression of fill between this photo, taken shortly after Mr. Becker purchased the property in September 2004, and the following photo taken in 2007. 17 .97X11(w0 .1a`umy Photo 5: 2007 (Courtesy King County GIS). Note the increased impervious surfaces and removal of blackberries on either side of stream at southern end of site. 1R APPENDIX 2: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS 19 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133id Street City /County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6, 2009 Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 1 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section, Township Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope ( %): 2 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: PFOC Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year'? Yes jffi No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil Q, or Hydrology 0 significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes j$ No❑ Are Vegetation 0, Soil O, or Hydrology 0 naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes j$ No 0 Yes 21 No 0 Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes El No D Remarks: 20 ves . 30 yes FACW VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 36 sf) ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (NB) 1. Salix lasiandra 20 ves . 30 yes FACW 2. Alnus rubra FAC 3. - 4. Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 50 = Total Cover 1. ) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover FAC FACU species x 4 = 60 ves T_ No UPL species x 5 = 1. Equisetum arvense Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Phalaris arundinaceae FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 Dominance Test is >50% 0 Prevalence Index is 53.0' 0 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 0 Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' 0 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. 6 9 10 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 65 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes N No 1. 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 30 = Total Cover Remarks: SOIL Sampling Point: 1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of Indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 0 -18 10YR3/1 100 Silt loam Water Table Present? Yes 0 No ❑ Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No Q Depth (inches): surface (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': ❑ Histosol (A1) Q Sandy Redox (S5) El 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) Q Stripped Matrix (S6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) Q Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Q Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) El Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Q Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: • Hydric Soil Present? Yes El No ❑ Depth (inches): Remarks: Auger and shovel HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) ❑ Surface Water (A1) Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (89) (MLRA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) la Saturation (A3) Q Salt Crust (B11) Q Drainage Patterns (B10) Q Water Marks (B1) Q Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Q Dry- Season Water Table (C2) Q Sediment Deposits (B2) Q Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Q Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q Geomorphic Position (D2) Q Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Q Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Q Shallow Aquitard (D3) Q Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC- Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (01) (LRR A) Q Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes Q No El Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes E No El Water Table Present? Yes 0 No ❑ Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No Q Depth (inches): surface (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133n' Street City/County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6. 2009 Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 2 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section, Township Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope ( %): 15 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 21 No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes Q No0 Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Q No Q Yes Q No Q Yes Q No 21 Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes Q No E Remarks: FAC 2. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 36 sf) ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) 1. Alnus rubra 70 yes FAC 2. 3. 4. Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 70 = Total Cover t. ) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover FAC FACU species x 4 = T No UPL species x 5 = 1. Equisetum arvense Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3, 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Q Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. 8 9 10 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: T = Total Cover 80 yes FACU • Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes El No Ei 1. Rubus armeniacus 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 20 80 = Total Cover Remarks: SOIL Sampling Point: 2 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) , Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 0-6 10YR3/2 100 Sandv loam 6 -12 10YR 4/2 100 Sandy loam 12 -18 5Y 4/3 90 10YR 4/4 10 RM PL Sift loam Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': Q Histosol (Al) Q Sandy Redox (S5) Q 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) Q Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Q Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes p No El Depth (inches): Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required* check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) ❑ Surface Water (A1) Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) Q Salt Crust (B11) ❑ Drainage Patterns (B10) Q Water Marks (B1) Q Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Q Dry- Season Water Table (C2) Q Sediment Deposits (82) Q Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Q Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Q Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) Q Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Q FAC- Neutral Test (D5) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Q Stunted or Stressed Plants (01) (LRR A) Q Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No El Water Table Present? Yes Q No $a Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes el No 0 Depth (inches): 16 (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133id Street City/County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6, 2009 Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 3 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section, Township Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope ( %): 4 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes El No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation la, Soil la, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? Yes Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes El NoD Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 12 No Q Yes Q Nola Yes Q No El Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes Q No E Remarks: 4. = Total Cover VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: — 36 sf) % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A/B) 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x 5 = 1. Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Q Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10 11. T= Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes II No E. 1. Rubus armeniacus* 20 - 100 yes FACU 2. 20 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 80 Remarks: Blackberry growing through hogfuel and monotypic in reference area SOIL Sampling Point: 3 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 +14-0 Hoofuel 0 -16+ 10YR 4/2 100 Silt loam Saturation Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): 16 (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: On same slope as DP 2 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': Q Histosol (Al) Q Sandy Redox (S5) Q 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) El Stripped Matrix (S6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2) Q Black Histic (A3) Q Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Q Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Q Depleted Matrix (F3) Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Q Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (51) Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes Q No E Depth (inches): Remarks: Backhoe pit HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Q Surface Water (Al) Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Q High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Q Saturation (A3) Q Salt Crust (B11) Q Drainage Patterns (B10) Q Water Marks (B1) Q Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Q Dry- Season Water Table (C2) El Sediment Deposits (B2) Q Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Q Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Q Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q Geomorphic Position (D2) Q Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Q Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Q Shallow Aquitard (D3) Q Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Q FAC- Neutral Test (D5) Q Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Q Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) El Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Q Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Q No El Water Table Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): 16 (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: On same slope as DP 2 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133i° Street City/County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6. 2009 Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 4 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope ( %): 4 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes El No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation El, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? Yes Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes Q No0 Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes la No El. Yes Ei No Q Yes la No Q j� Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes E No l� Remarks: 3. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 36 sf) % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66 (NB) 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply bv: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x 5 = 1. Equisetum arvense 10 yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Epilobium ciliatum 10 yes FACW - Prevalence Index = B/A = 3, 4, Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Q Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. $ 9 10 11. T = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 1. Rubus armeniacus 20 yes FACU 2. — 60 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: Blackberry growing through hogfuel and monotypic in reference area SOIL Sampling Point: 4 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 0-6 10YR 3/1 100 Silt loam 6 -10 10YR 4/2 80 10YR 4/4 20 C M Silt loam 10 -16+ 7.5YR 4/4 100 sandy loam Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Marginal soils and hydrology but included in delineated area because edge extends off -site but is part of the larger wetland. 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Q Histosol (A1) Q Sandy Redox (S5) Q 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) Q Stripped Matrix (S6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2) Q Black Histic (A3) Q Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) 0 Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Q Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Q Depleted Matrix (F3) Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Q Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes ED No II Depth (inches): Remarks: Backhoe pit HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) 0 Surface Water (A1) Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 0 High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Q Saturation (A3) Q Salt Crust (B11) Q Drainage Patterns (B10) Q Water Marks (B1) Q Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) 0 Dry- Season Water Table (C2) Q Sediment Deposits (B2) Q Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Q Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Q Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q Geomorphic Position (D2) Q Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Q Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Q Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC- Neutral Test (D5) Q Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Q Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) 0 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Q Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No Q Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ❑ Water Table Present? Yes Q No J$ Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes 0 No Q Depth (inches): >16" (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Marginal soils and hydrology but included in delineated area because edge extends off -site but is part of the larger wetland. WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133id Street Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker Investigator(s): Celeste Botha City/County: Tukwila State: WA Sampling Date: April 6. 2009 Sampling Point: 5 Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope (%): 4 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes El No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation El, Soil El, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? Yes Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes El No❑ Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology El naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Q No Q Yes Q No El Yes Q No Q • the Sampled Area within a Wetland? n Yes J__.l No E Remarks: = Total Cover Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: — 36 sf) % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A/B) 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiplv by: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x 5 = 1. Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Q Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. 8 9 10. 11 T = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes II No El 1. Rubus armeniacus* 20 — 100* ves FACU 2 20 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 80 • Remarks: Blackberry growing through hogfuel and monotypic in reference area SOIL Sampling Point: 5 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe' Loci +2 - 0 Hoqfuel 0-16+ 10YR 3/2 100 loam Saturation Present? Yes Q No rEl Depth (inches): >16" (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Marginal soils and hydrology but included in delineated area because edge extends off -site but is part of the larger wetland. 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': Q Histosol (Al) Q Sandy Redox (S5) Q 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) Q Stripped Matrix (S6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2) El Black Histic (A3) Q Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Q Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Q Depleted Matrix (F3) Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Q Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, 0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes n No izi Depth (inches): Remarks: Badkhoe pit HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Q Surface Water (Al) Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Q High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 0 Saturation (A3) Q Salt Crust (B11) Q Drainage Patterns (B10) Q Water Marks (B1) Q Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Q Dry- Season Water Table (C2) Q Sediment Deposits (B2) Q Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Q Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Q Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q Geomorphic Position (D2) Q Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Q Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Q Shallow Aquitard (D3) Q Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Q FAC- Neutral Test (D5) Q Surface Soil Cracks (B6) 0 Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Q Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Q Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No Q Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No E Water Table Present? Yes Q No El Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes Q No rEl Depth (inches): >16" (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Marginal soils and hydrology but included in delineated area because edge extends off -site but is part of the larger wetland. WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133id Street City/County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6, 2009 Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 6 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section Township Range: Landform (hilisiope, terrace, etc.): level Local relief (concave, convex, none): level Slope ( %): 2 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: PFOC Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ®, No 0 (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes J$ No❑ Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? NQ (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes EL No 0 Yes El No 0 Yes El No 0 Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes E No n Remarks: 70 ves FAC VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 36 sf) ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66 (NB) 1. Alnus rubra 70 ves FAC 2. 3. 4. Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 70 = Total Cover 1. ) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply bv: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover FACW FACU species x 4 = T No 60 yes T_ no UPL species x 5 = 1. Phalaris arundinaceae Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Ranunculus repens FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Conium maculatum FAC+ 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 Dominance Test is >50% 0 Prevalence Index is 53.0' El Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 0 Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' 0 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. 8 9 10 11 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 60 = Total Cover 10 ves — FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes El No ri 1. Rubus armeniacus 2 % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 10 = Total Cover Remarks: SOIL Sampling Point: 6 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks. (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 0 -10 10YR3/1 100 loam 10 -20 10YR 3/2 100 loam Saturation Present? Yes 181 No Q Depth (inches): 10 (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': Q Histosol (A1) Q Sandy Redox (S5) Q 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) Q Stripped Matrix (S6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2) Q Black Histic (A3) Q Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Q Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Q Depleted Matrix (F3) Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Q Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and 0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) 21 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes 1231 No Q Depth (inches): Remarks: Pit excavated with backhoe HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Q Surface Water (A1) Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA'1, 2, Q High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Q Salt Crust (B11) 0 Drainage Patterns (B10) El Water Marks (B1) El Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) 0 Dry- Season Water Table (C2) Q Sediment Deposits (B2) Q Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Q Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 0 Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q Geomorphic Position (D2) 0 Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Q Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Q Shallow Aquitard (D3) Q Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 0 FAC- Neutral Test (D5) 0 Surface Soil Cracks (86) Q Stunted or Stressed Plants (01) (LRR A) Q Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Q Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes Q No 21 Depth (inches): . Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes El Non Water Table Present? Yes Q No El Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes 181 No Q Depth (inches): 10 (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133`1 Street City/County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6, 2009 Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 8 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope ( %): 15 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes El No El (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation El, Soil El, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? Yes Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 21 No❑ Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Q No El Yes Q No Q Yes Q No Q Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes 0 No E Remarks: All vegetation eliminated 2. VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 1. 2. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 3. 4. Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (NB) Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size. ) = Total Cover 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = 1. Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Q Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. $ 9 10 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) T = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation (� Present? Yes J l No o 1. 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 = Total Cover Remarks: As noted above, vegetation not present due to fill material SOIL Sampling Point: 8 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 +6 - 0 gravel /rock fill 0 -10 2.5Y 3/2 100 sand 10 — 16+ 10YR 4/2 100 loam (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': ❑ Histosol (Al) Q Sandy Redox (S5) Q 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) Q Stripped Matrix (S6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2) Q Black Histic (A3) Q Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Q Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Q Depleted Matrix (F3) Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Q Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes a No El Depth (inches): Remarks: Pit excavated with backhoe HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required. check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Q Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Q High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) Q Salt Crust (B11) Q Drainage Patterns (B10) ❑ Water Marks (B1) Q Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) ❑ Dry- Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (B2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Q Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q Geomorphic Position (D2) Q Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Q FAC- Neutral Test (D5) Q Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Q Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No Q Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes n No El Water Table Present? Yes 0 No Q Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133m Street Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker Investigator(s): Celeste Botha City/County: Tukwila State: WA Sampling Date: April 6, 2009 Sampling Point: 9 Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope ( %): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: PFOC Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 21 No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology El significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No❑ Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Q Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Q Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes El No El (� Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes E No 1_..1 Remarks: VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: — 36 sf) ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (NB) 1. Salix lasiandra 100 ves FACW 2. 3• 4. Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 100 = Total Cover 1. ) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply bv: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover FAC FACU species x 4 = 100 yes T_ No UPL species x 5 = 1. Ranunculus repens Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Phalaris arundinaceae FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. 8 9 10 11 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 100 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes E No n 1. 2 % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum = Total Cover Remarks: SOIL Sampling Point: 9 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 0_5 2.5Y 2/2 100 " Silt 5 —16+ 2.5Y 2/2 100 silt Oxidized roots at 5 +" Saturation Present? Yes Q No 0 Depth (inches): 10" (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': Q Histosol (A1) Q Sandy Redox (S5) Q 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) Q Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) Q Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Q Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) lE1 Depleted Matrix (F3) Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Q Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) El Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes E. No l l Depth (inches): Remarks: Auger and shovel HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required. check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) ❑ Surface Water (A1) Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 0 High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Q Saturation (A3) Q Salt Crust (B11) Q Drainage Patterns (B10) ❑ Water Marks (B1) Q Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Q Dry- Season Water Table (C2) Q Sediment Deposits (B2) Q Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Q Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q Geomorphic Position (D2) 0 Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Q Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) El Shallow Aquitard (D3) Q Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Q FAC- Neutral Test (D5) Q Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Q Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) El Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes E No II Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No Q Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes Q No 0 Depth (inches): 10" (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133id Street City /County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6, 2009 Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 10 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope ( %): 2 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes El No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 0, Soil 2:1, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? Yes Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes El No0 Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Q No 13 Yes Q No Q Yes Q No la Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? . 1. Yes No E Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 3. Remarks: All vegetation eliminated 4. Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: — 36 sf) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 1. 2. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 3. 4. Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = 1. Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Q Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. $ 9 10 11 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) T_= Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes II No II 1. 2 % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 = Total Cover Remarks: As noted above, vegetation not present due to fill material SOIL Sampling Point: 10 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % • Type' Loc2 +4' - +2' gravel /rock fill +2' - 0 hogfuel 0 —16+ 10YR 4/2 100 loam (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: ❑ Histosol (A1) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) • ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No El Depth (inches): Remarks: Pit excavated with backhoe; at wetland edge, part in hydric soils and other part (location of flag) JUST outside HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required. check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA ❑ Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (B11) ❑ Drainage Patterns (B10) ❑ Water Marks (B1) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) ❑ Dry- Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (B2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 13 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (B3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (84) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ Iron Deposits (B5) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ FAC- Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ❑ Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes a No lZ Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No 21 Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ❑ Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Part of backhoe pit in hydric and part in non - hydric soils WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133'" Street City/County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6, 2009 Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 11 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): level Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes $l No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes J$ No❑ Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 181 No Q Yes Q No 121 Yes Q No j$ Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes a No E Remarks: FAC 2. Alnus rubra FAC VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: — 36 sf) ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) 1. Populus balsamifera 70 ves 30 y FAC 2. Alnus rubra FAC 3. 4. Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 100 = Total Cover 1. ) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply bv: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover FACW FACU species x 4 = 100 ves UPL species x 5 = 1. Ranunculus repens Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3, 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: El Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. 6 9 10 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 100= Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes E No fi 1. 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum = Total Cover Remarks: SOIL Sampling Point: 11 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 0 -16+ 2.5Y 2/2 100 Silt Water Table Present? Yes Q Nola Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes El No l21 Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': Q Histosol (Al) Q Sandy Redox (S5) Q 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) Q Stripped Matrix (S6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2) Q Black Histic (A3) Cl Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) El Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Q Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Q Depleted Matrix (F3) Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Q Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes Cl No E Depth (inches): Remarks: Auger and shovel HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) El Surface Water (Al) El Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, El High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) El Saturation (A3) El Salt Crust (B11) Q Drainage Patterns (B10) El Water Marks (B1) Q Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) El Dry- Season Water Table (C2) Q Sediment Deposits (B2) Q Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Q Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Q Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q Geomorphic Position (D2) Q Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Q Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Q Shallow Aquitard (D3) Q Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Q FAC- Neutral Test (D5) Q Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Q Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Q Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Q Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes Q Nola Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Q No E Water Table Present? Yes Q Nola Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes El No l21 Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Plot next to stream where water table in stream — 3 ft. below soil surface WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133id Street City/County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6, 2009 ApplicanUOwner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 12 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section, Township Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): level Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: PFOR Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 181 No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 181 No0 Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 21 No Q Hydric Soil Present? Yes181 No Q Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ja No Q Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes E No n Remarks: Marginal but included in wetland because of evidence of overflow flooding which may be frequent 1. Populus balsamifera VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 36 sf) ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) 1. Populus balsamifera 80 yes 20 ves FAC 2. Alnus rubs FAC 3. 4. Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 100 = Total Cover 1. ) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover FACW FACU species x 4 = 25 yes 30 ves UPL species x 5 = 1. Ranunculus repens Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Phalaris arundinaceae FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' El Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants,,, " Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. 8 9 10 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 55= Total Cover T_ no T no T_ = Total Cover FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes El No ri 1. Rubus armeniacus 2. Solanum dulcamara FAC % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks: SOIL Sampling Point: 12 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confine Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 0 -16+ 2.5Y 3/2 100 sandy loam Water Table Present? Yes 0 No Q Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Q Histosol (A1) Q Sandy Redox (S5) • Q Histic Epipedon (A2) Q Stripped Matrix (S6) Q Black Histic (A3) Q Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': Q 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Red Parent Material (TF2) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. • Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Q Depleted Matrix (F3) Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Q Redox Dark Surface (F6) Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7) El Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes E No Depth (inches): Remarks: Auger and shovel Soil indicators marginal but evidence of flooding from sediments and mounding HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Q Surface Water (A1) Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Q High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Q Saturation (A3) Q Salt Crust (B11) Q Drainage Patterns (B10) Q Water Marks (B1) Q Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Q Dry- Season Water Table (C2) Q Sediment Deposits (B2) Q Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Q Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Q Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q Geomorphic Position (D2) 0 Algal Mat or Crust (B4) 0 Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 0 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Q Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Q FAC- Neutral Test (D5) Q Surface Soil Cracks (B6) 0 Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Q Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Q Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes E. No ri Water Table Present? Yes 0 No Q Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Plot next to stream where over -flow flooding evident WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133id Street Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker Investigator(s) : Celeste Botha City /County: Tukwila State: WA Sampling Date: April 6, 2009 Sampling Point: 13 Section, Township Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): level Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope ( %): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes )$ No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Q, Soil la, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? Yes Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes Q No❑ Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Q No Q Yes Q No Q Yes Q No Et Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes 1=E No El Remarks: All vegetation eliminated 2. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: — 36 sf) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 1. 2. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 3. 4. Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = 1 Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Q Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No 1. 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 = Total Cover Remarks: As noted above, vegetation not present due to fill material SOIL Sampling Point: 13 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of Indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvpe' . Loc2 +8° - 0 gravel/rock fill 0_9 10YR 3/2 100 sandy loam some small concretions 9 — 16+ 5Y 4/1 100 loam (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Q Histosol (A1) Q Sandy Redox (S5) . Q 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) Q Stripped Matrix (S6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2) El Black Histic (A3) Q Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Hydrogen Suede (A4) Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Q Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Q Depleted Matrix (F3) El Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Q Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Q Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes E No D Depth (inches): Remarks: Pit excavated with backhoe HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) El Surface Water (Al) Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Q High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 0 Saturation (A3) El Salt Crust (B11) Q Drainage Patterns (B10) 0 Water Marks (B1) El Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Q Dry- Season Water Table (C2) Q Sediment Deposits (B2) Q Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Q Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Q Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) El Geomorphic Position (D2) Q Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Q Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Q Shallow Aquitard (D3) 0 Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Q FAC- Neutral Test (D5) Q Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Q Stunted or Stressed Plants (131) (LRR A) Q Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) 0 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes II No E. Water Table Present? Yes Q No Q Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes El No Q Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133rd Street City /County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6, 2009 Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 14 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section, Township Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): level Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope ( %): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Q No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? Yes Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes El No❑ Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Q No Q Yes Q No Q Yes Q Nola Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes Q No El Remarks: All vegetation eliminated Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 3. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: - 36 sf) % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 1. 2. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 3. 4. Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (NB) = Total Cover Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACW FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x 5 = 1. Ranunculus repens T no Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Q Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Cl Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' El Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. - 6. 7. 8 9 10 11. T = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No 0 1. Rubus armeniacus T no 2. — T = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 Remarks: As noted above, vegetation not present due to fill material SOIL Sampling Point: 14 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 +9 - +6 Hogfuel +6 - 0 Gravel fill 0 - 6 10YR 3/1 100 silt loam 6 —10 2.5Y 3/2 100 silt loam 10 —16+ 5GY 4/1 100 silty clay loam 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': ❑ Histosol (A1) 11 Sandy Redox (S5) A 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) II Red Parent Material (TF2) 0 Black Histic (A3) II Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) 0 Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) II Depleted Matrix (F3) a Thick Dark Surface (Al2) II Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and 0 Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) II Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) 11 Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes II No E Depth (inches): Remarks: Pit excavated with backhoe HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) A Surface Water (A1) ❑ Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 11 High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) II Saturation (A3) Q Salt Crust (B11) a Drainage Patterns (B10) ❑ Water Marks (B1) a Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) II Dry- Season Water Table (C2) II Sediment Deposits (B2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 17 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) II Drift Deposits (B3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) 17 Geomorphic Position (D2) II Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Q. Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 11 Shallow Aquitard (D3) 11 Iron Deposits (B5) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) 11 FAC- Neutral Test (D5) 11 Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) II Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) II Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes Q No El Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes II No E Water Table Present? Yes [j No El Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes 11 No El Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133id Street City/County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6. 2009 Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 15 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section, Township Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): level Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope ( %): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes El No El (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 21, Soil jE, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? Yes Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes j0 No0 Are Vegetation 11, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Q No El Yes Q No 21 Yes Q No El Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes n No El Remarks: All vegetation eliminated 4. = Total Cover VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: — 36 sf) % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (NB) 1. 2. 3. 4. = Total Cover Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) UPL species x 5 = 1. Ranunculus repens T no FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. 4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Q Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.0' Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. $ 9 10 11. T = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes n No E 1. Rubus armeniacus* 10 — 90* yes FACU 2. 10_ 90 = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 (currently) Remarks: As noted above, vegetation not present due to fill material; area reportedly dominated by Himalayan blackberry prior to clearing. SOIL Sampling Point: 15 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 +8 - +6 Hoqfuel Filter fabric underlies hoqfuel +6 - 0 Gravel fill 0_6 2.5Y 3/2 100 silt loam 6 —12 5Y 2.5/2 100 silt loam 12 — 18+ 5Y 2.5/2 90 10YR 4/6 10 silt loam 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': El Histosol (Al) Q Sandy Redox (S5) Q 2 cm Muck (A10) Q Histic Epipedon (A2) Q Stripped Matrix (S6) Q Red Parent Material (TF2) Q Black Histic (A3) Q Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Hydrogen Suede (A4) Q Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Q Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Q Depleted Matrix (F3) El Thick Dark Surface (Al2) El Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Q Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) El Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No E. Depth (inches): Remarks: Pit excavated with backhoe HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Q Surface Water (Al) Q Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA 0 Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, Q High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) Q Saturation (A3) Q Salt Crust (B11) Q Drainage Patterns (B10) Q Water Marks (B1) Q Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Q Dry- Season Water Table (C2) Q Sediment Deposits (B2) Q Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Q Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Q Drift Deposits (B3) Q Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q Geomorphic Position (D2) Q Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Q Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Q Shallow Aquitard (D3) Q Iron Deposits (B5) Q Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Q FAC- Neutral Test (D5) Q Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Q Stunted or Stressed Plants (01) (LRR A) Q Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Q Other (Explain in Remarks) Q Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Q Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes Q No la Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No E. Water Table Present? Yes Q No D31 Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes la No Q Depth (inches): 16 (includes capillary fringe) . Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 4300 S. 133id Street City/County: Tukwila Sampling Date: April 6. 2009 Applicant/Owner: Barry Becker State: WA Sampling Point: 16 Investigator(s): Celeste Botha Section, Township Range: Landform (hillsiope, terrace, etc.): level Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 0 Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Not mapped NWI classification: none Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes El No El (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation 131, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q significantly disturbed? Yes Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes la No❑ Are Vegetation Q, Soil Q, or Hydrology Q naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes Q No 21 Hydric Soil Present? Yes Q No j$ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes El No j$ Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes n No E Remarks: Marginal but included in wetland because of evidence of overflow flooding which may be frequent 1. Alnus rubra 30 yes FAC VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: — 36 sf) ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (AIB) 1. Alnus rubra 30 yes FAC 2. 3. 4. Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 = Total Cover 1. ) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 2. 3. OBL species x 1 = 4. FACW species x 2 = 5. FAC species x 3 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) = Total Cover FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = 1. Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. 4. _ Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Q Dominance Test is >50% Q Prevalence Index is 53.01 Q Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Q Wetland Non - Vascular Plants' Q Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydre soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 5. 6. 7. 6 9. 10 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No Ei 100 yes FACU 1. Rubus armeniacus* 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 = Total Cover Remarks: *Note: blackberry cover extrapolated from aerials and owner's statements; currently no vegetation due to fitter fabric. SOIL Sampling Point: 16 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm Depth Matrix Redox Features the absence of indicators.) Texture Remarks (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 3_0 hogfuel filter fabric beneath hogfuel 0 - 6 10YR 3/3 100 loam 6 —16+ 5Y 2.5/2 100 sandy loam (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: 'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':. El Histosol (Al) El Sandy Redox (S5) El 2 cm Muck (A10) II Histic Epipedon (A2) II Stripped Matrix (S6) El Red Parent Material (TF2) II Black Histic (A3) II Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) El Other (Explain in Remarks) El Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) El Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) II Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) El Depleted Matrix (F3) El Thick Dark Surface (Al2) El Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and El Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) E] Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, El Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) El Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No El Depth (inches): Remarks: Auger and shovel , Soil moist due to restrictive layer (filter fabric) which retards evaporation HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) El Surface Water (Al) El Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA El Water- Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, El High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) El Saturation (A3) El Salt Crust (B11) El Drainage Patterns (B10) Q Water Marks (B1) El Aquatic Invertebrates (813) El Dry- Season Water Table (C2) El Sediment Deposits (B2) El Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) El Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) El Drift Deposits (B3) El Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) El Geomorphic Position (D2) El Algal Mat or Crust (B4) El Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) El Shallow Aquitard (D3) II Iron Deposits (B5) El Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) El FAC- Neutral Test (D5) El Surface Soil Cracks (B6) El Stunted or Stressed Plants (01) (LRR A) El Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) El Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) El Other (Explain in Remarks) El Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) El Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes El No 0 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No El Water Table Present? Yes El No El Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes El No 0 Depth (inches): (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Plot next to stream where water level in stream >3' below soil surface APPENDIX 3: WETLAND AND WATERCOURSE SURVEY (FULL -SIZE COPY ATTACHED) 711 a3 MOS BRASS NORAIVDN Di CASE - RR. amt+ a 2T yB' ffE-ww a CAP IMAM MP EtRIF rte' C1 jrI 7 i 7r' I f 1 -.\ Pin 1 � \s ` 1.4 ` \ rk ltwd ,e�een mra 4 i \ `\ � 1a7b Ane8 y �i ,y .-oral �y ; '1 ♦``\ 13176 Yaredem geed S d -Aa( „ t dti ,'y 7" ® t • } f,s a y. r,f+ f 1 }; r v ,y 1 yi�.tie rNaI i1 .: n r OASIS OF REARM IOW Otteded565552/e5 MP 1 _./ ! --- 1.- - _ E BCbP'�b' F _ - .l-im— ____._- t; tti'dsh9et Z - - -___ art9E TAME eat Dan RAMS [DICE CI warn" wawa mow t7 mine IMOa 177,19 Lo B10'0Y WSJ& B&W UPE Tamp 1 NO. DISZCIICAV DISTANCE Ll Ne921ti•r wax' lY H 601W,fd' E my' LS a 18a045- ww eas' Lo a &mum" w dill!' 15 Smyna—m 4716' &doYm50ft WETLAND SURVEY MAP for ,Mr. Barry Becker Tukwila, Washington LEGAL LJLJI.R 1X1et 471at portion of Lot dB, 18vmaids latmurbm Tracts, as alien to Yokota 10 of Pleb Pope 94, 8coordd of ding County, Wishiagtoh, flag tomb at South 133rd Street, east of d2nd Avenue Staab, tool weigh of the aouth line of Booth 18Sbd Street; together Mb the net of rotated ,lB1d Anne South adjoining, end 81eC22/7 etate bighway right-al-way. JrcaL8 Soar portion of Lot I5, Ioataria Darden nada. as shown In Maras 9 at Plate, Page 96. neon& at ding County, tfanheagtar. and vacated Squire 8lcelei, bearth of Faeir f gk. ExL'�? portion ur f tying waste of Stat. tgghway deeded by /adlteECe No. Wand and auaept &late tngtray rlgbt -ad -way. El b4 ;e co col 13:11 A Partlan of the MN 1/4 of the NE 1/4, sec lS, T 23 N, R 4 E, icing County, Washington Sett= 15, T 23 N, R 4 VICINTY MAP Sp1LF. J NCH - If1 ler APPENDIX 4: CRITICAL AREA IMPACTS (Si. MITIGATION AREAS 72 MGM to rano MSS MOM' a1' CASE - R8 Am • Yr 04 ae-ate t CAP lfHfa/ARP POOP RAW TAME ra co Oa Al RAMOS n sPaao trax ttuo WHIM Q rise Isar 13lt:r•:, �afr mi .-5n 1 ©fIAD7at " •`•;' \ Wetland clearing =1,122 sf 1 ` } 1 a+cu �� . ti APpropmate ♦ extent hogfuel 1111 I 1- >r 1 } =3,324 sf \ 1' woe: ! S•! \ _ ^\.620,. j5 1 Thal portion of Ink 48. ISemide IatmvrLan trade. at =sown to Wade 10 of Plate, Pale 74, &lemon of dill CountJ. Sfaskiagioa, lying aorta of South 133rd Street, end of Med knouts South, and month of the south line of South 13iad Street, tqa dhsr Mb MO fad toff of useatad 6Trd dada= !b aqi NW& and ram auto Jdlmro runt -oP -way. 1110211..2 That portion of Lot 10, Poatmia garde Trade, as e=teera m Volume i of Phta, Pale t4 R cer& at Egg Comity, Iaatrluarao, and vacated again 3 m set, bona trio[ mat o tali Iy ,Ovay deeded by Ordhzattorr 1Oa 8.1 88 sad wept data Menu right -af -way. Impervious buffer impact areas = 10,192 sf (0.23 ac) Iess2,536 sf 1 existing access "11 =7,656sf ' Approximate extent buffer Bearing and hogfuel fit =870 sf (510 sf onsite) SAW or soma taco mar Ammer: WP ;183 • - -'—' S. Llid fbwt a eau?' r --- -- -- - -. - - -- 0 !0 133 Previously Existing Access Drive = 2,536 sf Scab t' • 50 Note: Areas approximate with the exception oftota1 onsite wetland (0.62 ac) and total onsite reduced buffer (0.74 ac) I M PACTS TOTAL BUFFER IMPACTS = 11,850 SF TOTAL DIRECT WETLAND IMPACTS =1,122 SF Note: All buffer areas shown are reduced by 50% from qty of Tukwila standard buffer widths CO A V Co I; ap A Portion of the Atwl/4of the ltl/4, Sec, LS, T 23 N, R 4 E, w,M, King County, Washington Section 15,T2314,A4E YKNTY MAP SCALE feral - tp ONE • L3 HMV lD Talmo miss g+dYracir arCASE - l— am • SET aorf -at&CAP ffBR/ARY 2002 a--a - raKE • Ors • .1'.'- ill ,',7 -7 F'LLT,aioo Ia OffECTION -4 © W 8.19160' 1^100.41• N arae'ss' W -1C /,\ Wetland Restoration area =1,122 sf Nis dg`s 1 \ 4 DATk \, s4uaao \\1,4.5.237' That portion of Lot 19. Armanida latazrrrbm Treats. as shown he Vatoms.l0 of Plats. Pagel % Saamnta of Sing (bey, faildattion, lying mitt a 4mitt al South 18ard streak east at Und Menus Soak and matt of the south See of &nth tsimd street; tcp slth the groat ball of Heated d &vane sat adjotatrg, and )mil stets highway right - of -may. BacciLD That portico of lat IS la.tarle Carden &eat . as shown la Volume 9l �of Rats, Pepe D6, Regards of Mao County Pacific ., mid vacated awl= Strsek Po t ti?? 9 w _!i Ids Portaaa 4hdt aara Av. 01tl8tla and =apt state hfgheay t-cd'-igy. Wetland Enhancement areas =25,000 sf PAM or ammo maa war MOWS MAP 1/2 '1a• r'r p,as ao a ao ran Note: Areas approximate with the exception of total onsite wetland (0.62 ac) and total onsite reduced buffer (0.74 ac) MITIGATION AREAS Note: All buffer areas shown are reduced by 50% from Qty of Tukwila standard buffer widths Buffer Restoration & Enhancement Areas= 30,811 sf 2 A Portion of the NW 1/4 of the Nf 1/4, Sea 15,T23N,R4E,W.M. King Cotalty, Washington Satan E, T 29 N, R 4 E Azirriitte sr.+r• r slow .. rp CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at '/ 3 C' () 5 , / 3.g 44 for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at 71,/< ,, ( (city), 12 /14. (state), on /9f2$ / /0 20 e, Print Name /21-1.1 Address 941 y (0 S. /3 /sr. r'/ AA Phone Number 2.17 ip - - tr`� e.3� Signature --i� t4 /� "�� ✓� _ ` On this day personally appeared before me executed the foregoing instrument and ackn led d that e/shd ighed the same as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. CI me known to be the individual who SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS P:\Planning Forms\A pplications \SPDirector- 6- 06.doc residin PUBLIC in and for a tale of Washington I uX,A),1c (LJ A ai �1 My Commission expires on December 4, 2006 CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E- mail :: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us SPECIAL PERMISSION DIRECTOR APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P -SP Planner: File Number: Loot-014 Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. 4-/ 3 co s, /3 aE,a_ S7 - 7-4(-) lc /v} LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). 6/3200/_?/ © J 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: 4-122 j Address: 94/ y / / S i •. 1)1. / U,k i- : / 9 " %V6 C' Phone: vZ06, — 4/6- `f C?2 FAX: i.Z6, -- 5'OS" E -mail: Signature: �►�cZ -rte: ` Date: 4 - - Cj 7 P:\Plenning Fence \Applications\SPDirector•6 -06.doc December 4, 2006 icc 5, A F :i r 4 REF- 5ctT1EY ota ptuopcgTy (J><IE .fF%6MM /� IIJpU4rrt.4 RoM 1 - 0 MEDIUM RAN gesi .rr&i- A'1- H - SAITP i2 r 44249E1-1 YS.Thd t jcl '7T RCrtPt � P?-D oftto t,INIs' HotLrP� (6 o ) G,4 j2 E 13PsameArr U4• :.- Hw CTree • cgme Nof0 5E'(Av ' 33 `3T G»'4M- L• Moivuett wi7N BF-NCH AsJart,_srre. P1,441,1 A Portion of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4, Sec. 15, T 23 N, R 4 E, W.M. King County, Washington kg Section S, T 23 N, R 4 E SITE goutbgato q Park • • fS a 4 VICINITY MAP SCALE 1 INCH = 1/4 MILE LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel A =: %fi 7341-OfoO- 0722- That portion of Lot 48, Riverside Interurban Tracts, as shown in Volume 10 of Plats, Page 74, Records of King County, Washington, lying north of South 133rd Street, east of 42nd Avenue South, and south of the south line of South 132nd Street; together with the west half of vacated 43rd Avenue South adjoining, and EXCEPT state highway right -of -way. Parcel .13 ,2C6- I3- 1-0-0I3 That portion of Lot 18, Fostoria Garden Tracts, as shown in Volume 9 of Plats, Page 95, Records of King County, Washington, and vacated Squire Street, lying north of Pacific Highway, EXCEPT the portion thereof lying east of State Highway deeded by Ordinance No. 618285 and except state highway right -of -way. ' Dai=:LQ,rTl<' ] r ALO( LEGEND A FOUND BRASS MONUMENT IN CASE — FEB. 2002 • SET 5/8" RE —BAR & CAP FEBRUARY 2002 x —x— FENCE CURVE TABLE NO. DELTA RADIUS LENG1H C1 16'08'21" 570.00 160.56 C2 5758'00" 115.80 11Z16 C3 570'01' 985.37 88.86 LINE TABLE NO. DIRECTION DISTANCE L I N 09 '06'00" E 28.30' L2 N 8056'45" E 67,90' L3 N 764045" W 68.51' L4 N 62V725" W 61.85' L5 S 5078'45° W 47.06' cL DATA: R- 150.80' 0 =41'29'38" L =109.21' 0 BASIS OF BEARING: KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S MAP i N 7534:047 - - - _-- 24j 93 L2 l3 38.954. • A Parcel No 734080 -0722 1.005 ACRES 13136 Macadam Road S. z 81.88' C3 18.90' ------- 50 7 0L2 4. 1143 Y 40 WETLAND ,BUFFER (REDUCED 5D8 v o;& .`Ip�Re eaRase ;fa. r' com' W 4, ▪ b �. � 1 e YA14. W J. .1Q, Y +D,.I CL DATA: 8 =150.80' 0 =57'58'00" \L=152•57' ♦ ♦ , +vaEVEL 2,472.177 rvI W 4, W .1, 4, _w W S 8952'15' E - 156.67 5p5)) 5 89'52'15- E _� S. 133rd Street 314.72' 0 50 150 Scale 1" = 50 ft WETLAND SURVEY MAP for Mr. Barry Becker Tukwila, Washington LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel A That portion of Lot 48, Riverside Interurban Tracts, as shown in Volume 10 of Plats, Page 74, Records of King County, Washington, lying north of South 133rd Street, east of 42nd Avenue South, and south of the south line of South 132nd Street; together with the west half of vacated 43rd Avenue South adjoining, and EXCEPT state highway right -of -way. Parcel B That portion of Lot 18, Fostoria Garden Tracts, as shown in Volume 9 of Plats, Page 95, Records of King County, Washington, and vacated Squire Street, lying north of Pacific Highway, EXCEPT the portion thereof lying east of State Highway deeded by Ordinance No. 618285 and except state highway right -of -way. co 00 00 m 0 0 bo .E F;)"..4 A Portion of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4, Sec. 15, T 23 N, R 4 E, W.M. King County, Washington Section 15, T 23 N, R 4 E SITE �) $outl,gate Park °> an x i f a a r VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1 INCH = 1/4 MILE r", r-7 1,N [ � COMtt U Inf 7 f r'r t .4_40 04 11111111111111KNIIII _ -_,—.64pHotz.4z4siNe4.144 Zrilf-Alr44174,--ST4414'jcl { Raanosir.1 , ?M.1.11- LZVEL, CIA.r-XAE- ST oW01°. tft& ff= 11-oft E.- 1:7k(1-161HT- ei.1 - LF-AiRL-Ce. L-OLJ eAr."2e.- Ay kJ c„.0/410,6-r Hou,56s At.cA/6, gAsi RALF- gx/srimel /aq"■-/ HoUs.a. R COMMUNiT1 DEVELOFt:.,,,Isa A2.01 rf2O-PPE R4(1`1 C4421PE1-1 - 1 0.7.) IA) enApo. -ro 19. CiONCoMelms 6/ra. ft4614/ /".,...50c,ov t3,.c...r4::R 142e)Fra42r1 eeik/Ac4pAm Le.c, pacww, I 3S p,o '5'-/r --> NW s7- T1J K ( LEGEND B FOUND BRASS MONUMENT IN CASE - FEB. 2002 • SET 5/8' RE -BAR & CAP FEBRUARY 2002 o SEWER MANHOLE O STORM DRAIN MANHOLE mo ROCK WALL BLOCK WALL ff'°7 CRAtEL SURFACE x —x— FENCE • MEE CURVE TABLE NO. DELTA RADIUS LENCRI CI 1608'1' 576100 16056 C2 5758'00' 11580 117.16 02 57001' 98537 88.86 LK4E TABLE NO. DIRECTION DISTANCE L1 N 090600' E 2430' L2 N 805645' £ 67.90' L3 N 7640'45' W 6451' L4 N 620725' W 61.85' 1.5 5 5078'45' W 47.06' rc DAIk 6.150.80' A.41'28'38' 1.109.21 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel A That portion of Lot 48, Riverside Interurban Tracts, as shown in Volume 10 of Plats, Page 74, Records of Kung County, Washington, lying north of South 133rd Street, east of 42nd Avenue South, and south of the south line of South 132nd Street; together with the west half of vacated 43rd Avenue South adjoining, and EXCEPT state highway right -of -way. Parcel B That portion of Lot 18, Fostoria Garden Tracts, as shown in Volume 9 of Plats, Page 95, Records of King County, Washington. and vacated Squire Street, lying north of Pacific Highway. EXCEPT the portion thereof lying east of State Highway deeded by Ordinance No. 818285 and except state highway right -of -way. fl 087: R•150.60' 0.6758'03' 1.152.57 ll SSW U0 6.A 1 E 8' N16 6.47 E8' NE 8.47 E 8' SE 6.42 VERTICAL DATUM: NAND 1988 BENCHMARK 0P17005 -264 WSDOT BRASS DISK IN CONCRETE LOCATED IN THE PAVED AREA BETWEEN THE MAINLINE OF NB SRS AND THE ON -RAMP FROM INTERURBAN AVE. ELEVATION s 25.99 FEET. BANS OF BEARING RING COUNTY ASSESSORS MAP 50 0 r 50 150 Seale 1' • 50 R TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY MAP for Mr. Barry Becker Tukwila, Washington A Portion of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4, Sec. 15, T 23 N, R 4 E, W.M. King County, Washington Section l5;T23N,R4E VICINITY MAP SCALE I INCH a 1/4 MILE MGM • MO MBAR NateE T NG4SE — • 4'f d/r AL-akE • OP s —o— IEMZ CURT TAME EDI =INII I, : '' , 'A fJ,:, i iJ aIEeRJf Ol -or ,••ym® 2111.14;11-1' 1C2111=il JAE TAaiE Ma aIEeRJf MOW N W5Otstr E •W N MOW i our Li N ••• • • !A 3 home' of aa!<' I anew a ._. L._. +•_� -C_ `� __`` \ N. ,~` ' area =1,122 sf Wetland Restoration • ant `_1. asr AMU Thai location of Jot 44 Avenida lalarasban Trnda, as seem la Wilms 10 of Plata, Pao a 74.2aaards at Mew 1. lholdootao, Wog meth a! Booth 133rd Strut, eon at 4bd Awn= aoatb, mad ae dh of the mouth dam of /bath 13ind Street ltth net fast hail of treated tan Amie &u WAWA& ant NOWT much Wow dobt- at'rRY. 11am1B That partfaa of Jot I Platuria Garden !mane, u aims la Wimp 9 of Palo. Ads � Omar s of avidee Street, 1Ati u11hh& Paa�r°°' xa r Liu vilest fbaraaf Mier —t of waded Ordinance R 01n1 and swept dale Jsithty Wetland Enhancement areas = 25,000 sf oAss or same ma MOW ASS9 ,71 s owe E _f S. 1LW fttaat 3•72. .r- .r- 'Zi7dS so 0 so ISO Scab t'.tn0 Note: Areas approximate with the exception of total onsite wetland (0.62 ac) and total onsite reduced buffer (0.74 ac) RESTORATION & ENHANCEMENT AREAS Buffer Restoration &Enhancement Areas= 30,000 sf re" K �*& 4 6.,-C -� • King may, Washington ko a1 A � e 4:2 A wii a A :NE 4 of 14, GrAlfej sG 1.23 R4 W Sertbt g, T8141 4 E