Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-19-2008CITY OF a BURN WASHINGTON City Council Chambers 25 West Main Street HEARING EXAMINER November 19, 2008 5:30 pm Case No: CA008-0001 / Waste Management of WA Applicant: Maureen Mitchell Summit Law Group, 315 Fifth Ave S., Ste 1000 Seattle, WA 98104 Request: A Critical Areas Variance from the minimum 25 foot wide wetland buffer requirement in order to construct a driveway and automobile parking lot. The buffer width would taper from a 25 foot width down to minimally 7 feet over a distance of 45 feet of buffer length. 260 feet north of 2nd Street NW and 300 feet east of H Street NW. - Parcel # 446340-0136. And, with access via 701 2nd Street NW over Parcel # 446340-0090 Page 1 A TY OF UB URN AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM WASHINGTON Agenda Subject: Date of Report: Public Hearin for Application No. CA008-0001 November 10, 2008 Department: Planning, Attachments: Please refer to Exhibit Budget Impact: NA Building and Community List, below - Administrative Recommendation: Hearing Examiner to approve a variance from the Critical Areas Code wetland buffer width and approve a variance from the annual mitigation construction monitoring reporting. Background Summary: OWNER/APPLICANT: Maureen Mitchell, Summit Law Group, on behalf of Waste Management 315 Fifth Ave S. Ste 1000, Seattle, WA 98104 REQUEST: Waste Management requests two critical areas variances: 1) relief from the minimum 25-foot wide wetland buffer requirement for construction of a driveway and automobile parking lot. The proposed buffer width varies from 25 feet to minimally 7 feet over a buffer length of 45 feet, and, 2) relief from the requirement for annual preparation of post construction monitoring reports for three years;, alternatively reporting for two years is proposed. LOCATION: 260 feet north of 2"d Street NW and 300 feet east of H Street Parcel # 446340-0136 with access via 701 2"d Street NW over Parcel # 446340-0090 EXISTING ZONING: C-2, Central Business District EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant, Undeveloped with wetlands COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Downtown DESIGNATION: SEPA STATUS: A Final Determination of Non-significance (DNS) was issued on October 23, 2008 viewe y ounce Committees: viewe y epa me s ivisions: Arts Commission UNCIL COMMITTE ES: Building M&O Airport Finance Cemetery Mayor Hearing Examiner Municipal Serv. Finance Parks Human Services Planning & CD Fire Planning Park Board Public Works Legal Police Planning Comm. Other Public Works Human Resources Action: Committee Approval: il A l Yes No ll f P bli H i C HY HN Counc pprova : or ear ng a u c es o Referred to Until Tabled Until Councilmember: Staff: Karen Scharer Phone: 253-804-3111 & E-mail: kscharer@auburnwa.gov -Meeting Date: Nov. 19, 2008 Item Number: AUBURN* MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Agenda Subject Public Hearing CA008-0001 Hearing Date: 11/19/08 The Comprehensive Plan designations, zoning designations and land uses of the site and surrounding properties are: Comprehensive Plan Zoning Land Use Site Downtown C2 - Central Business District Undeveloped with wetlands North Heavy Industrial M2- Heavy Industrial Warehousing and Distribution Center South Downtown C2 - Central Business District Industrial East Downtown C2 - Central Business District Office/Industrial West Downtown C2 - Central Business District Waste Management Recycling Center EXHIBIT LIST Exhibit 1 Staff Report Exhibit 2 Master Land Use Application /Critical Areas Variance application, submitted August 27, 2008 Exhibit 3 Owner's Written Explanation Supporting Buffer Width Variance Application (7 pages), submitted August 27, 2008 Exhibit 4 Critical Areas Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan by ICF Jones & Stokes, dated August 25, 2008 Exhibit 5 Wetland Delineation Report by Jones & Stokes, dated October 2005 Exhibit 6 Site Plan & Buffer Planting Plan, by Poggemeyer Design Group, 3 sheets received August 27, 2008 Exhibit 7 Aerial Photo (Auburn GIS 2007) with property boundary highlighted with a heavy black line. Exhibit 8 SEPA Environmental Checklist received August 27, 2008. Exhibit 9 Determination of Non-Significance, File No. SEP08-0020 issued October 23, 2008 Exhibit 10 Notice of Application mailed on September 29, 2008 Exhibit 11 Notice of Public Hearing mailed on October 23, 2008 Exhibit 12 Affidavit of Posting for Notice of Application, w/posting September 26, 2008 Exhibit 13 Requests for Publication of Legal Notice dated Sept. 23, 2008 & Oct. 28, 2008 Exhibit 14 E-mail from Karen Walter, Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division, 39015 172nd Ave SE, Auburn, WA 98092, dated October 16, 2008 Exhibit 15 E-mail from Jacalen M. Printz, Project Manager, King County Regulatory Program U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Seattle District, PO Box 3755, Seattle, WA 98124, Dated November 3, 2008 FINDINGS OF FACT: Request The applicant, Waste Management, has requested approval of two variances from the city's critical area regulations. The first is to allow a 23-foot wide driveway w/pedestrian access within 18 feet of the required 25-foot wide wetland buffer of Wetland A. The purpose of the driveway is to serve as an access to an "automobile parking lot" planned for the site. The proposed use as an "automobile parking lot" is an allowed use in the C-2 District. The driveway to the parking area will cross over 700 square feet (sf.) of wetland buffer and to within 7.5 feet of the wetland. The buffer width proposed tapers from a 25 foot width to minimally 7.5 feet over a distance of 45 feet of buffer length. The Page 2 of 10 Agenda Subject Public Hearing CA008-0001 Hearing Date: 11/19/08 applicant seeks a second variance request for a reduction of the number of monitoring reports from three to two reports over a three-year post-construction monitoring period. 2. To mitigate for the 700 sf. of wetland buffer impact, 4,117 sf. of "additional buffer area" will be added beyond the standard 25 ft. wide wetland buffer, and 1,050 sf. of this added buffer will be enhanced with native plantings. Additionally, critical area fencing and signage will be used to limit access and identify the wetland feature to those passing near the wetland. The applicant has volunteered to plant willow and cottonwood "live stakes" over approximately a third of Wetland A to improve the existing degraded condition of the wetland. These live stakes are segments of branches that will root and develop into trees and shrubs. A total of approximately 600 stakes will be installed and the location of staking will be determined by the project biologist based on field conditions to assure best viability for survival. Staking will be done as a one time effort without further staking at a later date. 4. The wetland, 25-foot wetland buffer and additive wetland buffer area will be set aside in a recorded Wetland Conservation Easement which will give notice to any future property owner of this critical area feature and the Wetland Conservation Easement will preserve the area from future development per ACC 16.10. 5. At the time of submittal of a grading permit or other permit for development, a Storm Drainage Technical Information Report (TIR) will be required to identify both pre and post development storm water quantities. Storm water run-off from the parking lot will be captured and treated in a bioswale before it flows into the wetlands. Storm waters beyond the wetland's capacity will be captured and directed elsewhere per City Codes. 6. Auburn City Code (ACC) 16.10.160 provides the following criteria to be considered in review of a critical areas variance by the Hearing Examiner: 16.10.960 Variances. Applications for variances to the strict application of the terms of this chapter to a property may be submitted to the city. Minor variances, defined as up to and including 10 percent of the requirement, may be granted by the director as a Type 11 decision as defined by Chapter 14.03 ACC. Variances requests which exceed 10 percent may be granted by the hearing examiner as a Type 111 decision, pursuant to ACC 14.03.030 and Chapter 18.66 ACC. Approval of variances from the strict application of the critical area requirements shall conform to the following criteria: A. There are unique physical conditions peculiar and inherent to the affected property which makes it difficult or infeasible to strictly comply with the provisions of this section; B. The variance is the minimum necessary to accommodate the building footprint and access; C. The proposed variance would preserve the functions and values of the critical area, and/or the proposal does not create or increase a risk to the public health, safety and general welfare, or to public or private property; D. The proposed variance would not adversely affect surrounding properties adjoining, E. Adverse impacts to critical areas resulting from the proposal are minimized, and F. The special circumstances or conditions affecting the property are not a result of the actions of the applicant or previous owner. (Ord. 5894 § 1, 2005.) Site History and Conditions The subject property is 3 acres in size and consists of two lots that are taxed under one parcel number. The square shaped property is vacant and is without direct frontage onto a public street. It is surrounded by other developed properties with established industrial, distribution and office uses (see table of uses above). Waste Management owns the subject property and the adjacent parcel to Page 3 of 10 Agenda Subiect Public Hearing CA008-0001 Hearing Date: 11/19/08 the west which contains Waste Management's existing recycling plant. Access to the subject property will be provided though the existing plant via 2nd Street NW. 8. The property (Lots 1 and 2) was created through a short plat, File SP-11-79 and recorded with King County under File No. 7908230645. The short plat established a 30-foot wide easement for access and utilities along the north property line to provide access from the subject property east to "D" Street NW. The easement crosses over Lot 3 of the short plat (the lot abutting directly east). Additional easements that cross over the property include a 5-foot wide sewer easement along the north property line and a 16-foot wide rail road easement along a portion of the south property line. 9. Related to the legal access to the subject property, a vacation of right-of-way for "D" Street NW was approved under Ordinance No. 5772 on June 12, 2003 (V02-03). The vacation was conditioned on and subject in part to the continuation of a joint access easement to all the abutting properties owners along "D" Street NW, including Parcel # 4463400136 (the subject property). The applicant does not currently intend to use this access corridor. 10. In 1999 a code enforcement file was opened (V1099-0332) for grading that had occurred on the site without a permit. According to the file, it was determined that over the subsequent 3 years, the site stabilized itself with trees and brush. The unauthorized grading activity leveled the site such that storm water was contained on the site. After the enforcement file was closed, staff added additional comments indicating that the fill material was deposited within an area "designated" as wetlands. File notes indicate that prior to future development of the site, the wetland boundaries would need to be documented. The wetland boundaries were later documented in 2005 (Exhibit 5). 11. The site contains two small wetlands that have been delineated consistent with the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. These wetlands are described in detail on pages 3-6 of the Jones & Stokes Critical Areas Report, Exhibit 5. Wetland A is located on the west half of the site and Wetland B is located on the south east corner of the property. Neither wetland has a surface water connection to any other wetland or stream. The primary source of water to both wetlands appears to be the local area surface runoff from the site and adjacent properties. The report provides the following information: Wetland Ecology Hydrogeomorphic Cowardin Size in Rating Class Classification acres Wetland A 3 Depressional Palustrine Scrub- .24 shrub, Emergent Wetland B 3 Depressional Palustrine Emergent .04 Wetland A extends almost from the north to the south property boundaries of the site. The wetland is approximately 23 feet from the north property line and 30.5 feet from the south property line. 12. The existing wetland buffer areas are described by the consultant as disturbed grasslands on compact gravelly-sandy fill. These buffers are now dominated by reed canary grass. Other vegetation includes white clover velvet grass, bluegrass, blackberries, and Scot's broom. Page 4 of 10 Agenda Subject Public Hearing CA008-0001 Hearing Date: 11/19/08 Relationship to Code Requirements 13. The proposed project construction is a 'regulated activity' as defined in ACC 16.10.030(A) since it is an activity that affects a critical area or its buffer. ACC Section 16.10.020 provides the following definition of a regulated activity: "Regulated activities" means activities that have a potential to significantly impact a critical area that is subject to the provisions of this chapter. Regulated activities generally include, but are not limited to, any filling, dredging, dumping or stockpiling, release of contaminants to soil or water, draining, excavation, flooding, clearing or grading, construction or reconstruction, driving pilings, obstructing, clearing, or harvesting. 14. The Critical Areas Chapter sets forth standards of required buffer widths to be observed from the boundary of critical areas based on the category (or quality) of the critical area. ACC Section 16.10.020 provides the following definitions of "wetlands" and "buffers": "Wetland" or "wetlands" means areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland sites, including but not limited to irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities. However, wetlands include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland areas to mitigate conversion of wetlands. (Definition taken from the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual, Ecology Publication No. 96-94.) (Emphasis added) "Buffer or buffer area, critical area" means a naturally vegetated, undisturbed, enhanced or revegetated zone surrounding a critical area that protects the critical area from adverse impacts to its integrity and value, and is an integral part of the resource's ecosystem. (Emphasis added) 15. Further elaboration of the purpose and treatment of buffers is found at ACC 16.10.090(A) as follows: "A. General Provisions. The establishment of on-site buffers, buffer areas or setbacks shall be required for all development proposals and activities in or adjacent to critical areas. The purpose of the buffer shall be to protect the integrity, function, value, and resources of the subject critical area (in the case of wetlands, streams, and/or wildlife habitat areas), and/or to protect life, property and resources from risks associated with development on unstable or critical lands (in the case of geologic hazard areas). Buffers shall typically consist of an undisturbed area of native vegetation retained or established to achieve the purpose of the buffer. No buildings or structures shall be allowed within the buffer unless as otherwise permitted by this section. If the site has previously been disturbed, the buffer area shall be revegetated pursuant to an approved enhancement plan. Buffers shall be protected during construction by placement of a temporary barricade, notice of the presence of the critical area and implementation of appropriate erosion and sedimentation controls. Restrictive covenants or conservation easements may be required to provide long-term preservation and protection of buffer areas." 16. ACC 16.10 090(C) defines how wetland buffers are measured in the field. It provides that: "the buffer shall be measured perpendicular from the wetland edge as delineated and marked in the field using the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. " Page 5of10 Agenda Subject Public Hearing CA008-0001 Hearing Date: 11/19/08 17. ACC Section 16.10.090(E)(1) provides the following minimum and maximum buffer standards applicable to Category III wetlands: Wetland Category Minimum Buffer Width Category III 25 feet Maximum Buffer Width (see also subsection (E)(1)(g) of this section) 50 feet The 25 foot buffer width requirement applies to both wetlands on the site. 18. ACC 16.10 090(D) provides for wetland variances as follows: "D. Buffer Width Variances. A variance from buffer width requirements may be granted by the city subject to the variance criteria set forth in ACC 16.10.160. Minor variances, defined as up to and including 10 percent of the requirement, shall be considered by the director. Variance requests which exceed 10 percent shall be considered by the hearing examiner." This variance if approved would result in a 72 percent reduction of the buffer width on the south side of Wetland A. The Variance process was determined appropriate for this proposal rather than being authorized through an administrative approval by the Planning Director, given the degree of variance which would result in the driveway as close as only 7.5 feet from the wetland. 19. Construction allowed to occur within identified wetland buffers is described in ACC 16.10.090(E)(1)(d) which states: "Certain uses and activities which are consistent with the purpose and function of the wetland buffer and do not detract from its integrity may be permitted by the Director within the buffer depending on the sensitivity of the wetland. Examples of uses and activities with minimal impacts which may be permitted in appropriate cases include permeable pedestrian trails, viewing platforms, and utility easements; provided that any impacts to the buffer resulting from such permitted activities shall be mitigated. Uses permitted within the buffer shall generally be located as far from the wetland as possible." 20. The wetland buffer impacts and mitigation proposed consist of: Critical Wetland Impact Area Mitigation Mitigation Buffer Proposed Mitigation Areas Class (permanent) ratio ratio Required Amounts (square feet) Report (square proposed required feet Wetland A *None 25 foot 4,117 - Additional Undisturbed Buffer Area 3 700 applicable width Buffer Area 1.5:1 to buffer 1,050 - Buffer Enhancement *If the proposed buffer reduction could have been allowed with buffer averaging (ACC 16.10.090 EA A) and not through the need of a variance, a 1:1 buffer replacement would be required. 21. Post-construction monitoring is required to assure success of the mitigation project under ACC 16.10.130 which states: Monitoring program and contingency plan. A. For all actions requiring a mitigation plan, a monitoring program shall be prepared and implemented by the applicant to evaluate the success of the mitigation project and to determine necessary corrective actions. This program shall determine if the original goals and objectives are being met. The monitoring program shall be reviewed and approved by the city prior to implementation. The monitoring program shall include a contingency plan in the event that implementation of the mitigation plan is inadequate or fails. Page 6 of 10 Agenda Subject Public Hearing CA008-0001 Hearing Date: 11/19/08 C. Incorporate the following into monitoring programs prepared to comply with this chapter: ... 5. Monitoring programs for a minimum period of three years for buffer enhancement and a minimum of five years for other types of mitigation programs that include, at a minimum, preparation of an as-built plan; biannual monitoring and preparation of annual monitoring reports following implementation; and a maintenance plan. More stringent monitoring requirements may be required on a case-by-case basis for more complex mitigation plans; 6. Monitoring reports shall be submitted to the director by December 1st of the year in which monitoring is conducted. The reports are to be prepared by a qualified consultant and must contain all qualitative and quantitative monitoring data, photographs, and an evaluation of each of the applicable performance standards. If performance standards are not being met, appropriate corrective or contingency measures must be identified and communicated to the director and upon concurrence, implemented to ensure that performance standards will be met;" (emphasis added) A three year monitoring plan is proposed with reporting once a year in Years 1 and 3, rather than providing a monitoring report each year (1, 2 and 3). The applicant's Mitigation Plan indicates that the site will be monitored by a qualified wetland consultant who will prepare the monitoring data, photos, evaluation of performance standards. Should performance standards not be met at the end of the three-year period, corrective or contingency measures would be identified and implemented. Other Considerations 22. Other City departments and divisions have reviewed this variance application. No concerns have been raised by staff regarding the variance based on their review of the proposal. It is noted that a detailed review for construction of the parking lot will not occur until after a grading permit is submitted. 23. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Seattle District - The following comments were received in response to the Notice of Application, "The project may require authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, if there is the discharge of dredged or fill material (e.g., fill, excavation, or mechanized land clearing) into waters of the United States, including wetlands and navigable waters of the U.S. Please advise the applicant that, depending on the proposed work, a Department of the Army permit may be required." (Exhibit 15) 24. Muckleshoot Tribe - The following comments in italics were received from the Tribe in response to the Notice of Application (Exhibit 14): 1. It appears that the larger wetland on this site has been identified as wetland SQ in Alternative #8 of the Special Area Management Plan for Mill Creek (SAMP). If this is correct, this wetland was to be targeted for mitigation. Please verify if this wetland is wetland SQ and the proposed mitigation measures for this wetland, which were identified in the SAMP. Staff Response: Subsequent to this comment, the City determined that the on-site wetlands are identified in the April 2000 Mill Creek Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) as Wetland "50". "These wetlands have been designated as suitable for the SAMP regional permit because of their small site, fragmentation and location off the Mill Creek/Mullen Slough corridor" as stated in the Mill Creek Aquatic Restoration Plan. While the management plan for wetland resources identifies that the site's wetlands are suitable for filling and displacement with appropriate mitigation, the project does not propose wetland filling or disturbance and cannot be forced and thus SAMP mitigation requirements are not applicable to the project. 2. As noted in the CAR/Mitigation Plan, the existing wetland buffers for both wetlands appear to be dominated by reed canarygrass and other non-native species. From the information provided, it is not clear if the entire wetland buffer for Wetland A will be enhanced by removing these non- native plants and replanting with native species or if only the areas shown as proposed wetland Page 7 of 10 Agenda Subject Public Hearing CA008-0001 Hearing Date: 11/19/08 buffer will be enhanced. If the non-native species are not removed from both wetlands and enhanced with native species, it is unlikely that this wetland buffers will achieve their full functional potential. Staff Response: The proposed buffer enhancement will introduce additional diversity of native vegetation that will enhance buffer functions and diversity. In addition, the applicant has volunteered to plant willow and cottonwood "live stakes" over approximately a third of the wetland to improve the existing degraded condition of the wetland. 3. Similarly, the monitoring period (i.e. three years) is too short to adequately demonstrate that the wetland buffers were successfully mitigated. The monitoring period should be increased to at least 5 years and more likely 10 years to confirm the success of this project. Staff Response: The city's critical area regulations require monitoring for a minimum period of three years for buffer enhancement projects. CONCLUSIONS: The applicant must meet the burden of proof in demonstrating consistency with all of the following criteria necessary to grant variances under ACC 16.10.160. An analysis of the criteria in relation to each of the two variances requested is provided below: A. There are unique physical conditions peculiar and inherent to the affected property which makes it difficult or infeasible to strictly comply with the provisions of this section; Buffer Reduction - The property is completely surrounded by other developed properties and the site does not have public street frontage making access to a parking lot serving Waste Management difficult and impracticable via other routes than as proposed. Legal site assess via other routes is limited. There is an existing 30-foot wide access easement from the northeast corner of the site that crosses over the property immediately east and the easement ultimately connects to public right-of- way at "D" Street NW and 3`d Street NW. This intersection is approximately 660 feet from the northwest corner of the subject property. In total the distance to Waste Management plant via this route is approximately 1/3 mile or 1,560 feet away. Public street access (2nd Street NW) is closer through the adjoining Waste Management recycling center, approximately 400 feet from the proposed parking area. Access is limited by the location of Wetland A. It is the applicant's intent to use the property for parking which will in part serve the recycling center and also be available to serve the downtown Auburn area. As such, an access connection through the recycling center property is necessary. Reduction of Monitoring Reports - The applicant has volunteered to bear the cost of planting willows and cottonwood "live stakes" over approximately 1/3 of the wetland to improve the existing degraded condition of the wetland. The existing degraded condition of the site wetlands would benefit more from additional enhancement measures than a "Year 2" monitoring report. The site would still be monitored by the project biologist in year 2 but results would not be reported to the city in year 2. The overall length of the monitoring period would not change. B. The variance is the minimum necessary to accommodate the building footprint and access; Buffer Reduction - The proposed 20-foot wide driveway and 3-foot wide walkway is the minimum width needed to satisfy zoning, and fire safety (ACC 18.52.050 G.). The access driveway is located at the southwest corner of the property, where crossing of the wetland buffer would be least Page 8 of 10 Agenda Subject Public Hearing CA008-0001 Hearing Date: 11/19/08 impacted. There is no other route which would result in less impact and there is no other reduction of wetland buffers necessary to accommodate access into the site or the parking lot. Reduction of Monitoring Reports - Not Applicable C. The proposed variance would preserve the functions and values of the critical area, and/or the proposal does not create or increase a risk to the public health, safety and general welfare, or to public or private property; Buffer Reduction - The variance will assist in preserving the wetland function and value. Buffer impact will be mitigated by the partial enhancement of the buffer and removal of non-native plant species. Both, critical area fencing and signage will be strategically used on site to define the boundaries of the wetland. There is no known risk to the public health, safety and general welfare, or to public or private property. Reduction of Monitoring Reports - The purpose of monitoring and yearly reporting is to evaluate and report on the success of the mitigation project and to determine necessary corrective actions. This information is used by the project biologist in conjunction with the city to ensure successful establishment of vegetation to increase the wetland functions and values. This will be accomplished with a report in Years 1 & 3. The overall length of the monitoring period would not change, thus the city will have a chance to ensure success over the same period. D. The proposed variance would not adversely affect surrounding properties adjoining; Buffer Reduction - Surrounding properties are fully developed and will not be adversely affected as a result of the variance. The wetlands are contained within the site and do not extend onto adjacent properties. Reduction of Monitoring Reports - The reduction in wetland reporting is not anticipated to result is perceptible changes to adjacent properties. E. Adverse impacts to critical areas resulting from the proposal are minimized; and Buffer Reduction - The driveway will be located the maximum distance possible away from the wetland and driveway improvements will be limited to a 23-foot width to minimize impacts on the existing wetland buffer. Reduction of Monitoring Reports - The applicant's plan for completion of two rather than three monitoring reports will meet monitoring objectives provided that the site is monitored as planned. Additionally, the wetland staking will assist to increase the value and function of the wetland. F. The special circumstances or conditions affecting the property are not a result of the actions of the applicant or previous owner. Buffer Reduction - Limited access to the site is not a result of the actions of the owner. The wetland locations are not the result of actions of the applicant or previous owner. Reduction of Monitoring Reports - Not Applicable RECOMMENDATION Based on the applicant's submittal and the Facts, Findings and Conclusions of the staff report, staff recommends approval of both variances. Staff concludes that the request for a buffer reduction and for a variance from submittal of a Year 2 monitoring report is consistent with the criteria for variance approval and that both be approved subject to the following conditions. 1. Prior to approval of the grading permit (or other first "permit" for the site), a final wetland mitigation plan shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director. The plan shall be consistent with the mitigation plan submitted as Exhibit 6 and reference the other work proposed which includes installation of "live stakes" consisting of willows and cottonwood within Page 9 of 10 Agenda Subject Public Hearing CA008-0001 Hearing Date: 11/19/08 approximately one third of Wetland A. The location of staking would be determined by a qualified biologist based on field conditions to assure best viability for survival. 2. The wetlands and associated buffers shall be encumbered by a Wetland Conservation Easement to comply with ACC 116.10.090(E)(1)(f). 3. Monitoring reports for wetland buffer enhancement as compensation for buffer reduction shall be provided to the City in Years 1 and 3. If performance standards are not met after Year 3, the monitoring period shall be extended beyond this minimum timeframe; and provision for financial securities or bonding shall also be extended in an amount commensurate with any additional monitoring and contingencies to ensure the success of the mitigation. 4. Prior to issuance of grading permits, a wetland hydroperiod analysis shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. The analysis shall include a pre-developed analysis of the existing hydrologic volume tributary to the wetlands, and post-developed volumes from tributary areas directed to the wetlands. A wetland biologist shall be consulted to verify the appropriate hydrologic support necessary to maintain existing wetland's function and value. If augmentation is warranted to reduce or avoid impacts, treated stormwater runoff or other acceptable means can be directed to the wetlands at a volume approximating existing conditions to maintain hydrologic support of the wetlands. A monitoring plan/program shall also be developed for City review and approval. The Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (Ecology 2001) will provide guidance for performing the wetland hydroperiod analysis, information on maximum acceptable hydroperiod alterations, recommendation for reducing development impacts on wetland hydroperiod and water quality, recommendation for flow control and treatment for stormwater discharges to wetlands and recommendation for post development wetland monitoring. Staff reserves the right to supplement the record of the case to respond to matters and information raised subsequent to the writing of this report. Page 10 of 10 /aizLngJ l?uiL Liirig3 {id C3.+?AFi8nis`II.tns BJ$ Deps?????iew MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION- PLANNING APPLICATIONS Project Name Waste Management Parking Area Proposal Date August 25, 2008 Parcel No(s) 446340-0136 and 446340-0090 Site Address 701 2nd Street NW Legal Description (attached separate sheet if necessary) Parcel Nos. 446340-0136 and -0090 Applicant Name: Waste Management of Washington, Inc. Mailing Address: 701 2nd Street NW. P.O. Box 1877. Auburn. WA 98071 Telephone and Fax: (253) 804-6760 and (253) 804-6654 Email: rculbert(cDwm.com Signature: Owner (if more than one attach another sheet) Name: Waste Management of Washington, Inc. Mailing Address: 701 2nd Street NW, P.O. Box 1877, Auburn, WA 98071 Telephone and Fax: (253) 804-6760 and (253) 804-6654 Email: rculbert Oi? wm.com Signature: Engineer/Architecture/Other Name:Maureen Mitchell Mailing Address: Summit Law Grouq. 315 Fifth Avenue S. Suite 1000. Seattle. WA 98104 Telephone and Fax: (zub) e10-1 uu4 ana (Zub) n/b-iuuo Email: maureenme-summitlaw.com Description of Proposed Action: WMW seeks a variance under ACC 16.10.090.D from the 25 foot buffer width requirement. - pe of Application Required Check all that Apply) Administrative Appeal* Rezone (site specific)* Area Wide Administrative Use Permit* Short Plat Annexation* Special Exce tion* Boundary Line Adjustment p Special Home Occu ation Pen-nit* Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Text or Map)* p Substantial Shoreline Develo ment* Conditional Use Permit* Surface Mining Permit* Critical Areas Variance* Temporary Use Permit Development Agreement* Environmental Review (SEPA)* Final Plat Preliminary Plat* Variance* jj]](; *Please note that public notific?afk is required. A separate cost is e6 for the signs. City preparem PUD Site Plan Approval applicant responsible for sign posting Reasonable Use Exce tion* . -0 Page I of 2 CAOc EXHIBIT 2 IC4 iJ B ti-I 4 4 i F IVED ' 2000 UBURN NVISION _; C t^861-1 IN GTO N Planning, Building, and Cotnrnuni?y Departi-nent LETTER FROM PROPERTY OWNER GRANTING AUTHORIZATION TO ACT (A copy of this letter must be submitted for each property owner involved) Av {ke r zt A kep-,e5e,34-`•ve 0? I, R ? ka r ULt Ise., coy,, , being duly sworn declare that I am the%wner of the property (PROPERTY OWNER) / Involved in the application. I hereby grant of to act on my behalf. I further declare that all statements, answers, and information herein submitted is in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. T J f ` L't Signature euj Y7 J 5 i1 C?? t k2A LOCI Address t? 9 Y Date Subscribed and sworn to before me this ;z day of T`t 7?L. r'?itf acb-t Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, Residing at AVOut/fY Notary hme State of wad"on SOMNANG ORK My Appointment Expires May 23, 2012 Page 2 oft EXHIBIT 2- 2-E ? Z- EXHIBIT CITY OF AUBURN OWNER'S WRITTEN EXPLANATION SUPPORTING BUFFER WIDTH VARIANCE APPLICATION Introduction - Statement of Request Waste Management of Washington, Inc. ("WMW") seeks a Buffer Width Variance under Auburn Municipal Code ("ACC" or "City Code") § 16.10.090.1) and ACC § 16.10.160 from the 25 foot buffer width requirements of ACC § 16.10.090.E for Category III wetlands. WMW is proposing to construct a parking lot on an undeveloped parcel it owns in the Downtown area of the City of Auburn. The parcel and wetland location and configuration make development of the parcel impossible without impacting a small area (less than I% of the total buffer area) of wetland buffer. This variance application is . subject to Hearing Examiner approval because it requests a. variance from the minimum buffer width of 25 feet. WMW also seeks a variance to decrease the number of reports to be prepared during the three-year post-construction monitoring period from three reports to two. Site Description WMW owns approximately 7.86 acres located at 701 2nd Street N.W., identified by street addresses of 655 and 657 2nd Street N.W., and 325 D Street N.W and consisting of two separate, but adjacent tax parcels (Tax Parcel Nos. 446340-0090 and -0136). WMW's easterly parcel (the "Project Site") is currently undeveloped and not actively used. It is landlocked and has no public street access. WMW's westerly parcel ("Facility Site") is developed and in use. WMW's operations on the Facility Site consist of an administrative office building, a recycling buy-back center, a solid waste/recyclable materials separation and transfer facility, and a plant for sorting recyclable materials in construction, demolition and land clearing debris ("CDL"). Access to the Facility Site is from 2nd Street N.W. The north, south, east and west adjacent properties to the Project Site are occupied by buildings, industrial uses, and parking lots. Because the Project Site has no public street access, it can only be accessed from the Facility Site. In July 2007, the City rezoned both parcels to C-2 Commercial. Previously both parcels were zoned M-2 for Heavy Industrial use. WMW proposes to use the Project Site for automobile parking, which is an outright permitted use in the C-2 zone. Description of Wetlands and Buffers There are two depressional palustrine emergent wetlands on the Project Site, together comprising approximately 0.28 acres (or approximately 12,330 square feet). See. Parking Plan. The larger, Wetland A, is located along the western boundary of the Project Site parcel along a north-south axis. The smaller of the two wetland areas, Wetlan 8 C E I ` , E D EXHIBIT 3 WETLANDS BUFFER VARIANCE APPLICATION AUG 2 .a 2008 PAGE 1 CITY OF AUBURN BUILD NG DIVISION EXHIBIT the southeast corner of the Project Site. Neither wetland has any surface water connection to any other wetlands or streams. The primary sources of water appear to be roof drains from the surrounding structures, precipitation, and surface runoff from impermeable surfaces of adjacent properties. The two wetlands are Category III wetlands under both Department of Ecology and City of Auburn standards. ACC § 16.10.080.C.3. Request for Buffer Width Variance The minimum buffer width for Category III wetlands is 25 feet under ACC § 16.10.090.E.1. The Auburn City Code. § 16.10.090.13 provides: A variance from buffer width requirements may be granted by the city subject to the variance criteria set forth in ACC 16.10.160. Minor variances, defined as up to and including 10 percent of the requirement, shall be considered by the director. Variance requests which exceed 10 percent shall be considered by the hearing examiner. WMW requests a variance from the buffer width requirement of 25 feet at the area at the south end of Wetland A where the access road enters the Project Site. The access road will pass 7.5 feet south of the delineated wetland boundary. Thus, there is no impact to a critical area. The impact will be solely to the wetland buffer, and part of the wetland buffer will remain intact. All other wetland buffers surrounding the two wetland areas would be maintained at,or in excess of the required 25 foot buffer. See Planting Plan (attached). The total area of buffer impact is approximately 700 square feet, out of a total wetland buffer area of 27,300 square feet.' The proposed parking area is specifically designed to avoid impacts to the wetlands themselves. The parking area avoids Wetland B and its buffer entirely. The parking also avoids impacting Wetland A. The only impact from the proposed parking area is within the buffer area at the south end of Wetland A. The configuration of Wetland A near and along the westerly boundary of the Project Site parcel makes it impossible to provide vehicular access to the Project Site without impacting the wetland buffer. See Parking Plan. The distance from the southern boundary of the Project Site parcel to the southern edge of the buffer is less than seven feet. Thus, at the southernmost point of Wetland A, the access road to the parking area would impact the wetland buffer, even when the access road is placed as far south as possible. The environmental consulting firm, ICF Jones & Stokes, has prepared a Wetlands Delineation Report (Jones & Stokes, 2005), and a Critical Area Report and Wetland ' Although the total area impacted is less than 1%, because the linear distance of the impacted buffer is greater than 10% of the 25-foot minimum buffer width, WMW has been advised that an administrative variance is not appropriate. WETLANDS BUFFER VARIANCE APPLICATION PAGE 2 EXHIBIT Buffer Mitigation Plan (ICF Jones & Stokes, 2008). In accordance with the biologist's recommendations, WMW proposes to mitigate the wetland buffer impact by using buffer width averaging under the City Code on a 1.5:1 ratio. ACC § 16. states that alteration of "specific critical areas and/or their buffers" may be allowed subject to the criteria of that section, and that where enhancement, restoration or creation is proposed, "replacement ratios shall comply with the requirements of these regulations." The only replacement ratios related to wetland buffers are those related to buffer width averaging, which state that buffer width averaging may be used where the total buffer area after averaging is no less in area than contained within the standard buffer prior to averaging. ACC § 16.10.090.E. La. Accordingly, this proposed project has a buffer enhancement plan that analogizes to the standards required for buffer width averaging to mitigate the impact of the buffer width variance. Wetland buffer mitigation under the mitigation plan will include: (1) preservation of the existing 25 foot buffer in all areas but the access road area at the southwest corner of the parcel; (2) creation of additional buffer preservation areas to the west and east of the wetland (totaling 4,117 s.f.); (3) avoidance of impacts to any wetland; and (4) creation of five wetland buffer enhancement areas (totaling (1,050 s.f.). These five buffer enhancement areas will be built in the western wetland buffer. Currently, nonnative plants and invasive species of vegetation are encroaching on the wetlands. The biologist recommends weeding out the intruding vegetation as the primary mitigation measure, replacing them with native wetland buffer plants, and then monitoring the site to ensure protection of the enhanced buffer area and to curtail invasion of nonnative species. As part of this variance application, WMW also requests approval to deviate slightly from the reporting requirements, reducing the number of reports from three to two during the three year monitoring period. Variance from Wetland Buffer Requirements The City may grant variances from the wetland buffer width requirements pursuant to ACC § 16.10.090.D. To be eligible for a variance, the proposal must conform to the following criteria: • ACC § 16.10.160.A (There are unique physical conditions peculiar and inherent to the affected property which makes it difficult or infeasible to strictly comply with the provision of this section.) • ACC §16.10.160.13 (The variance is the minimum necessary to accommodate the access roadway.) • ACC §16.10.160.C (The proposed variance would preserve the functions and values of the critical area and/or the proposal does not create or increase a risk to the public health, safety and general welfare, or to public or private property.) • ACC § 16.10.160.D (The proposed variance would not adversely affect surrounding properties adjoining.) WETLANDS BUFFER VARIANCE APPLICATION PAGE 3 EXHIBIT • ACC §16.10.160.E (Adverse impacts to the critical areas resulting from the proposal are minimized.) • ACC § 16.10.160.17 (The special circumstances or conditions affecting the property are not a result of the actions of the applicant or previous owner.) WMW's proposal satisfies all of these criteria. The physical conditions of the property are unique. The parcel is completely surrounded by developed real estate. That development has contributed to the existence of the wetlands in their currently condition. There is no public street access to the Project Site. The location of the property, the lack of public street access, and the configuration of the wetlands on it make it infeasible to comply with the minimum wetland buffer; width requirements of the City Code. Access to the proposed parking area on the, eastern side of the Project Site is not possible without going through a portion of wetlands buffer. The parcel was platted in its current configuration and landlocked when WMW purchased it, and the company did not create the special conditions of the property that support granting a variance. The proposal therefore satisfies ACC § 16.10.160.A and ACC § 16.10.160.17. • Only the minimum necessary to accommodate access to the parking area is being proposed, and all adverse impacts to the wetlands system have been minimized. WMW has taken all feasible and reasonable measures to reduce impacts and losses to the wetlands buffer and to avoid impacts as much as possible. There is no access that would completely avoid crossing the buffer. The only feasible access points with minimal impacts cross a portion of the wetland buffer. Locating the access road at the south end of the property minimizes the amount of impact to the buffer, and completely avoids impacting the wetlands themselves. Only a small portion of the buffer around a sliver of wetlands that extends southerly will be affected. As a result of considering all possible alternatives for access, even without considering the mitigation proposal the impact from the proposed site layout will result in less than I% reduction of total buffer area surrounding the wetland. The proposal therefore satisfies ACC § 16.10.160.13. • The proposed variance preserves the functions and value of the wetlands. WMW's proposed development avoids impacts to the wetlands. The variance from the wetland buffer requirements will not impair wetland function, and the wetland buffer impact will be mitigated by enhancing the buffer in the areas indicated on the Planting Plan. The existing wetland buffers contain nonnative species of vegetation. They will be replaced with appropriate native vegetation. There is no risk of harm to public health, safety, and welfare from the proposed variance. The proposal therefore satisfies ACC § 16.10.160.C. WETLANDS BUFFER VARIANCE APPLICATION PAGE 4 EXHIBIT • Surrounding properties that adjoin the parking area will not be adversely affected. The source of hydrology to the parcel's wetlands is surface water run-on from the adjacent properties, and that condition will remain unchanged. The industrial activities will not be affected. The proposal therefore satisfies ACC § 16.10.160.D. • WMW's proposal to enhance the existing wetland buffer satisfies the Code's preferences for on-site; in-kind mitigation, and this enhancement proposal will produce greater functional and habitat values than the existing system offers. No net loss of wetlands functions and values will be caused. Although no actual impact to the wetlands themselves is proposed, the mitigation in the buffer areas will promote an improvement to the functions and values of the existing system by removing non-native invasive species and planting appropriate native vegetation, including trees and shrubs. The proposal therefore satisfies ACC § 16.10.160.E by ensuring that adverse impacts to the critical areas are minimized. Compliance with ACC §16.10.100 Criteria for Alteration of a Wetland Buffer In addition to satisfying the above criteria for a variance, wetland buffer alteration proposals must satisfy certain requirements contained in under ACC § 16.10.100. The criteria that must be met are: a.. Alteration and mitigation shall comply with the mitigation performance standards and requirements of these regulations; b. Where enhancement, restoration or creation is proposed, replacement ratios shall comply with the requirements of these regulations; and c. No net loss of wetland functions and values may occur. WMW's proposed wetland buffer mitigation plan meets the criteria of ACC§ 16.10.100. The first criterion is that the alteration and mitigation comply with the mitigation performance standards. All of the mitigation work will comply with the mitigation performance standards. The mitigation plan includes on-site installation of native wetland buffer plants. On-site.installation is preferred under ACC § 16.10.110.B.1. Native plant preference is stated in ACC § 16.10.120.A. Detailed explanation of the species, planting methods, and placement using native plants is contained in the 2008 Jones & Stokes Critical Area Report and Mitigation Plan and in the Planting Plan (Figure Nos. L1 and L2). The wetland buffer mitigation will include appropriate signage and fencing in accordance with ACC § 16.10.120.A.14. Slope requirements in the wetland buffer will be less than 25 percent, in compliance with ACC § 16.10.120.13. Thus, in all respects, the mitigation will comply with the ACC mitigation performance standards and requirements With respect to the second criterion, replacement ratios for proposed enhancement, restoration and creation will be met and exceeded. Approximately 700 square feet of WETLANDS BUFFER VARIANCE APPLICATION PAGE 5 EXHIBIT buffer will be impacted. In compensation, 4,117 square feet of buffer preservation area will be created and that preservation area will be protected with preservation fencing and signage. In addition, WMW will create five buffer enhancement areas with a total area of 1,050 square feet. These buffer enhancement areas will be planted with native tree and shrub species appropriate to wetland buffers. The third criterion that must be met is that there be no net loss of wetland functions and values. This will be achieved because the wetlands will not be directly impacted. In addition, under the proposed mitigation plan, non-native invasive plants will be removed and replaced with native plants in five buffer enhancement areas. As a result, the wetland buffer functions and values will improve after the project is completed. The enhanced buffer may result in enhanced wetland function and values; they certainly will not detract from them. Consequently, the proposed mitigation plan meets and exceeds the criteria of ACC §16.10.100. In addition to satisfying these three criteria, ACC § 16. also requires that the applicant demonstrate compliance with the mitigation standards identified in ACC § 16.10.110, the performance standards of ACC 16.10.120, and the monitoring requirements of ACC § 16.10.130. As described above, WMW's parking lot proposal will meet all applicable criteria of ACC § 16.10.110-130. WMW's proposal meets these requirements by satisfying the mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements, by meeting all performance standards for mitigation planning, and by complying with the monitoring program and contingency plan requirements, with the exception of one minor variance from the annual reporting requirement. WMW requests one minor variance related to the reporting requirement of ACC § 16.10.130.C.6. ACC § 16.10.130.C requires biannual monitoring and preparation of annual reports for a three year period. Given the limited size and scale of the Project Site and buffer enhancement areas, annual reporting would unnecessarily consume resources that would be more beneficially devoted to mitigation project enhancements. Granting a variance to allow reporting in year 1 and year 3 not pose a risk to successful mitigation. Successful completion would be assured by performing biannual monitoring. Even in the remote chance that the success rate fell below standard at the end of year 3, application of the performance and maintenance security would ensure successful mitigation. This minor variance will not impair the implementation of the mitigation plan. WMW's supplemental documents in support of this Written Explanation, including the Critical Areas Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan (ICF Jones & Stokes, 2008), Wetland Delineation Report (Jones & Stokes, 2005), the Parking Plan, and the Planting Plan (Figure Nos. L1 and L2) are incorporated by reference in this Application, and describe in more detail the manner in which the mitigation standards, performance standards, and monitoring requirements will be met. In addition to meeting the requirements of ACC § 16.10.160 for a variance, WMW's proposal should be granted because a denial of the variance would deprive WMW of the WETLANDS BUFFER VARIANCE APPLICATION PAGE 6 % f EXHIBIT reasonable use of its property. WMW's proposal is consistent with the "reasonable use" provision of the Auburn City Code. ACC § 16.10.150.A states: The standards and requirements of these regulations are not intended, and shall not be construed or applied in a manner, to deny all reasonable use of private property. If any applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the hearing examiner that strict application of these standards would deny all reasonable use of a property, development may be permitted subject to appropriate conditions. With the landlocked location of the Project Site parcel, no structure and no access to the parcel is possible without impacting the wetland buffer. WMW's parcel represents the minimum impact necessary to facilitate reasonable use of the Project Site as a parking area. Conclusion WMW's request for wetland buffer width variance represents a modest request to enable it to make use of the Project Site. The development of the Project Site will be achieved with sensitivity to the wetlands and protection and enhancement of the wetland buffer to the maximum extent possible. The wetlands on the parcel will be improved, and the public interest will be protected. This benign proposal, with no risks of injury to the public and great benefit to the property owner and the community that it serves with solid waste and recycling separation and transfer services, should be granted. WETLANDS BUFFER VARIANCE APPLICATION PAGE 7 +^,F /r ?,. MNNMM- JonesStokes& 'CF an la Intunar-W Cm-, CA U 6) ?, - - 0,uc EXHIBIT Memorandum Date: August 25, 2008 To: Karen Scharer, City of Auburn From: Alice McKee, ICF Jones & Stokes cc: Polly McNeil, Summit Law Group; Maureen Mitchell, Summit Law Group Subject: Waste Management of Washington--Auburn Parking Lot Proposal Critical Area Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan Introduction Waste Management of Washington (WMW) owns approximately 7.86 acres located at 701 2nd Street N.W., identified by street addresses of 655 and 657 2nd Street N.W. and 325 D Street N.W and consisting of two separate, but adjacent tax parcels (Tax Parcel Nos. 446340-0090 and - 0136). WMW's westerly parcel is developed and in use ("Facility Site"). WMW's operations consist of an administrative office building, a recycling buy-back center, a solid waste/recyclable materials separation and transfer facility, and a plant for sorting recyclable materials in construction, demolition and land clearing debris. Access to the Facility Site is from 2°d Street N.W. WMW's easterly parcel (the "Project Site") is currently undeveloped and not actively used. It is landlocked and has no public street access. The north, south, east, and west adjacent.. properties to the Project Site are occupied by buildings, industrial uses, and parking areas. Because the Project Site has no public street access, it can only be accessed from the Facility Site. In July 2007, the City rezoned both parcels to C-2 Commercial. WMW proposes to use the Project Site for automobile parking, an outright permitted use in the C-2 zone. Existing Conditions ICF Jones & Stokes performed a wetland delineation of the Project Site in 2005 (Jones & Stokes 2005). According to the delineation, there are two depressional palustrine emergent wetlands on the Project Site, together comprising approximately 0.28 acres (or approximately 12,330 square feet). See Parking Plan. The smaller of the two wetland areas is in the southeast corner of the Project Site. The larger is located along the western boundary of P the Site parcel along a north-south axis. Neither wetland has any surface water connect M y ds ,. streams. The primary sources of water appear to be roof drains from.t e precipitation, and surface runoff from impermeable surfaces of adjac o erties. o 317 SW Alder Street, Suite 800 ? Portland, OR -97204* Tel. 503.24E www.jonesandstokes.com ( WWW.Icfi.com Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan EXHIBIT wetlands are Category III wetlands under both Department of Ecology and City of Auburn standards. Existing Wetland Buffers The existing wetland buffer areas are disturbed grasslands on compact gravelly-sandy fill. The upland vegetation, soils, and hydrology are described below. Vegetation These buffer areas are dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). Other herbaceous vegetation observed include white clover (Trifolium repens), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), bluegrass (Poa sp.), fescue (Festuca sp.), and other sub-dominant species, such as Armenian blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) and Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius). There are several black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera spp. D-ichocarpa) trees in the northwest portion of the site. Overall, dominant vegetation is primarily FAC- to FACU+ and does not satisfy the 1987 Manual's requirements for hydrophytic.vegetation (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Soils The soils within the upland area are predominately sandy-gravelly fill material and were not evaluated because soil compaction restricted digging. The fill material has been described as gravelly sand that extends to a depth of approximately 7 feet (Jones 2004, unpublished). The fill material would not meet the hydric soil criteria of the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Hydrology No indicators of wetland hydrology were observed, as would be expected from vegetation in an upland buffer area. Critical Areas Avoidance ICF Jones & Stokes has reviewed the City of Auburn Critical Areas Ordinance and has determined that no Critical Areas will be impacted by the proposed site development activities, which include a parking lot, its access road, and, associated planting areas. The proposed site development has been designed to completely avoid impacts to the existing wetlands (critical areas) and to minimize impacts to the wetland buffers (not considered critical areas). Therefore, no impacts to critical areas will occur as a result of the proposed development. A 25-foot-wide buffer will be preserved around the existing wetlands except where impacted by construction of the proposed access road. The road will impact 700 square feet (s.f.) of buffer; this is the only impact that will be caused by the proposed development, and mitigation will be provided for it, as described in this plan. The wetland buffers will be protected during construction by fencing and signage. Buffer enhancement has been designed to be as viable and enduring as the buffer area it replaces. Functions and values will be replaced or improved after enhancement activities are completed Auburn Transfer Station 2 Waste Management of Washington Wetland Buffer Mitigatioewi EXHIBIT because invasive weed species will be removed in these areas and will be replaced with appropriate native species. Buffer. Mitigation Plan The wetland buffer mitigation plan has been designed to comply with the requirements of the City of Auburn Critical Areas Ordinance and to exceed the wetland buffer mitigation requirements for the proposed development. Goals and Objectives Goal--Mitigate for impacts to the existing wetland buffer, replacing or improving existing functions and values. Objective-- Areas of the existing buffer will be cleared of non-native vegetation and will be planted with native wetland buffer species. Design All mitigation will occur on-site, within the existing wetland buffers. A 1:1 ratio of buffer enhancement is required for buffer impact mitigation (a total of 700 s.f.); the mitigation plan includes enhancement of five wetland buffer areas along the western side of the larger existing wetland, totaling 1,050 s.f. (a 1.5:1 ratio), and additional preservation of 4,117 s.f. of wetland buffer. Site Preparation The enhancement areas will be grubbed prior to planting to remove all existing woody non-native plants (primarily Armenian blackberry) and their roots. Grasses will be mowed. All existing native vegetation will be preserved. Vegetation Planting plans for the enhancement areas are shown on Figure L1. Species to be planted include Scouler's willow (Salx scouleriana), Cottonwood and Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana). All plant material will be from the Puget Lowlands or Pacific Northwest ecoregion and will be installed in late January or early February, prior to construction of the parking area. The plant species were selected to provide heterogeneity and structural diversity. Existing cottonwood trees that will be preserved will provide additional structural diversity. The densities and placement of plants are based on the ecological tolerances of the species proposed for planting. Protection tubes will be installed around each plant to protect them from rodent damage and weed competition, and to help retain moisture. These tubes will also help identify installed plants during monitoring. Hydrology According to the 2005 wetland delineation, neither wetland has any surface water connection to any other wetlands or streams. The primary sources of water appear to be roof drains from the 00025.08 3 Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan f ? EXHIBIT surrounding structures, precipitation, and surface runoff from impermeable surfaces of adjacent properties. These sources will continue to provide water to the buffers, although installed plants will be watered (by truck or hand) during the first summer and thereafter during the 3-year monitoring period, as necessary for establishment. Fencing and Signage The outer perimeter of the portions of the wetland buffers adjacent to the parking areas will be permanently fenced, as shown on Figure L1, with a three-foot-high chain link fence. Permanent signs will be placed on the fences in five locations. Fencing and sgnage will be installed prior to construction of the parking area. The signs will be worded as follows (or with alternative language approved by the City): "Habitat Conservation Area Do Not Disturb Contact the City of Auburn Planning Department regarding uses and restrictions" Construction A qualified wetland consultant will conduct a site visit to verify the quality and quantity of native plant materials during installation, and to verify that appropriate site preparation and plant installation have occurred. The outer boundary of the western wetland adjacent to the enhancement areas will be fenced with temporary construction fencing during construction to ensure that the wetland is not disturbed. Ground Water Protection Areas The only hazardous materials that could be used at the site would be pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers used in the ornamental planting areas within the parking area. These materials will not be used in the buffer, enhancement areas, with the exception of herbicide if necessary. Use of these materials will be avoided or minimized to the extent possible and they will not be stored on-site. If used, these materials will be applied in strict conformance with manufacturer's instructions and by persons licensed to perform such applications, if applicable. Any other use of potentially hazardous materials that becomes necessary will comply with City requirements and will be done only with approval from the City. Storm water run-off from the parking lot will be captured and treated in a bioswale before it flows into the wetlands. Additional storm water (beyond the wetlands' capacity) will be captured, treated, and disposed of appropriately. Auburn Transfer Station 4 Waste Management of Washington Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan r EXHIBIT Weed Management Weeds will be controlled by hand pulling or mowing during the monitoring period if they threaten plant survival, to ensure that performance standards are met. Herbicides approved for use in aquatic environments will only be used if necessary, if manual means of weed control are insufficient. Performance Standards, Monitoring Program, and Contingency Plan Performance Standards Performance Standard ]- The buffer enhancement areas will have a 100% plant survival rate at the end of Year 1. Performance Standard 2- The buffer enhancement areas will have a minimum 85% plant survival rate at the end of Year 3. Performance Standard 3 -Woody plant species cover within the enhanced buffer areas will be composed of 80% native species in each year of monitoring (Years 1 and 3). Performance and Maintenance Security As required by the City, a performance and maintenance security equal to 125% of the cost of the mitigation project will be provided for the length of the monitoring period. Monitoring The enhancement areas will be monitored in Years 1, 2, and 3 after construction to evaluate the success of the mitigation project and to determine any necessary corrective actions. Vegetation will be monitored by identification of each plant installed according to the planting plan. Plant protection tubes installed around each plant during construction will aid in plant identification. Survival of each individual plant will be confirmed and recorded. At least two photographs will be taken of the mitigation site in each monitoring year, from established photo points. These photos will be included in each monitoring report. Monitoring Reports Monitoring reports will be submitted to the City in Years 1 and 3, by December 1 st. The reports will be prepared by a qualified consultant and will contain all monitoring data, photographs, and an evaluation of each of the performance standards.. If performance standards are not being met, appropriate corrective or contingency measures will be identified and implemented, with the City's approval, to ensure that performance standards will be met. Contingency Plan If performance standards are not being met at the end of the initial three-year period, appropriate remedial actions will be taken (e.g., replanting or weed removal) and the monitoring period will be extended if necessary. As required by the City, additional financial securities or bonding will 00025.08 5 Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan be provided, as appropriate, to ensure that any additional monitoring and contingencies are completed to ensure the success of the mitigation. r_vu References Ecology, 2004. Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, Mississippi. 100 pp. + appendices. Jones & Stokes, 2005. Waste Management South Sound Auburn Parcel Phase 1 Property Wetland Delineation Report. Auburn Transfer Station Waste Management of Washington s EXHIBIT WASTE MANAGEMENT - SOUTH SOUND Auburn Parcel - Phase 1 Property Wetland Delineation Report Prepared for: Waste Management - South Sound PO Box 1877 Auburn, WA 98071 Prepared by: Jones & Stokes 317 SW Alder, Suite 800 Portland, OR 97204 October 2005 Project No. 05254.05 CE1V g1 AU 2 ;' 2000 CITY OF AUBURN O?: 1811 tt BUILDiNO DIVISiOlti13L?`?? ??1 WASTE MANAGEMENT - SOUTH SOUND Auburn Parcel - Phase 1 Property Wetland Delineation Report October 2005 Prepared for: Waste Management - South Sound PO Box 1877 .Auburn, WA 98071 Contact: Ben Whitley Phone No.: (253) 804-6654 Prepared by: Jones & Stokes 317 SW Alder, Suite 800 Portland, OR 97204 Contact: Brent Haddaway Phone No.: (503) 248-9507 Project No.05254.05 Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel Phase 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. ..........................1 2.0 WETLAND DELINEATION METHODS .................... ............,,..............................1 2.1 PRELIMINARY DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS ....................... 2.2 FIELD INVESTIGATION ..................................... 3.0 STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION ....................................... 4.0 EXISTING DATA REVIEW ................................ .. 4.1 TOPOGRAPHY ..................................... .......... 2 4.2 SOIL SURVEY .........................................:. 4.3 NWI MAP ............................ :.......................................................................................... 4.4 LOCAL WETLAND INVENTORY .................. 2 ......................................................... 4.5 PRECIPITATION DATA ........................ ........... 2 . ........................ 5.0 WETLAND DELINEATION RESULTS ....................... 5.1 UPLANDS .................................... ................3 ............ 5.2 WETLANDS ........................................ ... 4 ............... 5.2.1 Wetland A .................................... ... 4 5,2.2 Wetland B .............. 6.0 SUMMARY ........................... .... ............................ ......................................................... 5 ............................................................................................ 5 7.0 REFERENCES ........................... LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Precipitation data for the Auburn Parcel - Phase 1 site visit ............... Table 2. Normal and 2005. precipitation. Jan 1 -Apr 8 ................... :. 3 Table 3. Wetlands and other waters identified on the Auburn Parcel - Phase 1 Site ..................... 4 APPENDICES Appendix A - Figures Appendix B - Typical Wetland Delineation Methodology Appendix C. - Site Photographs Appendix D - Local Wetland Inventory Appendix E - Precipitation-Data Appendix F - Routine Wetland Determination Field Data Forms Jones & Stokes 1 Project No. 05254.05 Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel - Phase 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION Jones & Stokes was retained by Waste Management - South Sound (WM South Sound) to perform a wetland study on the Auburn Parcel - Phase 1 property in Auburn, King County, Washington. The site address is 325 D Street NW, Auburn, Washington (Appendix A, Figure 1). The study area is located on the SE '/< of Section 13, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian. The tax parcel number is 446340-0136 (Appendix A, Figure 2). Two wetlands were identified within the parcel, and both were rated as category 3 wetlands using the Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Ecology, 2004). The surrounding uplands within the parcel ate comprised of sandy/gravelly fill material and low-lying disturbed areas. 2.0 WETLAND DELINEATION METHODS Wetland delineation for this project included two components; a review of previously prepared environmental documents and a field investigation to evaluate on-site conditions. 2.1 Preliminary Data Collection and Analysis Prior to fieldwork, Jones & Stokes identified potential wetlands within the study area using United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic Maps, United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Maps, Auburn Local Wetland Inventory (LWI), the Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington and unpublished site data. Precipitation data for the days of, and two weeks prior to the field visits were acquired from the AccuWeather.com to determine whether typical hydrologic conditions were present at the site. 2.2 Field Investigation Jones & Stokes delineated wetlands within the study area using the routine determination methodology outlined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Routine delineation methods that were used to identify wetlands are presented in Appendix B. Fieldwork was performed on April 8, 2005 at which time the boundaries of wetlands within the study area were identified and flagged. Data plots were established in wetland areas and at locations _upslope to determine the wetland boundary. In addition, routine wetland delineation data forms and photographs were used to record indicators of wetland vegetation, soils, and hydrology. Flagged wetland boundaries, data plot locations, and photo locations were surveyed. All identified wetlands were classified according to the USFWS classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979) and rated using the Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Ecology, 2004). 3.0 STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION The study area is an undeveloped rectangular parcel, approximately 3 acres in size, and surrounded by commercial development (Appendix A, Figure 3). The surrounding parcels include buildings and parking lots that appear to have been constructed on fill material. Fill . slopes from these surrounding properties extend onto the study area in some locations- The Jones & Stokes 1 Project No. 05245.05 Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel -Phase 1 eastern half of the study area has been filled prior to Waste Management - South Sound's acquisition of the parcel. (Appendix C, Photo 1 through 3). The remaining unfilled area is an L- shaped depression on the south and west portion of the property that is approximately 5 to 7 feet below that of the fill material. The northern portion of the property includes a ditch that receives water runoff from an abutting parking lot to the north (Appendix C, Photo 4). Water from offsite appears to flow westerly in the ditch and settles in the northern portion of the L-shaped. depression. Water appears to be directed into the southern portion of the depression from roof drains of adjacent buildings. Vegetation within the study area is dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW) with black cottonwood (Populus balsamfera, FAC), red osier dogwood (Corpus stolonifera, FACW), and Himalayan blackberry found. on the northern portion of the study area. 4.0 EXISTING DATA REVIEW A summary of the existing data review for the Auburn Parcel- Phase 1 property is provided below. 4.1 Topography The USGS topographic map of the area is not adequate for this study and was discounted in lieu of a recent topographic mapping of the property, by Roth Hill Engineering Partners, LLC (Appendix A, Figure 4). The recent topographic map shows the property to have a high elevation of 76 feet msl and a low elevation of 67 feet msl (Appendix A, Figure 4). The depression area found near the west boundary appears to be isolated because of the surrounding developments. 4.2 Soil Survey The Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (Snyder 1973) indicates that the northeastern portion of the study area is underlain by hydric Snohomish silt loam (So) with non-hydric Urban land (Ur) soils throughout the remainder of the site (Appendix A, Figure 5). The Snohomish soil series also has hydric inclusions of the Woodinville, Seattle, Tukwila, and non-hydric Shalcar soils. 4.3 NWI Map The USFWS NWI map (Appendix A, Figure 6) shows one palustrine emergent seasonally flooded wetland extending across the property and continuing off-site to the west. Off-site areas have been developed and are no longer wetlands.. No other waters are shown on the NWI. 4.4 Local Wetland Inventory The local wetland inventory shows one crescent-shaped wetland along the northern, western, and southern portions of the property (Appendix D). No other waters are shown on the wetland inventory. 4.5 Precipitation Data Precipitation data for the day of, day previous to, and the two weeks prior to the wetland delineation site visits are shown in Table 1. This data was obtained from the wunderground Jones & Stokes 2 Project No. 05245.05 ?+ Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel -Phase I weather website with readings from Sea-Tac airport. Copies of the data received from the website are included in Appendix E. Table 1. Precipitation data for the Auburn Parcel - Phase l site visit* • n=://wunder&round•eom Table 2. Normal and 2005 Table 2 shows that precipitation levels were below normal for January and February, near normal in March, and slightly above normal for the with days in April. This suggests that precipitation levels were sufficient to determine if wetland hydrology criterion were present at the time of-the site visit. 5.0 WETLAND DELINEATION RESULTS Two depressional. wetlands were identified within the study area boundary (Appendix A, Figure 7). Field observations, field data, and GPS survey results were used to ' determine the on-site wetland area. Completed wetland data forms are presented in Appendix F. 5.1 Uplands Uplands were generally confined to fill areas. The plant communities associated with the uplands are disturbed grasslands on compact gravelly-sandy fill (Appendix C, Photo I through 3). The upland vegetation, soils, and hydrology are described in the following sections. Vegetation These areas are dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW). Other herbaceous vegetation observed include white clover (Trifolium repens; FACU+), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus, FAC), bluegrass (Poa sp., FACW+- UPL), fescue (Festuca sp., FAC+ - UPL), and other sub-dominant species, such as Himalayan blackberry and Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius). Overall, dominant vegetation is primarily FAC- to FACU+ and does not satisfy the 1987 Manual's requirements for hydrophytic vegetation (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Jones & Stokes 3 Project No. 05245.05 * hhiW/wunderground.com Although the precipitation levels are within the normal range for the two-week period prior to the site visit, the overall trend shows that precipitation is below normal (Table 2). Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel - Phase I Soils The soils within the upland area were predominately sandy-gravelly fill material and were not evaluated because soil compaction restricted digging. The fill material has been described as gravelly sand that extends to a depth of approximately 7 feet (Jones 2004, unpublished). The fill material would not meet the hydric soil criteria of 'the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Hydroloav No indicators of wetland hydrology. were observed. 5.2 Wetlands Two closed depressional wetlands were identified within the study area, totaling 0.28 acres (Appendix A, Figure 7). A summary of the wetland descriptions is shown in Table 3. Table 3. Wetlands and other waters identified on the Auburn Parcel - Phase 1 Site 5.2.1 Wetland A Wetland A is a depresssional palustrine emergent,- scrub-shrub wetland within the western portion of the study area. (Appendix A, Figure 7). This wetland is approximately 0.24 acre in size. The vegetation, soils, and hydrology of these areas are described below and in Appendix F. The site wetland map shows the-surveyed location of each data plot (Appendix A, Figure 7). Vegetation Vegetation is dominated by reed canarygrass, but also includes red osier dogwood and sapling black cottonwood in the northern portion of the site (Appendix C, Photo 5 through 7). The areal cover of the scrub-shrub and sapling species were estimated at more than 30 percent and therefore considered a Cowardin wetland class. Vegetation in Wetland A was sufficient to satisfy the hydrophytic vegetation criteria of the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Soils Soils in Wetland A are mapped as non-hydric Urban land series with Snohomish silt loam, nearby (Appendix A, Figure 5). Urban land soils have been modified by disturbance. No matrix color is provided for the Urban land series. However, the Snohomish silt loam series is shown to have a matrix chroma of I OYR 3/2 silt loam to 11 inches, with 1 OYR 5/6 mottles in the upper 8 inches (Snyder 1973). Below 11 inches, soil becomes a clay loam with a matrix of 2.5Y 5/2 clay Jones & Stokes 4 Project No. 05245.05 { based on uSFW5 Cowardin et-al (1979) classification system Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel -Phase 1 loam to 10YR 2/1 and 3/1 mucky peat with 5YR 4/4 and 5/6 mottles. Field data show soils within. the wetland area were found to be similar to the Snohomish silt loam series. Soils within this wetland satisfied the hydric soil requirements of the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Hydrology Observed wetland hydrology indicators were saturation in the upper 12 inches and surface drainage patterns, therefore meeting the hydrology criteria set forth in the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The primary hydrologic source for this area appears to, be precipitation, surface runoff, and seasonal high water table. This wetland does not appear to have any surface water connection to any other wetlands or streams outside of the study area. 5.2.2 Wetland B This 0.04-acre palustrine emergent wetland is located in a depression within the southeastern corner of the study area (Appendix A, Figure 7). The typical vegetation, soils, and hydrology of these areas are described below and in Appendix F. The site wetland map shows the surveyed location of each data plot (Appendix A, Figure 7). Vegetation Vegetation is dominated by reed canary grass (Appendix C, Photo 8). The vegetation found in Wetland B was sufficient to satisfy the hydrophytic vegetation criteria of the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Soils Soils in Wetland B are mapped as non-hydric Urban land series with Snohomish silt loam, nearby (Appendix A, Figure 5). However the soils are similar to those found in Wetland A. Soils within this wetland satisfied the hydric soil requirements of the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Hydrology Wetland hydrology was confirmed by observing saturation in the upper 12 inches and surface drainage patterns. The primary hydrologic source for this area appears to be roof drains from surrounding structures, precipitation, surface runoff, and seasonal high water table. These conditions meet the hydrology criteria set forth in the 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). This wetland does not appear to have any surface water connection to any other wetlands or streams outside the study area. 6.0 SUMMARY Review of National Wetland Inventory Map, City of Auburn 1991 and 2002 Wetland Inventories, and King County Soil Survey (Snyder 1973) indicate wetland conditions are present on the parcel. Two wetlands that appear to be isolated from other surface water features, comprising approximately 0.28 acres, were identified on the Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel - Phase 1 property. A topographic rise separates the two wetlands. Data plot, DP-11, was established at a topographic rise between the two wetlands. The, absence of hydric soils and near-surface saturation indicated the area between the two was upland. Jones & Stokes 5 Project No. 05245.05 Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel -Phase I Data collected at DP-2, an east-west drainage ditch located along the northern property line did not have wetland hydrology and was determined to be non-wetland. This report documents the investigation, and conclusions of Jones & Stokes. It is correct and complete to. the best of our knowledge. It should be considered a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination of wetlands but is subject to approval of permitting agencies. If impacts to wetlands on this property are proposed, this report will also need to be reviewed and approved in writing by the COE, Seattle District, in conjunction with the submittal of a Joint Aquatic Resource Permit Application (JARPA). Jones & Stokes 6 Project No. 05245.05 Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel - Phase 7.0 REFERENCES Alaback, et al. 1994. Alaback, P., Antos, J., Goward, T., Lertzman, K., MacKinnon, A., Pojar, J., Pojar, R., Reed, A., Turner, N., and Vitt, D. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Lone Pine Publishing, Redmond, WA. 526 pp. Cowardin, et al..1979. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service PUBL. FWS/OBS-79/31. 103 pp. Ecology, 2004. Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps -of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, Mississippi. 100 pp. + appendices. Guard. 1995. Guard, B. Jennifer. Wetland Plants of Oregon & Washington. Lone Pine Publishing, Redmond, WA. 239 pp. Kollmorgen Instruments. 1988. Munsell Soil Color Chart. NRCS. 2001. Hydric Soils List - King County Area, Washington: Detailed Soil Map Legend. Natural Resources Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture. http://www.wa.nres.usda.goy/technical/soils/hydric lists/hydsoil wa 633 ndf Reed. 1988. Reed, P.B., Jr. National List of Plant Species that Occur 'in Wetlands (Northwest Region 9). U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (26.9). 89 pp. Reed. 1993. Reed, P.B., Jr. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands (Northwest Region 9), Supplemental. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. http:[/www.fws.p-ov/ SCS. 1991. Soil Conservation Service, in Cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Hydric Soils of the United States. Snyder, Dale E., P.S. Gale, and R.F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington, Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture. ftp:bft-fe.sc.eszov.usda.gov/MOI/text-t)df/washington/wa633 text pdf Spear Cook, Sarah 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington & Northwestern Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, Washington. 417. USFWS. 2005. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Department of the Interior. National Wetland Inventory Map - USGS Auburn, Washington Quadrangles. http://wetiands.fws.gov/ USGS. 1987. United States Geological Survey. 7.5' Series (Topographic) - Auburn, Washington Quadrangle. Jones d Stokes 7 Project No. 05245.05 Appendix A. Figures Mow ;_ A :r. J ?. t No .. >; nth St Na ,, .. 6th t rjtiw Lam,. 4 ??571'IF •t f ,?.t=? ? ^+. cri" ^+ 1 E?Rl :i E, ??. __... ... ?l -t '?^..., :.,?'1h^'•Y..., .fyK.V:'s ?? • 1 Ef f.y ' , s :R? ?tii'.?M1 1c_'[CJp.'?if?', f ? ?. 1 Y' f`. F 1 N A 0 1000 LT... t2tin Sit Legend E Study Area: Lat. 47, Long. -122 Washington State Study Area Seattle . Aubum Tacoma FIGURE NO. Auburn Parcel h-m" &LPL Phase 1 WM - South Sound 1 Vicinity Map PROJECT NO. 2006 - 11:61dn 05'05 r, fr-a I 1111 I I a,634 44 3 Legend Study Area Boundary N A 0 200 71atn FIGURE NO. 30 Aubum Parcel iWPM c Phase 1 . WM - South Sound 2 Tax Lot Map PROJECT NO. oal loos - 7xo;m 05254.05 '^- - -w^-av?? -gun root thaw I\WV19-2 tsMO1_!p Source: Corps of Englneers 2005 Legend mmum? Study Area Boundary N A 0 75 m ,.... L 1"` 9°?M?" Aubum Parcel Phase I WM - South Sound Aerial Photo - 2002 FIGURE NO. 3 I I PROJECT NO. od?03, 2M 12Apm 05254 05 *`\PMJ'0b\ftA* "' -0-r?A062K06 A kwa Psat Phe NW\F1y-3 owkw r I I f --SOj i I I I N J t E t t , ! t t E E E E , E E ! t , t E, I f , t z t , E F F F f ? I E t f E t t , Ta - \' FI FV N Study Area Boundary t ?? ' 30 0 30 fx) SCALE x+ FEET T-Sw NOT OR CONSTRUCTION T i- - r _ 1 ' Awn FIGURE NO_ Auburn Parcel saw"Figm. Phase I none ""L Eft'^""^" jORWAS- o m Topograhic Map WM -South Sound t+a+ ."i` 4 I PROJECT NO. uoa _ 05254.05 sad. ..?.._ .??,... ------ - •.--vnr-? .w-.v.p x.rw rx.¦ k+ao. r".c Legend Study Area Boundary Soil Types N So Snohomish Silt Loam (hydric) A Ur Urban Land 0 200 FIGURE NO. la Auburn Parcel 3091-N gtc n Phase 1 WM - South Sound 5 `" Soils Map i PROJECT NO. 05254 Oot 0& 2008 - 12:3*n .05 }M z _ - MM111 E Y Source: USFWS weluke RODS Legend Study Area Boundary (Approx) ' PEMC Palustrine Emergent Seasonally Flooded N A 0 100 ts?t a - FIGURE NO. Aubum Parcel jolow-& Phase I WM - South Sound 6 NWI PROJECT NO. AMU-. oa oa z6oe - iz? 05254.05 K V -P-N- ---9 VMMfA* - &AM rata rho.. INCADVIO - NMLdn 1 1 1 J . ?nd A, rte` l '1 ? ; ` ? ii 4 \\ J t Wetland ! \,?..- ,..tee 96uroe: Corps of 15e91neers 2605 lierlalj; Fiogpea Byer Design Group 2005 Jones & Stokes 2005 Legend mmmm? Study Area Boundary DPB x Data Point N ems- Photo Point and Direction A Wetland Flag Location Q 75 Wetland: Wetland A: 0.24 ac: Wetland B: 0.04 ac. a FIGURE NO. Auburn Parcel _ Phase 1 WM - South Sound 7 Site Wetlands PROJECT NO. Aub1.: * j 05254.05 o b mob -. 1x?7pn r" Appendix B Typical Wetland Delineation Methodology Vegetation Hydrophytic vegetation is considered to be prevalent if greater than 50 percent of dominant species from all strata (tree, shrub, vine, and herbaceous) are classified as obligate wetland (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), and/or- facultative (FAC) according to the USFWS publication' National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands (Reed 1988). These classifications are based on moisture tolerance as indicated in Table 1. Dominant species are those representing 20 percent areal cover or more as shown on the data forms. Non-dominants (i.e., species comprising less than 20 percent areal cover) are also listed for use in-aiding wetland delineations when dominants are either- not classified to moisture tolerance or primarily facultative. In the latter case, a facultative neutral test is completed to aid in the determination of the presence or absence of hydrophytic vegetation. Plant s ecies indicator sate o definitions (Reed 1988 Obligate Wetland: (OBL) Plants that almost always occur in wetlands (estimated robabili > 99% under natural conditions. Facultative Wetland: Plants that usually occur in wetlands (estimated probability (FACW) 67 to 99%) but are occasionally found in non-wetland areas. Facultative: (FAQ Plants that are equally likely to occur in wetlands or non- wetlands (estimated probability 33 - 67%). Facultative Upland: (FACU) Plants that usually occur in non-wetlands (estimated robabili 67 - 99%). Upland: (UFL) Plants that almost always occur in non-wetlands (estimated probability > 99% under natural conditions. NOL Not on list - assumed as UPL Soils Hydric soils are defined as being saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic (i.e., reducing) conditions in the upper horizons, which favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Soils are classified as hydric based upon criteria set forth by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS). In general, this criteria includes; 1) soils that are classified as organic mucks and/or peats (i.e., Histosols); 2) mineral soils characterized as somewhat poorly drained, poorly drained, or very poorly drained, which exhibit high water tables between 0.5 and 1.5 feet from the soil surface for a significant period (usually a week or more) during the growing season; 3) soils that are ponded for a long or very long duration during the growing season, and 4) soils that are frequently flooded for a long or very long duration during the growing season (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Under these criteria, hydric soils may be further classified as drained or undrained, with drained hydric soils being those where sufficient ground or surface water has been removed by an artificial means (e.g., ditching, subsurface drain tile) to such an extent that the area will no longer support hydrophytic vegetation (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). As such, not all areas of hydric soil are considered to be wetlands. The growing season is defined as that portion of the year when the temperature of the soil, at approximately 20 inches below the surface, is -higher that 41 ° Fahrenheit (F). In order for this temperature to be reached, it is intuitive that the air temperature must be below freezing for an extended period. During an average winter, freezing may occur to depths up to 8 inches and to 15 inches during extended cold periods (Snyder 1973). This suggests that soils at 20 inches would rarely reach 41 ° F and imply a year-round growing season. However, the growing season is generally considered the time between the last and first frost, or a period of about 220 days (Snyder 1973). 'Hydric soils are identified in the field by digging soil pits and examining the soil profile for the presence of hydric soil indicators. Hydric soil indicators include such conditions as the presence of more than 50% organic material in the upper 32 inches, the existence of a histic epipedon in mineral soils, the detection of a strong sulfidic odor, the existence of reducing conditions, and the presence of gleyed (gray) soils colors or bright mottling (i.e., spots or blotches) with low-chroma matrix colors (Environmental Laboratory 1987). A soil is considered to be hydric if any one of these indicators is present. Soils at each sample plot on the Study Area were inspected to a depth between 3 and 16. inches to determine presence or absence of hydric conditions. Soil pits that were less.than 16 inches were due to soil compaction, typically associated with the fill. Soil characteristics including texture, . matrix color, and presence of mottles or gleying were recorded on the data forms, with the soil hue, value, and chroma determined using the Munsell Soil Color -Chart System (Kollmorgen Instruments Corporation 1988). Soil classifications and descriptions were obtained from the Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (Snyder 1973) and compared with field samples. Additional test pits were dug at the site to ensure accurate determination of wetland boundaries. These test pits followed the same methodology as the soil pits; however, data forms were not filled out at these locations. Hydrology Wetland hydrology is defined as permanent or periodic inundation or soil saturation for sufficient duration to develop hydric soils that support vegetation typically adapted for life in periodically anaerobic soil conditions (Environmental-Laboratory 1987). Primary indicators of wetland hydrology include inundation (i.e., standing water), saturation in the upper 12 inches of the soil column, water marks or lines on adjacent stationary objects (e.g., trees), sediment deposits or drift lines on vegetation, and observable drainage patterns on the ground surface. Other secondary indicators such as water-stained leaves, oxidized-rhizospheres in the upper 12 inches of the soil column, and information on the frequency of flooding and/or presence of high water tables from the local soil - survey or other sources can also be used to verify wetland hydrology when two or more are present (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Appendix C Site Photographs Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel -Phase 1 Jones & Stokes Project No. 05254.05 Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel - Phase I runes a OTOWS Project No. 05254.05 - - ---V, -VA SAX W UbL ,nuw,ng m? area ann general landiorm. Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel - Phase 1 Jones & Stokes Project No. 05254.05 rnuu? a: i.ooxing souin from north end of Wetland A showing emergent and scrub-shrub vegetation. rnoto 6: Looking southeasterly showing topographic rise into upland area. Note a defined channel at lower right of picture. Waste Management - South Sound Auburn Parcel - Phase 1 Jones & Stokes Project No. 05254.05 dominated by reed canary grass. - - ..6 ., r.,..... ?,,,...? ..V.U, UUIUIUaLeu oy reea canary grass. Not the depression area created by surrounding till. Appendiz D Local Wetland Inventory 04/22/2605 FRI 13:58 FAX 253 804 3114 AUBURN CITY HALL ° - C?oo1/O14 Posb t% brand fax transmittal memo 76n # at pvm ? e Rain 'TDfxdM?i(tc()a.?gse.A 9P ria rw^ 1 ) .. January 2003 CITY OF AUBURN STREAM AND WETLAND INVENTORY Auburn, WASHINGTON Prepared for City of Auburn 25 West Main Auburn, Washington 98001-4998. Prepared by Adolfson Associates, Inc. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, Washington 98107 Funds made available through the Washington State Department of community,, Trade and Economic Development b /22120D5 FRJ' 1:1.5-8 FAX '253 '904 3114 AUBURN:`CIT'Y'•`HALL U02fQ14 CYty oJAubum Nedand End Sbrcam Inverrtoty Mill Creek River Basin (continued) ML028 ML029 ML029 ML:030 ML032 ML033 ML035 ML037 I- - 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 1 _B; 1.7 105 105 25.1 25; 25.1 33 NOR" AubUrn 1991 Weiland !Even SEPA 1`des Auburn 1991 Wet_fand Inventory 2002 City Observation SEPA filed SEPA files NWI2001 SEPA fifes M 038 12 21 04 24 Auburn 1991 -Weiland ML039 12 21 04 28 Invein SEPA fles ML040 12 21 04 NI SEPA files ML041 12 21 30 . SEPA T11-es ML041 12 21 0ei 30:30.1 Auburn 1991 Wetland ML041 12 21 04 30' Inventory SEPAales . ML041 12 21 04 30 Aubum 1991 Wetland ML042 12 1 04 714 .; 1.5 Invento Auburn 1991 Wetland ML042 2 21 04 1.4 Inven Auburn 1991 Weiland ML042 21 04 7.4 Inventory SEPA fides ML043 13 21 . 04 26 Auburn-1991 Wetland ML044 13 21 04 105 Inventory SEPA fli es ML045 13 21 04 105 Aubum 1991 Wetland ML048 13 21 .29 Invent Auburn 1981 Wetland ML047 13 21 04 27 Invento Auburn 9981 Wetland M048 13 21 04 Invent M. Vi 20Q1 ML049 13 21 04 NW12001 ML060 13 21 04 2000/2001 Aerial photo ML051 13 21 04 8 2002 City ObsM tlon ML053 13 21 04 7; 7.1 2 Auburn 1991 Wetland ML054 13 21 9 9 nventory Auburn 9991 Wetland ML055 14 21 04 12 Inventory Auburn 991 Wetland ML056 14 21 04 Inventory 200012001 Aerial photo ML057 14 21 04 2002 City Observation ML068 14 21 04 Adollson 1997 January 2003, Arlo json Associates; rmc. Append&H-4 04/22/2005 FRI `13:59`' FAX -251 3'04 11:14 ATrBURN CITY HAI:I. . 004!014 C.e 5 nTLAND INWNTORY DATA FORM, Wetland ?J " No 1 /4-SU 1 /4 .S 13 T51 R? 1 /4- 1/4 ? MTP Noow. 1/4? 1/4 S- T Parcel Noll),; 3 17 Oats inventoried:_ -v Zoning: .= ect Plan Map: Weather Conditions: Coal, S A ----___--?----_=?.-=cam= - 1. General wetland type or characteristic: A. River Wet Pasture $. stream F. Pond/Lake C. Marsh/Swamp/Bag - G. Other D. Drainage Channel/Ditoh 2. Types of eater bodies associated with the wetland (Inlet (I); Outlet (O); Undetermined (b))= A. River I/O/U E. Pond/Lake--- I/O/U B_ Stream 1/0/U (7) None (Groundwater C. Drainage Chaanel/Ditch'I/Okd Exchange) I/Oa D. Drainage Pipe I/O/U 3. Distance to nearest drainage facility: CD 0-100' C. 5001-10001, B. 1001-500' D. X1000' ca) S E W NE SE NW SW 4. Xvidence of water movement through the wetland: A. No outlet. B- Outlet with standing Water/Hater below Outlet. C. No visible water movement (but water moving from outlet). D. Visible movement of water through wetland. None. Comment =- 5. Extent of V611utant discharge into the Wetland. AU'' No kiloton discharge. B. Probable discharge. C. Visible discharge. v. Source: 04/22/2005 FRI 1.3:`59 PAX 253 `804 3114 ATIBUR.N CITY iIA-I`J., " V00764'4,.., 6. The substrate is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year: No Ye (Probable) Yes (Confirmed) Inconclusive 7_ Is there visible surface water? No_:?< Yes 8. Field evidence of inundation or saturation (i.e. mater marks, drift lines, algal mats): Cnx? ?il.s OL-% We 9. The sut?strate is Predominantly undrained hydric soil: No Yes Field Inventory (See below) Soil Conservation Service Maps Test Pit #= 1 Series /Phase: Um I3,40 Is the soil on the hydric soil list? Is the soil: _ Mottled? No Yeses Matrix ColorRAIc ?ylq. Gleyed? No--s--- Yes Gley Color Y '- Satlirated? No Yeses Sulfer smell? No_LG Yes Entisol with Mottling? No - yes, Chromes- Hue A`...LR Va],?.te. , Chrcfta. Z vaku0- 5 Test Pit-#-- Is ries/Phase: • the soil on the hydric soil list? Is the soil: Mottled? No Yes Matrix Color Gleyed? Into Yes Gley Color Saturated? No Yes Sulfer smell? No Tres Entisol With Mottling? Np Yes Chroma Hue value NOTES: Soil pt* i u.Sc.o . d„u,q t? cLgn%e,-}MD-JL QJUA C" C9'mm U ,_...,,,.,,,,n Acccrdir!s -io - acs rnc,95 i -U sail u3 ow, Ur6" so11 wlhic h Is 1oc0Ae& c oba Gn shove ? SN' sail I round w aLO SCI4 041CL eonki -?D c Ln • N L4r'fAn3 c ?1tcQ C- , * ?;rCvll t sue.. tbalts r exnAe4r-e& -cam 1noU .. Ck isar?tta xVi, a'bnL"f 'TV so l1 KuE bo i? cbs?ru?'x s a [ -tt 5cyi[ I.,ttdLt i e. (6aae ran + ?,-?41??,,? ot.n? a c?l-.r?•.-tom 2 07 l9-?0? , r? so I a><-{xaQrx?e ?A 4 u LkAk '04:/'22/2005 FRI 13:59 FAX'25) 804 3114 AuBiMN CITY HAT.I. - ?1'D0B10i`A &??IOLO?ICAT+ Ft7NC,TUM Wetland No. 2.6 map no, 1, At least periodically, thb land supports predominantly hydrophgtes: No Yes* (Probable) es* (Confirmed) Inoonalusive* *See attached worksheets. 2. Degree of hydrophytic vegetation cover on the wetland (See attached worksheets). ?A >75% B. 50-75%, C. 25-50% D. 0-25z 3. Agricultural use is present within the wetland: Yes (Extent of Coverage): A. 0-25% B. 25-50% C. 50-7551 D. D75X 4. Quality of wetl&nd for breeding/apaLwning, Vinterirng/transit or habitat for anadromous fish. trout, game fish, game birds-or other mammals of significant commercial or recreational value (see attached plant list): A. Breeding Area No Probable).Yes(Confirmed) B. Spawning Area (RD Yes (Probable) Yes(Confirmed) C. Wintering/Transit. No QD%Probable) Yes(Coafi.rmed) D. habitat No Yes(Probable) (TEEXConfirmed) E. Rare/Endangered (o Yes(Probable) Yes(Confirmed*) Species* *Based on U.S. Departinent of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service and the Washington State Departments of Wildlife, and Natural Resources reporting. Observ4tion:GbnP_xvu2 cx,tt'--?i s. s. LmeAt kilt.di.tLC 5cn3 S- , rm'-s crCW!z. ?t.r x?co`r , qQ acAN r_4 E_ Jt rc' 5. Sure A. B. C. ®D F_ G. H. oundine habitat: Open Water: Agricultural Grass: Wooded: Brush/shrub: Developed/Urban: Filled/unveBetated: Freesway/Railroad : N S E W NE SE NW SW N S E W HE SE NW SW' N S E W NE SE NW SW N S E W NE SE NW SW OCR O O NE SE NW SW N S E W NE SE NW SW N S E W NE SE NW SW N 5 E W n SE NW SW 1,4/27/2005 FRI 13:' 59 FXX 253 804 3:114 AUBURN CITY HALL * 07/0].4; 6- Special habitat-features:- A. Snags X25' high.. E. Logs B. Shags <25' high ( Canopy cover C. Rock outcrop j; Other-Tacd r , Perchers H. Hone. 7. AniMals observed on the Wetland site: Bi?dFis Amphibians/Reptiles Mammals Other Species NOTES scar rte.,, Env 'Ru. ?,v-e?'1c??i ?. e}'+ 3 Slctgo Provia-z.., PoAe4Y6a-Q nest !s;K : -'er 6trAo CU'1 CL A SCx1..fCR- ? ; 't O o r.? cats ?tsi ? ?? ?.c? ? c9 r.? '?4 R D JU A va-!4 C-VxCR 11 QC6 0 ? T )NA L a l CWh ev S%A. cLo l utU . k)C> sr*, aj2k rrce„r Y+, a SLo w ,x ?r Gj tr ?p t-trt? KG ar^ ?? 04/22/YO"05 `FRI "1":?:SA FAX 253 804 39:9.4" ATT.4 City JUM, _C_ VT9.TjAY..1MT.9-rMAT Wetland NO.-?-G map No. 1. Size of wetland: Average width. aq1-0 feet CE3D E/wI Average Length:- feat, N/S Estimated Area: !.(, acres 2_ Distance in miles to nearest school: C;X) 0-•5.miles: N (2) E W NE SE NN SW B. .5-1 miles: N S E W HE BE NW SW C. 1-2 miles: N S E W NE SE NW SW. D.,>2 miles: N S E W NE SE NW SW 2. Distance in miles to nearest perk: CK> 0-.5 miles: N S E W RE-9b NW SW B. _5-1 miles: N S B W NE SE NW SW C: 1-2 miles: N S E W NE SE NW SW. D. >2 miles: N S E W NE SE NW SW- 4• Types of access to the wetland: A. Pedestrian Trail: N SSE W NE SE NW SW B. Moycle Trail: N S E W NE SE NW SW C.•Rodd: NSEWNESE-MW SW D. Boatable Watercourse: N S E W NR SE Nw SW None. S. Tyres of access Within the met-land: A. Pedestrian Trail B. Bicycle Trail C. Road D. Doatable Watercourse None. S. Surrounding land uses: L::L? vacant : 4a?s EM NE SE NW SW - B_ Agricultural N S E W NE SE NW Sit Industrial/oomn?aroial: NQJ?p NE BE NW SW D. Residential: N S E W -NE SE NW SW B. Park Land: N S E W NE SE NW SW --- Freeway/Railroad R/W: N S S W NIT SE NW SW NOTES: ar dt6/ yC t eA dA 1V,* 01 t wow=azo, ^- ?= ?j eco' "t?? cue???,? Mnci ?kCLCOZ Li% _TCNV" "C S+r ?? 04/22/2005 TR'L 1`4,. 00 'FAX 253 ' 804 3114 .AUBURN `CITY -RA1.:L. 009/D7 4 ` ? W7'? A'N7) Ti , i TTi'r? ?truv ???-----? Wetland Ho. 2b ?'aGASS IFICATT[)t7 Mays No. t? 1. System ?aius+rL#,LA 'QOM Subsystem 1, Class* % Cflvex 1o C Subclass__ Subclass Subclass Modi.fier__=trn cir ` -TV 2. Class ? Cover Subclass Subclass Subclass Modifier 3. Class % Cover _ ._ ._.__ Subclass Subclass 'Subclass Modif iez 4. Mass % Cover Subclass Subclass Subclass Modifier 5. Class ' Covex Subclass Subclass Subclass Mocutier 5 doryi?na-tR.1a sc-*-s...o sr t?.ht ck• (?eYSi s? t -fir ' e.r,-{,rc`'„'' NJ 1? tab,. ??.n?.??? , 246 l Les .A-vtl bAcLL) 'i'?rq :qo,l auor-fcLc.t MOS+ - ew JL 'tea 5cv? 0&/22/2005 FRI`74:00` FAT `255 401 a11:4, AITBURN CITY" T.xij.: . Op-d? - 011ifi 1411 Wetland po, VEGETATIVE Map No.-X„ COV, vegetation unit community indicator status: Proportion of vegetation unit to the entire wetland: Do the dominant species indicate that the vegetation ?? supports hydrophytic Vegetation? No Yea unit ..K Inconcluaivc, 04/22/2006-MI - L4: 00 PAX `253 804 °3'114 AUBURN. -CITY. iTAld, C Ol lYtfl4'' Wetlahd No.C? VEGETATIVE Map No, Vegetation unit community indicator status:w Proportion of vegetation unit to the entire wetland: !o o % Do the dominant species indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydrophytie vegetation? No Yes ? Inconclusive- F04/2$Y20.05 FR-1 14;00: FAI ;.253 `804 311:4 AITAURN -CITY.HALa, a-^Ct Mao 2. Is hydric soil present? No ..Yes . T=?OI?IARY Wetland No, Zr- Map No. 1-3 1. Is wetland hydrology present? ---No Yes (Probable) XYes. (Confirmed) ____Iaconclusive 3. Is a predominance of wetland vegetation present? o Yee (probable) -ZYes (Confirmed) Inconclusive 4. The wetland is classified as: Non-wetland Fish and Wildlife Service -? -- _O_ S .. Arw Corps of Engineers NOTES: -MiS U t*d CLk.c1 is otwAo?tLq ccr,%p K-AI. ts.e _ C Cs ra.ss a C" S c ?-,- .?? vrc- fcu5,,9-q,9 Cf, Q.Q.. s; ?lmwlo? a? cn + ?.th, s bl2 ? - - ' gnu' haEAR Flu sb,l e t 06 --1."A 5 `Aj a? w ate. cbse r,?Q or S-k?c? n? ?Y1vt'w1-i,ry. ant- 04-/2-2 !2005 :FRa 14:`00 . FAX 253 -804 3.1:14 AWBITR.N CITY JALI :: - F'_ i?rL.atan STraarzv- The following map indicates such features as the general wetland shape, location of survey transects. wetland dimensions, public access. and the location of specific survey information (i.e. soil test pits; inlets; outlets; habitat features; etc,)': i I i t /r b f I - " wets. ,? Z [° p fA . 1 :Zoo r" 04/Z2/2U05 All 14:'00 1 PAX `2&6 80'4 X114 AUBURN-CITY na IF -j E- L JD Nlt!`w lS3M -?_ _ :1 t c; MN t5 Ht '•f{2foi?4YOi"d' C? L_? +7m s?? ?? ss ?tr9 p 4 3'?i' +I1 yC? V ? c ! £? o I a m . `2 ? off i1 mi - •n .t r ? tr 6 Stil O 3 01 3 h ,? - y L A Pm" A C ? ??+r 1 ' •E1 3 rb n ° ? ' - $ C7 `D 3 { J ? V " m 6 m t ? I r It),' l•UUj d \ e it. _- lit c, i_ 55 9 -i3 :'bc` T{ SA.-.-7 ' ^, ? ?'S+ ? ' ? 7 ,1?.e0PlFl'4'•? i S'`Y ?1 C?f+?sV@?cvJ •4•,?i??fl r ' .. ?'1f'???+'°°x????.v77?-? '?• • •? cl' I? p ??t. ter.+?'+?--"'?• ?/ YQ.}??11?!•?l}jj??? ?{ ..Il +?C"t?nf l l?.v?` '•?•?? ,? U: -r \:IWAI tI It _ ,. -- uuC; r. r. , ru Printer Friendly WUI - History wunderground.carrti a Previous Month Sunday . « 2004 January 2005 2006 s 2 3 g 5 4 x.. e Actual: Precip: 41130 0.00 Actual: Precip: 40128 0 00 Actual: r 40128 Actual.: .39124 Actual: 40.126 Actual: :g tx 44134 Average Precip: : 45135 0.17 . Average: 45135 Preci : 0 17 P ecip: Average 0.00 : 45 1 36 Precip:' 0.00 Average: 45136 Preci. Average 0.17 : 45 36 Precip: 40.08 51 Average: p . Precip: 0.17 Precip: 0.17 Preci P 0,17. Precip; 0.17 0.17 'Y AOL VIP. :11 M6 JA Actual: Precip: 37132 0.04 Actual, Precip: 38127 0.00 Actual: Preci : e 39123 T Actual: 45139 Actual: 40131 Actual: 38127 L~ Average: 451.36 Predp: 0.17 Average Preci : : 45136 0 17 p Average : 45136 ' Precip: Average 0.00 : 45136 Pracip: Average 0.00 : 45136 Precip: Average 0.00 : 45136 p . Precip: 0.17 Precip: 0.17 Precip: 0.17 Precip: 0.17 16 , • R. et J2 1W I IQ 21 Actual: 44 32 1 Actual: 54142 Actual: ' 60153 Actual: "'+° 62150 -A t l '?i• f;;eF+ Precip: Average: 0.09 46 136 Precip: 2.39 Average: 46 136 Precip: 0.92 Avera e: 46 36 9 I Precip: A T . c ua : Precip: 54149 0.15 Actual: P re a: 61149 0.02 Precip: 0.17 Precip: 11.17 Predp: 0.16 verage Precip: : 46136 0.16 Average Preci : : 86138 0 16 Average: 461 36 p . Precip: 0.16 23 25 2z 2 Actual: Preci P: 56145 T Actual: Pred : 57142 0 00 Actual: 50137 Actual: 50140 Actual: 53 41 I 8 Actual: . ?`; e + 55140 Average: Preci : 46136 0 16 p Average: . 47136 Predp: Average: 0.00 47136 Precipc 0.04 Average: 47136 Predp: Average: 0.07 47136 Precip: A 0.01 p . era Precip: 0.16 Precip: 0.16 Precip: 0.16 Precip: 0.16 verage: Precip: 47138 0.16 Actual: 51141 Actual: 54142 Precip: 0.01 l Precip: 0.02' Average:-47136 Average: 47136 Precip: 0.16 predlp: 0.16 Month Precipita0on -Actual month totals 4.4 1 Normal month total: 5.13 Calendar Key Sunny Mostly Sunny Partly Sunny Partly Cloudy Sunn Rain Mostly a Hal b Flurries u . Thunderstorms Cloudy Hazy V Sleet Fog . ? • „ . ? . _ , ? r* . denotes • -, 'chance or Page I of 1 Next Month z 1 •i?:r Actual: 45137 Precip: 0.05 Average: 45135 Precip: 0.17' Actual: 44133 Precip: '0.02 Average: 45136 Precip: 0.17 tai j 2 Actual: 37126 Precip: 0.19 Average: 46136 Precip: 0.17 Actual: 551 50 Precip: 0.17 Average: 46136 Precip: 0.16 22 Actual: 47142 Precip: T Average: 47136 Precip: 0.16 l Xr Snow " r Con Hi h A actual' 9415$ g Precip: 0. 4 rec Unknown Average: 71153 Tem :y Precip: 0.03 -eo= Aftih Copyright CO 2005 The Weather Underground, Inc http://printer.wunderground.com/history/airport/KSEA/2005/1/1/MonthlvHistorv.html?nrintfeature=calendar 4/2.9/2005 PrinterTriendly-WUI History Alk wunderground.com Page 1 of 1 K Previous Month ((2004 February 2005 2006 a Next Month H Sunday Monda T uesday Wednesday Thursday. Friday Saturday i 3 _ F AL Actual: Precip: 53136 0.00 Actual: Precip: 59145 0 00 Actual: Preci : 51 139 0 00 Actual: 50 141 Actual: 44135 Average: 48136 Preci : 0 16 . Average: 48137 p Average . : 48137 Precip: 0.12 Average: 48 13T Precip: Average: 0.00 48137 p . Precip: 0.16 Precip: 0.16 Precip: 0.16 Precip: 0.16 Z $ 8 JA 12 Actual: Precip: 43137 0.75 Actual: Precip: 46135 0.00 Actual: Preci : 48131 0 00 Actual: P 49133 Actual: 51 129 Actual: 55129 Actual: 14o 4714o Average Precip: : 48137 0:16 Average: 49137 Preci : 0 1 p Average: . . 49137 recip: Average 0.00 : 49137 Precip: 0.00 Average: 49137 Precip: Average 0:00 : 49137 Precip: Average: 0.09 49137' p . 5 Precip: 0.15 Precip: 0.15 Precip: 0.15 Precip: 0.15 Precip: 0.15 JA &L 16 MR 1@ 18 Actual: Precip: 45136 T- Actual: Precip: 43130 T Actual: Preci : 44126 0 00 Actual: 51131 Actual: .52132 Actual: 54132 Actual: 481.28 Average: 49137 Precip: 0.15 Average Preci : : 49137 0 15 p Average: P . $0137 Precip: 0.00- Average: 50137 Precip: Average: 0.00 50137 Precip: 0.00 Average: 50137 Precip: Average: 0.00 50137 p . recip: 0.15 Precip: 0.15 Precip: 0.15 Precip: 0.15 Precip: 0.15 2tL 21 22 2a 24 ?;; 2S Actual: Precip: 50134 0.00 Actual: Precip: 53128 0.00 Actual: Precip: 56130 0.00 Actual: Preci : 59131 0 00 Actual: Pr i 61 134 , Actual: 51 139 Actual: 47134 Average: Precip: 50137 0.15 Average; 50 137 Preci : 0 14 Average: P 50 138 p . Average: 51 1 38 p: ec Average: 0.00 51 1 38 Precip: 0.00 Average: 51 138 Precip: Average: 0.00 51138 p , recip: 0.14 Precip: 0.14 Precip: 0.14 Precip: 0.14 Precip: 0.14 27- 2$ . Actual: 61135 Actual: s 58145 Precip: 0.00 Precip: 0.24 Average: 51 138 Average; 51 138 Precip: 0.14 - Precip: 0.14 Month Precipitation -Actual month total: 1.20 N ormal month total: 4.18 Calendar Key Sunny Clear ° Mostl Sunny Partly Sunny 466 Partly Sunny * Cloudy Rain Snow F Com Z `.; Mostly Cloudy QCIU81: 90 3r _High Lo T Hail Flurries Thunderstorms ' t•.. , p FoHazy g Fo 9 Sleet ? . denotes Unknown Precip: 0.00 Average: 71 53 rec ?Tem _ + 'chance N Precip: 0.03 1-00-300 or A ft. Copyright.0 2005 The Weather Underground,_Inc, http://printer. wunderground.com/history/airport/KSEA/2005/2/?I/MonthivHistorv-htmI?n7intfPan„-P=n_gIPr,riar ai')oionn, -Printer Friendly WUI - History Page 1 of 1 .Aft. vunderground?com x Previous Month a 2004 March 2005 ' 2006* Next Month n Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 2 4 Actual: 60145 Actual: 55145 Actual: 61140 Actual: 58 143 Actual: 59 142 Precip: 0.12 Precip: 0.04 Precip: 0.00 Precip: 0.00 Precip: 0.00 Average: 51 138 Average: 51 138 Average: 52138 Average: 52 38 Average: 521 38 Precip: 0.14 Precip: 0.14 Precip: 0.13 Precip: 0.13 Precip: 0.13 Actual: 61149 Actual: 63150 Actual: 67145 F? Actual: 50148 Actual: 63146 Actual: 65142 Actual: 60147 Precip: 0.00 Precip: 0.00 Precip: 0.00 Precip: 0.01 PreGp: 0.00 Precip: 0.00 Precip: 0.00 Average: 52138 Average: 521 38 . Average: 52139 Average: 52139 Average: 521 39 Average: 52 139 Average: 531 39 Precip:. 0.13 Precip: 0.13 Precip: 0.13 Precip: 0.13 Precip: 0.13 PreGp: 0.13 Precip: 0.13 Actual: 62139 Actual: 61 137 Actual: 56142. Actual: 4s ? 41 Actual: 53 1 41 k; Actual: 50 1 38 Actual: 55137.+. Precip: 0.00 Precip: 0.00 Precip; 0.00 Precip: 0.14 Precip: 0.00 Precip: 0.00 Precip: 0.34 Average: 53139 Average; 53139 Average: 53139 Average: 53139 Average: 53139 Average: 53139 Average: 54139 Precip: 0.12 Precip: 0.12 Precip: 0.12 Precip: 0.12 Precip: 0.12 Preelp: 0.12 Precip: 0.12 2Q / a 21 22 23 24 25 26 .Actual: 55140 Actual: 4913; ctu : Actual: 53137 Actual: 56137 Actual: 54141 Actual: 53137 Actual: 50143 P 0.10 Precip: 0.07 Precip: 0.00 Precip: T Precip: 0.00 Precip: 0.00 Precip: 1.51 Average: 54139 Average: 54139 Average: 54140 Average: 54140 Average: 541-40 Average: 54140 Average: 55140 Precip: 0.12 Precip: 0.12 Precip: 0.11 Precip: 0.11 Precip: 0.11 Precip: 0.11. Precip: 0.11 aC 312Z ji 11 2-6 i s . dPta tX a i?r F 29 Actual: $2144 Actual: 47141 Actual: 50141 Actual: 54141 Actual: 54142 Precip: 0.64 Precip: OAO Precip: 0.13 Precip: 0.00 Preelp: 0.21 Average: 55140 Average: 55140 Average: 55140 Average: 55140 Average: 55140 Precip: 0.11 Precip: 0.11 Precip: 0.11 Precip; 0.11 Precip: 0.10 Month Precipitation -Actual month total: 3.71 Normal month total: 3.75 Calendar Key Sunn 04 Clear Partly Sunny SuPartl nny Cloudy Rain 1 Snow on mostly r,•? to T Actuar---l: 90158 ieh Cloudy Preci 0.00 rec Hal Thunderstorms p N s Flumes Ha W Sleet Unknown Average: 71153 'Tel Fog denotes 'chance 11 Precip: 0,03 =eo ao 0 Copyright © 2005 "I'he Weather Underground, I http://printer.wunderground.com/history/airporUKgEA/2005/3/1/Month]vHistorv.html?nrintfPattire,=r`a]P„riar 41mmnS Printer Friendly WUI - History AM wunderground.com Page 1 of 1 « Previous Month at 2004 April 2005 Sunday Monde Y Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Frida 2006 , Next Month » y Saturday Actual: .53140 Actual: 55138 Precip: 0.34 Precip: 0.10 Average : 55140 Average: 56140 i Z Precip: 0.10 Precip: 0.10 Actual: 1 F 41 Predp: 0.40 Actual: Preci : F 62145 Actual: 0 00 541 40 Actual: 55137 Actual: 55140 Average: 56147 Precip: 0.10 p . Precip: 0.20. Avers a: 56 41 : ge 41 Preci p 0.00 ge: 57 141 Precip: 0.00 Average: 57141 14 Preclp 11 0.10 Precip 010 prey P: 0.10. Precip: 0.09 Actual: 52138 Predp: 028 Actual: 50137 Actual: 49136 Actual: Precip: 0.40 Precip: 0 08 P 52137 Actual: $1138 Actual: 50 141 Actual: 55143 Average: 5T (41 Precip: 0.09 . recip: Average: ST 141 Average: 57142 Average Precip: 0 09 0.00 Preci : : 58142 Average: T . 58142 A erage: 58142 A e . Predp: 0.09 Predp: 0.09 Precip: 0.09 Precip: 0.09 v rage: 58142 Predp: 0.09 ct l 211 0 21 22 . 2a ua : 54140 PAP: 0.04 Actuate 57 .43 1 Actual: 62140 Actual Predp: 0.01 Predp: 0.00 Preci : 64141 Actual: 0 00 61147 Actual: 78151 '1 Actual: 64152 Average: 58142 Predp: 0.08 p . Predp: Average: 59142 Average: 59.142 Average: 59 43 Average: Precip: 0 08 P 'reap* 0.08 0.00 59 43 Preci Average: F: 0.00 69 1 43 Precip: 601 0.12 6 g3 _ 19 . redp: 25 26' 27 008 Precip: 20 008 Pr cip: 0.08 A8 Precip: FActual:65 Actual: 631 52 Actual: 65i54 A ctual: Predp: 0.00 Precip: 0 00 i1 50 Actual: 51552 29. Actual: ' 3 150 0 6 . R If Forecast: Bt146 Pip: 0.08 . Predp: Average: 60143 Average: 60144 Average: Precip: 0.08 Preci • 0 07 P P 0.00 Predp: 61 ! 44 Avers e: g 0.16 61 44 1 Preclp: Average: 0.12 61144 Chance of Rain Average: W I" . • reGp: Month Precipitation - To dale: 3 30 Normal to date: 2 34 N l 0.07Predp: 0.07 Precip: 0 0.05 .05 Precip: 0.07 0.07 . orma month total: 2.59 Calendar Key ' Sunny Mostly Sunny Partly Cloud Rain - Clear Parity Sunny - Sunny Apt- T now Data F om Mostly y ili? ACt1.11l: I 90 i 58 g Cloud Hall Thunderstorms Hazy Sleet 'r 4 Flurries Fog i .'.,; :.. e r nknown L?lo T Precip; 0.04 reo M f'71V81ityeE 711.53 , T ' of chan e j Precip: 0.03 '8® - Copyright © 2005 T he Weather Unde rground, Inc http://i)rinter.wunderpTound.com/history/aimort/KSEA/2005/4/1/Month]vHicto v.html?nri ntfPanrrP-naIendP- AI?01?001? Appendix F Routine Wetland Determination and Rating System Field Data Forms ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION FIELD DATA FORM (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987, revised) Mapped Unit Name: Urban Land Matches Profile? generally Taxonomy: No data listed Drainage Class: non listed 16" 10YR 3/2 7.5YR 4/6 numerous, medium, bright silt loam - Histol Reducing conditions (test) Gleyed Histic epipedon High organic content surface layer Organic streaking Sulfidic odor x Mottled (wrin to") Organic pan - Probable aquic moisture regime Concretions (wrin 3", >2mm) On hydric soils list Comments: Low chroma.and mottles within upper 10". Depth of surface water: -- Inundated Oxidized rhizospheres in upper Depth to free water in pit: -- x Saturated in upper 12 in. 12 in. Depth to saturated soil: .8" Water marks Water-stained leaves Drift lines x Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC neutral test Comments: Drainage patterns in wetlands Other Hydrophytic Vegetation? Yes Hydric Soils? Yes Wetland Hydrology? Yes Comments: All three wetland criteria observed. Is this sample plot within a wetland? Yes Project 05254.05 Date: 4/8/2005 Client/Owner. WM - South Sound State: Washingotn Investigator: Jim Carsner County: King Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Township, Range, Section: T21 N, R4E, Sec 13 Is it an atypical situation? No Plant Community: PEM Is the area a potential problem area? No Sample Plot np 1 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION FIELD DATA FORM (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987, revised) Mapped U Taxonomy: loam i Matches Profile? no Drainage Class: poorli Histol Reducing conditions (test) Gleyed Histic epipedon High organic content surface layer Organic streaking Sulfidic odor x Mottled (wrn 10") Organic pan Probable aquic moisture regime Concretions (wrin 3", >2mm) On hydric soils list Comments: Low chroma and mottles within upper 10". Depth of surface water. -- Depth to free water in pit- Depth to saturated soil- Comments: No primary or secondary indicator Hydrophytic Vegetation? Yes Hydric Soils? Yes Wetland Hydrology? No Comments: Saturated in upper 12 in. Oxidized rhizospheres in upper 12 in. Water marks Water-stained leaves Drift lines Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC neutral test Drainage patterns in wetlands nth- Is this.sample plot within a wetland? No Project #: 05254.05 Date: 4/8/2005 Client/Owner: WM - South Sound State: Washingotn Investigator: Jim Carsner County: King Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Township, Range, Section: T21 N, R4E, Sec 13 Is it an atypical situation? No Plant Community: PEW Is the area a potential problem area? No Sample Plot: DP 9 ROUTINE VVETLAND DETERM?NATtON FIELD DATA FORM (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987, revised) Project #: 05254.05 Date: 4/8/2005 Client/Owner: WM - South. Sound State: Washingotn. Investigator: Jim Carsner County: King Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes. Township, Range, Section: T21 N, R4E, Sec 13 Is it an atypical situation? No Plant Community: Upland Is the area a potential prob?erri area? No Sample Plot: np s Mapped Unit Taxonomy: R Matches Profile? no Drainage Class: poorly-drained It loam Histol Histic epipedon Sulfidic odor Probable aquic moisture regime Reducing conditions (test) High organic content surface layer Mottled (wAn 10") concretions (w/In 3", >2mm) Gleyed Organic streaking Organic pan On hydric soils list ?'• •" Depth of surface water --- - ------------ : - Inundated Oxidized rhizospheres in upper Depth to free water in pit: -- Saturated in upper 12 in. 12 in. Depth to saturated soil: - Water marks Water-stained leaves Drift fines Local soil survey data Sediment deposits T FAC neut ral test Comments: No primary or secondary indicator o ] H Drainage patterns in wetlands r bserved. Hydrophytic Vegetation? Yes Hydric Soils? No Is this sample plot within a wetland? No Wetland Hydrology? No Comments: Not all three wetland criteria observed. ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION FIELD DATA FORM (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987, revised) Mapped Unit Name: Urban Land Taxonomy: No data listed Matches Profile? generally Drainage Class: non listed Histol Reducing conditions (test) Gleyed Histic epipedon High organic content surface layer Organic, streaking Sulfclic odor x Mottled (Wrin 10") Organic pan Probable aquic moisture regime Concretions (w/in 3", >2mm) On hydric soils list Comments: Low chroma and mottles within upper 10". Depth of surface water: - Inundated Oxidized rhizospheres in upper Depth to free water in pit: 10" x Saturated in upper 12 in. 12 in. Depth to saturated soil: surface Water marks Water-stained leaves Drift lines Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC neutral test Drainage patterns in wetlands Other comments; Primary indicator observed. Hydrophytic Vegetation? Yes Hydric Soils? Yes Is this sample plot within a wetland? Yes Wetland Hydrology? Yes Comments: All three wetland criteria observed. Project #: 05254.05 Date: 4/812005 Client/Owner. WM -South Sound State: Washingotn Investigator: Jim Carsner County: King Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Township, Range, Section: T21 N, R4E, .Sec 13 Is it an atypical situation? No Plant Community: PEM Is the area a potential problem area? No Sample Plot: DP 4 ROUTINE WETLANDDETERMINATION FIELb BATA FORM (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987, revised Project #: 05254.05 Date: 4/8/2005 Client/Owner: WM - South Sound State: Washingotn Investigator: Jim Carsner County: King Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Township, Range, Section: T21 N, R4E, Sec 13 Is it an atypical situation? No Plant Community: PEM Is the area a potential problem area?, No Sample Plot: DP 5. x % of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-): Comments: Dominated by FAC or wetter species. = I 1 Mapped Unit Name: Urban Land Taxonomy: No data listed 1 of 1 Matches Profile? generally Drainage Class: non listed silt Histol Reducing conditions (test) Gleyed Histic epipedon High organic content surface layer Organic streaking Sulfidic odor Mottled (wfin 10") Organic pan Probable aquic moisture regime concretions (w/in 3", >2mm) On hydric soils list Comments: Hydric soil - low chroma. Depth of surface water: - Depth to free water in pit: -- Depth to saturated soil: 10" Comments: Primary indicator observed. Hydrophytic Vegetation? Yes Hydric Soils? Yes Wetland Hydrology? Yes Comments: All three wetland criteria observed. x Saturated in upper 12 in. Oxidized rhizospheres in upper 12 in. Water marks Water-stained leaves Drift lines Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC neutral test Drainage patterns in wetlands Other Is this sample plot within a wetland? Yes RbUTfNE WETLAND DETERM!NATION FIELD DATA FORM (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987, revised) Project #: 05254.05 Date: 4/8/2005 Client/Owner: WM - South Sound State: Washingotn Investigator: Jim Carsner County: King Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Township, Range, Section: T21 N, R4E, Sec 13 Is it an atypical situation? No Plant Community: Upland Is the area a potential problem area? No Sample Plot: DP 6 uc...... a. uuvlll4UG[f n tsu X FACW Rubus discolor H 30 x FACU % of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-): Comments: Not dominated by FAC or wetter species_ Mapped Unit Name: Urban Land Taxonomy: No data listed 0 - 16" 1 of 2 Matches Profile? generally. Drainage Class: non listed Histol ----- Reducing conditions (test) Histic epipedon High organic content surface layer _ Sulfidic odor x Mottled (w/in 10") Probable aquic moisture regime Concretions (wrin 3", >2mm) Comments: Low chroma and mottled within upper 1011. Depth of surface water: - Depth to free water in pit: - Depth to saturated soil: - Comments: No saturation within upper 16 inches. Gleyed Organic streaking Organic pan On hydric soils list Inundated Oxidized rhizospheres In upper Saturated in upper 12 in. 12 in. Water marks Water-stained leaves Drift lines Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC neutral test Drainage patterns in wetlands nth-, nyaropnytlc vegetation? No Hydric Soils? Yes Is this sample plot within a wetland? No Wetland Hydrology? . No Comments: Not all three wetland criteria observed. ROUTINE WETLAND'DETERMINATION FIELD'DATA FORM (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987, revised) Project #: 05254.05 Date: 4/8/2005 Client/Owner WM - South Sound State: Washingotn Investigator: Jim Carsner County: King Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Township, Range, Section: T21 N, R4E, Sec 13 Is it an atypical situation? No Plant Community: Upland Is the area a potential problem area? No Sample Plot: DP 7 - Mapped Unit Name: Urban Land Matches Profile? generally Taxonomy: No data listed Drainage Class: non listed _ n HMO 1( Histol Reducing conditions (test) Gleyed Histic epipedon High organic content surface layer Organic streaking Suifidic odor Mottled (w/in 101) Organic pan Probable aquic moisture regime concretions (w/in 3", >2mm) On hydric soils list Comments: Hard packed below 8". No mottling within upper 10". Depth of surface water: - Inundated Depth to free water in pit: -- Saturated in Depth to saturated soil: -- Water marks Drift lines Comments: No saturation within upper 8". Oxidized rhizospheres in upper 12 in. 12 in. Water-stained leaves Local soil survey data FAC neutral lest n wetlands nor o? Hydrophytic Vegetation? Yes Hydric Soils? . No Is this sample plot within a wetland? No Wetland Hydrology? No Comments: Not all three wetland criteria observed. a 1 ROUTINE WETLAND-DETERMINATION FIELD DATA FORM (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987, revised) Mapped Unit Name: Urban Land Taxonomy: No data listed Matches Profile? generally Drainage Class: non listed Histol Reducing conditions (test) Gleyed Histic epipedon High organic content surface layer Organic streaking Sulfidic odor Mottled (w/in 10") Organic pan Probable aquic moisture regime Concretions (wrin 3", >2mm) On hydric soils list Comments: Hydric soil - low chroma. Depth of surface water: -- Inundated Oxidized rhizospheres in upper Depth to free water in pit: 8" x Saturated in upper 12 in. 12 in. Depth to saturated soil: surface. Water marks Water-stained leaves Drift lines Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC neutral test Drainage patterns in wetlands Other Comments: Saturated within upper 12" and water at 8" of surface. Hydrophytic Vegetation? Yes Hydric Soils? Yes Wetland Hydrology? Yes Comments: All three wetland criteria observed Is this sample plot within a wetland? Yes Project #:. 05254.05 Date: 4/8/2005 Client/Owner: WM - South Sound State: Washingotn Investigator: .Jim Carsner County: King Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Township, Range, Section: T21 N, R4E, Sec 13 Is it an atypical situation? No Plant Community: PEM Is the area a potential problem area? No Sample Plot: DP 8 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION FIELD DATA FORM (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987, revised) Project #: 05254.05 Date: Client/Owner: WM - South Sound 4/8/2005 State: Washingotn Investigator: Jim Carsner County- King Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Township, Range, Section:* T21 N, R4E, Sec 13 Is it an atypical situation? No Plant Community: U land Is the area a potential problem area? No p Sample Plot DP 9 11 au - X_ I FACW Rubus discolor SS 20 x • FACU % of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAG): 1 Comments: Not dominated by FAC or wetter species. Mapped Unit Name: Urban Taxonomy: No data listed of 2 Matches Profile? generally Drainage Class: non listed Hist Reducing conditions (test) Histic odor on High organic content surface layer Sulfidic odor mottled (wfn 10") Probable aquic moisture regime Concretions (w/in 3", >2mm) Comments: Hard packed below 10". No mottles observed within 1011 . Depth of surface water. -- Depth to free water in pit -- Depth to saturated soil: -- Comments: No primary or secondary indicator Gleyed Organic streaking Organic pan On hydric soils list ""-".--- Oxidized rhizospheres in upper Saturated in upper 12 in. 12 in. Water marks Water-stained leaves Drift lines Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC neutral test Drainage patterns in wetlands Othor Hydrophytic Vegetation? No Hydric Soils? No Is this sample plot within a wetland? No Wetland Hydrology? No Comments: Not all three wetland criteria observed. -ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION FIELDbATA FORM (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987, revised) Mapped Unit Name: Urban Land 'Matches Profile? generally Taxonomy: No data listed Drainage Class: non listed 10 - 16" 1 10YR.2/1 I Histol Reducing conditions (test) Gleyed Histic epipedon High organic content surface layer Organic streaking Sulfidic odor Mottled (w/in 10") Organic pan Probable aquic moisture regime Concretions (w/in 3", >2mm) On hydric soils list Comments: Hydric soil, low chroma. Depth of surface water: - Depth to free water in pit 12" Depth to saturated soil: surface Comments: Saturated within upper 12" munuaceo Oxidized rhizospheres in upper x Saturated in upper 12 in. 12 in. Watermarks Water-stained leaves Drift lines Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC neutral test Drainage patterns in wetlands nthcr Hydrophytic Vegetation? Yes Hydric Soils? Yes Wetland Hydrology? Yes Comments: All three wetland criteria observed. Is this sample plot within a wetland? Yes Project #: 05254.05 Date: 418/2005 Client/Owner: WM - South Sound State: Washingotn Investigator: Jim Carsner County: King Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Township, Range, Section: T21 N. R4E, Sec 13 Is it an atypical situation? No Plant Community: PEM Is the area a potential problem area? No Sample Plot- np in ROUTINE WETLAt4D=DETERMINATION FIELD DATA FORM (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual 1987, revised) Project #: 05254.05 Date: .4/8/2005 Client/Owner: WM - South Sound State: Washingotn Investigator: Jim Carsner County: King Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Township, Range, Section: T21 N. R4E, Sec 13 Is it an atypical situation? No Plant Community: Upland Is the area a potential problem area? No Sample Plot: DP 11 Mapped Unit Name: Urban Land Taxonomy: No data listed Matches Profile? generally Drainage Class: non listed ' silt sandy loam 1 I I Histol Reducing conditions (test) Gleyed Histic epipedon High organic content surface layer Organic streaking Sulfidic odor Mottled (wAn 10") Organic pan Probable aquic moisture regime Concretions (w/in 3", >2mm) On hydric soils list Comments: Non- hydre, Chroma of 2 and no mottles within upper 10".a Ei Depth of surfade. water. Depth to free water in pit -- Depth to saturated soil: -- Comments: No primary or secondary indicator c uacea Oxidized rhizospheres in upper rated in upper 12 in. 12 in. .r marks Water-stained leaves lines Local soil survey data rent deposits FAC neutral test cage patterns in wetlands "h- Hydrophytic Vegetation? Yes Hydric Soils? No Wetland Hydrology? No Comments: Not all three wetland criteria observed Is this sample plot within a wetland? No 000-1?o wd OtY YO-DnY-li DxP'oxb00G0-YI!t-;a\lula\iol owNJOd wnany YIM - axb00V\na?oJd ?u"?J?J\?d '03NIDN3 311 01 3UOSOdX3 1YO31 N0 AINBYII InON111 ONV NSItl 3105 $,tl35n ` - o Q Dp '- W g '` '.• 301 !Y 38 1111 030N3iNl 3SOdNnd 3ll*34 311 U04 U33NION3 3I A0 NOUY'1dYOY (??J O g u ? p .J j .. ONY NDLL1'3111U3\ KLird* irtl0111 35113tl ANY U 103. OIOUd U3%0 ANY NO 3Sn ANY UO! K Hjy. u b L0096 VM !NNn 1 181 ' V m ~ U N } 0 i 0500 03! YOld 3 SW JO SSNOKNUn NO S 10N $ION NS?r NO YWYO tl0 I'NOS W ;d A. ANY 48 'W ?r g W ¢ . MN 133US M LOL 15 wig ? dNnoS HIMS 1N3W30VNVW 31SVM W v ; .? 0 Au ao 1 ?Ol g NV?d `JND d @ a e ?tx' ae NpIbN3tl Olrp N21f19(1V 3O A• ID 3Hl A9 a3AONddV 111Nn NOU,Df1SISNOJ 2104 ION 38V ONV AINO M373N 2IO3 3214 SNVId 3S3H1 y ^ C3 C-1 0, W®??" - t co s ¢ ^Q? r ? A J. ?: s l s ad r' BO6 b04ZBl # 13O21Vd Xb1 O)q A, r m rd Q 1 t- . psi.., .. .••.? - - - N •?`,, } ..w.Po.. _ ?n\ ?? N a 121)Z6fff..3 90bff?3 6681:$85• ~\ , •---.- .......... Imo. _ ,> , nj.:-,... ?,`: ?::., i GUN t) c r Y- ? G j 4 a \ ?? 3 ;` ?` I a • s, E S a; v a ........ - cr W ' v 'r' ?j`4?"".'„„y ... +.'w.' ??? ? `•" I / ?,. ? . / :'' \ t: 1J . LcJ•J Ih !5 • ? \ ?Y, U I:" \ \ 1??'r'I \ Litt \% / I \\\1JJ f Ed a 3 ' 3 z r /•n / / / I \ \.. R I; 0900.Ot!£9Y4 #1302lVd Xb'1 OH try. C) ....... , Y (01 101 'S1OY8, N308YO SAW 30 3NI1 HU)OS) i n / ; 1 \ \ ' li ti ± li N N I G ..\ h a ... O N N coil L ? CD ..... E r j . L C) Lr) -3 cm 'o, Q ? ' N N W O W O O If ^'1 A ` LLJ O U U Y .. I .. I .,. ? x U U O U Q Q U Q U 4,1 Q Z Q a. Q Q Q N Q p I 3C M CO CN c-, CD Cz:, Ln s 5 "' r r I.., ? y a 1 z I ? • F ?i 1 J J \ 1 / .... 1 4 .7 SAN I ';.. _ y \ .. ("' ;.: (. S ... S 8?13'S5 " E 1 r . Y i;' •' fY'.I I tt GIVM dO 1HOI21 '' .. JI18l1d) ?_ _ MN 1g3MLS QNZ ' u J L) O 0.X Ya- a Y a Z Vlz S d CQ C W Y _ v?v? 4 - 3 C _° N s E ' o t c 0 Z p L 'J. p? O! n Y y . f . u , r AS ?E r° c 2,c v ccTt 4 ° W e- 8 Ci6 + + ?. Z w ? d n d c o+ ° ai ??g ' ? ? d J x $ v?? a J d N ? c 0.m dd?-t Lt Q c E r C ?? &a m N ? Q d o rn c d a A c m e H v 0 E e u ,d b ` C Z Q yy A ._ N Q C +0-' C C O C d .C N p c^ N .L?' C N 9 A 4 A R H - 7 OI y !O co O a ` E N N A d O C; ; p C aO7. N C N W N to ° :1 L? o a oto 1O c to fs c c N ao e O o C ^ .c a ' ?N? c 3 c ?+ y c 14 C z° e, S ??' S' c c° Off. O I'Qy'1 ayy `a a ac c? 1O ?' A a ° e N N C ?+ N C Ct GI N a E C C G a ?u Q N N Z W I w I g m a F. VJ G7 Q r ui iC A m 0; r J M OI C ?.t e v z C O m N Y U - C O C Y ^ = ?.../ ` 0 c (L G f a . .: N a J d ZS O f 0 2 C 0-2 0. t 3i O O Q' ? y E o°-Mx Z m c 4 c yv - c tr. 0 0 O D m C O N a a- tL d U) - CL CL in N a c 9 s co m ~ d7 C C C w W Oi ,r O to C a n lc, (n ) fn w W co m o Q W ' 0 Z, x W 0 , ®® 70 \? \. t a a \ \ \ \\ as a?`\> \\` \` \ ` 11\ r\ ? i? a > a > \` \ \`?\\ /?` `\ \\ s + i a\\\ \\ I\ T \? r a a \a\ >?\\ \\X` \ \\`\\\\+,.4 r a r r a a\\\\`\\\ \ `?-•1.' \" `\ a r a a a > a a \444• \\ ?(\\a S a s r a +r (r \\?\\\` `\ \; a a + >? > 444 r a > a al a > a a X\` "•.. \ \\ i a i all a > ` \\?\\ a ? f \r >?a Ia > la a \\ ?\\? ?\\\\\ a a> r o f a s \\\? ?? \ \ a a a a ? a > a `\ \\ \` \\\\\\ r J ?•?S a a s \?\ \N `\\ \\`? ` f a r f f `\ \\ \ \ \\ \` \ f a a a \` ` \ \` \ . ---- pI rnTrnrn/.,2 PT. J ' O_ /m N N O a O a LL C LL ,_ O Z ?En N? 'O N N o. O CL a LL ca z a ! \ ,?c \\ O It O I /77T T /Tf /-1 \\ \ a + a > r s r r \ ? \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ ` \ \` \\ a a r r a + \?\\\ \ Xe. -75 Z Z m r-bij LL- O P5 W V) U p 6¢i O 1- O V) C14 i TTe-TITfT T T J'7'.T1.7'T.77T r7' I. a d ? z o !V J CL. ° OO HN ac ?m ?? y o z IU6.1 CD z J ? dN C d tv m V N ?o CL -j 0 0 e 1 0 ce- O N ? 3 ?.; C? = r N id o o z (D o o a: ce Y N C.1 z c +? cu cu ' ?' a Q acui > W < w N M N CN Q UJ p U) N Q y O oo E ro3 ro y W o H I m O Z D w ro v ro °? N co I ?-_. t y Z y C y dl ?'? C CY ?4 z a z LLl to O W .' W QQ . W a? cr y U ?z (Y LL y Q Q m •? 0 C) N U O ; 0) z Z s Q Q z a Q Q ' Q co • . Q Q O U O `- O cu m C.0 (n i ` .0 06 N Ch .N N O Q L3. - m Q. to • co to m (? U c• co cu co N ?' O O 05I CN N ? d• N ? 'O C fo c? ? O ,p N ca 2 p O co O cn , Y O j CD ct CD CD > 3 ca C co 9) cu (D Z cn N N .? co 0 (t CU m o toa e E o o? w 0a? 4 c O co o L Q U v a -t w a o ro to v, a a Q w p c o N> co co c .? m O 'c ` E cn co cm p 0 cr, co J JC C O O V O V Q) C O L J ,C N O F om em Q¢ Q? ?o N0 W ?cn ? m ? a 0 3 3 L) co LO c LO rn N Z O m m r 0 Z cn F , w ,.. w 2 ?A W • _ `Y`} 7 .l CO '' Page 1 of 1 CAS c-I EXHIBIT 7 Cti<AIC4A1'7G TT)f1 inniinnnn A? WAC 197-11-960 Environmental checklist. Purpose of checklist: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able .to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not knowthe answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably, related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Waste Management Parking Lot. 2. Name of applicant: Waste Management of Washington, Inc. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Dick Culbertson, Site Manager Waste Management of Washington, Inc. 7012' Street NW Auburn, WA 89071 253.804.6760 4. Date checklist prepared: August 22, 2008 SEP b8 COD0700 EXHIBIT GAO D$ - O00 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 5. Agency requesting checklist: City ofAuburn Planning Department 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Wetland mitigation planting will take place in January 2009. Parking lot construction will take place in February 2009. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Reports prepared in association with environmental assessment conducted at thisproperty include a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report (SCS Engineers, 2004), a Wetlands Assessment Report (J S. Jones & Associates, 2004), a Wetlands Delineation Report (Jones & Stokes, 2005), a Critical Area Report (ICFJones & Stokes, 2008) and a Wetlands Mitigation Report (ICFJones & Stokes, 2008). 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Yes. Waste Management is requesting for a variance from the wetlands buffer requirement. In addition to the pending variance request above, a City ofAuburn Building Permit and Grading Permit will be required to conduct the proposed work 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) Waste Management wishes to utilize an undeveloped, land-locked parcel as an automobile parking lot. Yhis area ("Project Site') is located contiguous (west of) our current waste transfer and recycling operating location ("Facility Site'). The project requires construction of an internal entrance%xit point and an all-weather access road andparking area. The total area that will be used forparking and access roads will comprise approximately 1.464 acres. The parcel is currently fenced and this proposed project will have controlled access via our current operation location. Weiland buffer mitigation will be performed to enhance, enlarge, and protect the wetland buffer areas west and east of the larger of the twd wetland areas on the Project Site. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Waste Management's address is 701 2nd Street N. W., in Auburn, Washington. The company owns two parcels, identified by street addresses of 655 & 657 2nd Street N. W. and 325 D. Street N. W (Tax Parcel Nos. 446340-0090 and-0136). The proposed project will be constructed on the property located at 325 D Street N. W (Tax Parcel No. 446340-0136). The property is located within Section 13, Township 21, and Range 4 of the Western Washington Meridian. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one • Flat oiling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other ... b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY There is a maximum 9116 slope around the west side of the west wetland, which is outside the project area. The average slope in the proposed areas of development is 2.5%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime fam?land. Sandy silt - glacial till. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill Cut=4,482 C. Y. and Fi11=384 C. Y. There will be some filling on the access road and the east side of the west parking area: Fill will be provided from the cut areas, f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. The project area is basically flat and erosion should not occur ifproper construction erosion control . taken. measures are g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 48.5% of the presently pervious surfaces on the parcel where the parking lot is proposed will be converted to impervious surfaces (asphalt, curb, gutter). h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: All necessary TESC control measures to avoid surface water runoff will be taken and all necessary erosion and sediment controls will be constructed to minimize, if not eliminate, the potential for erosion. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The minimal site development needed for the parking area will be of short duration and will be conducted during February 2009, so significant dust is unlikely. Nonetheless, some emissions of dust and automobile exhaust may be produced during site development. When the project is completed, the area will be used for automobile parking and will therefore result in no emissions, other than emissions from the cars while parking. The employee and customer vehicles that are intended to use the parking area are currently parking elsewhere on the X"site, and will not increase emissions. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Dust will be controlled with mist water spray in areas when needed during leveling of access road and parking areas. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Two'depressional wetlands totaling 0.28 acres occupy the property. Both have been designated as Category III Wetlands using the Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Ecology, 2004), which is the methodology adopted by the City of Auburn. Wetland A is located on the westernportion of the property and drains by infiltration. Wetland B is located on the southeast portion of the property and also drains by infiltration. See attached report for additional details: Wetlands Delineation Report (Jones & Stokes, 2005). 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes_ Work will be conducted in the buffer area adjacent to the wetlands at the southeast corner of Wetland A. No work will be conducted in the wetlands. See Site Plan. See also Critical Area Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan (ICFJones & Stokes, 2008) for further details. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None_ 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR A(jENCY" USE ONLY Yes, the proposed project will implement an on site storm water infiltration system and a bioswale. Quantities will consist of the developed 100 year storm event for the 1.464 acres ofproposed paved surface at approximately 0.7 cubic feet per second of storm runoff. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals... ; agricultural; etc.).. Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not applicable. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Quantities of water runoff will consist of the developed 100 year storm event for the proposed 1.464 acres of proposed paved surface, approximately 0.7 cubic feet per second of runoff. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. 'Waste materials are not likely to enter groundwater or surface water. The bioswale and filtration vaults will be used to prevent wastefrom entering into the stormwatersystem. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: All necessary TESC control measures to avoid surface water contamination will be taken during construction. Surface water will be pretreated in a stormwater system approved by the City of Auburn prior to infiltration into the soil below. The source of runoff will be from approximately 1.464 acres ofpaved area. The paved area of the parking area east of the wetlands will have a high point where gravel will transition to pavement. This will sheet flow NE to a catch basin, then it will be conveyed to a bioswale. Discharge from the bioswale will be conveyed toward the wetlands in an amount approximately equal to the quantity of water that previously fed to the wetlands. Any runoff in excess of those amounts will discharge to a storm filter vault. This will then be conveyed into a 72 " CMP to be infiltrated. From the high point of the gravel/pavement transition the runoff will drain south and to the west with a 2% cross slope. Water will drain to a catch basin, then to a storm filter vault and into a 72 " CMP to be infiltrated. The parking area west of the wetlands has a high point approximately midway and will sheet flow to storm filter vaults, then into a 72 " CMP to be infiltrated. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tr alder aple, aspen, other evergreen tree cedar ine, other shrubs ass pasture crop or grain. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY wet soil plants tt uttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other (in detention pond) water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation: blackberries b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Grasses and other surface vegetation will be removed from the area for the proposed automobile parking lot. As part of wetland buffer enhancement, non-native and invasive species will be removed from a portion of the wetland buffer area approximately 25 feet long and 10 feet wide, and replaced with native vegetation. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or neat the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any See attached. Planting Plan and Critical Area Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan (ICF Jones & Stokes, 2008). 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbir other: Sparrows qg? mammals: deer, bear, elk, beau other: Mice fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: None b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. None. Property is surrounded by businesses having industrial purposes. 6. Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity will be used to supply the proposed onsite parking lot lights. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not applicable. 7. Environmental health 6 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Not applicable. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? - None. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Noises associated with construction equipment (dump truck dozer and compaction roller) for sub-base preparation and surface development will be created as a result of the project- The construction phase will last approximately 2 weeks and will occur during daylight hours only- Noise levels at the property boundary will be within allowed limits in accordance with ACC §8.28.010. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None necessary. 8. Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is an existing waste management facility, but the parcel on which the parking lot is proposed is an undeveloped parcel surrounded by industrial buildings and other parking lots. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. No structures exist on the parcel to be developed. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? C-2 Central Business District f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? 7 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Downtown. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, the site contains wetlands, which are discussed previously in this SEPA checklist. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The parking lot project would not change the number of people working at the site. WMW employees and visitors wouldpark automobiles in theparking lot as needed instead of elsewhere on the site, where they currently park. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. IL Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Not applicable. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not applicable. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Landscaping and landscape islands appropriate for the parking lot will be installed. 11. Light and glare 8 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Parking lot lighting will be installed, but would be used primarily during business hours. During business hours (variable for summer l winter), automatic sensors will activate and deactivate lights. The lighting location, foot- candle plan, and specifications will be prepared by an electrical engineer. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Lighting will be hooded, shielded, directed downward and not exceed one-halffoot-candle at the property line in accordance with ACC §18.52.050C. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? None. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not applicable. 13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any. Not applicable. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Use of the parking area site will be through an internal roadway from WMW's adjacent property where WMW is currently operating, which is located at 7012"d Street NW in Auburn and accessed via 2"d Street N. W. Access to the parking area will be made at the southwest corner ofthe parcel on which parking is proposed, directly from WMW's 701 2d Street property that serves as the western boundary of the project site. There will be no public . access to or from the parking area. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Not applicable. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? 169 added parking spaces, 0 eliminated parking spaces (for project site only) d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). A new private all-weather access road will be constructed to allow vehicles to access the parking area. e. Will the. project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. £ How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None. The parking area will be used instead of our current parking area on WMW's existing facility and will not create additional vehicular trips. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Not applicable. 15. Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not applicable. 16. VtWties a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. None. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Electricityfor parking lot lighting will be provided by extending the existing electrical service (Puget Sound Energy) from the adjacent WMW parcel to the project site. 10 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICAI?7 C. SIGNATURE EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: ................................... .............................................................. . .............................................................................. Date Submitted: ............ ....................................................................................................................................... II 3A U.. IBIT Au'BURN- Peter B. Lewis, Mayer INAS H I NGTO N 25 West Main Street * Auburn WA 98001-4998 * www.ouburnwo.gov * 253-931-3000 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) SEP08-0020 / Waste Management of WA Date of Issuance: October 23, 2008 Project: Construction of a paved automobile parking lot for 167 cars and a driveway access in total covering 1.3 acres of a 3 acre parcel. The driveway to parking will cross over 700 sf. of wetland buffer and the driveway will be 7 feet at the closest point to the wetland. The buffer width proposed tapers from a 25 foot width down to minimally 7 feet over a distance of 45 feet of buffer length. Location: 260 feet north of 2nd Street NW and 300 feet east of H Street Parcel # 446340-0136 with access via 701 2nd Street NW over Parcel # 446340-0090 Owner: Waste Management of WA Applicant/Contact: Maureen Mitchell Summit Law Group 315 Fifth Ave S. Ste 1000 Seattle, WA 98104 Auburn Contact: Karen Scharer, Senior Planner Phone # 253-804-3111 or email at kscharer@auburnwa.gov Auburn Permits: Critical Areas Variance/CAO08-0001 together with future grading and construction permits Existing Zoning: C2 - Central Business District Comprehensive Plan: Downtown Notes: A. This finding is based on review of the SEPA Environmental Checklist received August 27, 2008, Critical Areas Variance application (CA008-0001) submitted August 27, 2008, Wetland Delineation Report dated October 2005, Critical Areas Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan dated August 25, 2008, comments received from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe and other documents in the file. B. Issuance of this threshold determination does not constitute approval of the permits and plan approvals. The application(s) will be reviewed for compliance with all applicable Auburn City Codes which regulate development activities, including the Critical Areas Code, Zoning Code, Uniform Fire Code, Road Design Standards, and Surface Water Design Standards. Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be used to limit impacts from the grading and construction of the parking lot. C. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Downtown Central Business District and the C2 - Central Business District zone allows the use of automobile parking per ACC 18.28.020 C. D. A Critical Areas Variance from the minimum 25 foot wide wetland buffer requirement is proposed reducing the buffer by approximately 18 feet to a 7 foot width. However, only 700 sf. of wetland buffer will be exchange with mitigation. To mitigate for the buffer impact, 4117 sf. of SEP08-0020/SEPA TD October 23, 2008 Page 2 "additional buffer area" will be added to other areas beyond the standard 25 ft. wide wetland buffer, 1050 sf. of enhancement area will be created in the "additional buffer area". Additionally, fencing and signage will be used to limit access and identify the wetland feature to those passing near the wetland. E. The on-site wetlands are identified in the April 2000 Mill Creek Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) as Wetland "50". "These wetlands have been. designated as suitable for the SAMP regional permit because of their small site, fragmentation and location off the Mill Creek/Mullen Slough corridor" as stated in the Mill Creek Aquatic Restoration Plan. F. A Storm Drainage Technical Information Report will be required to identify both pre and post development storm water quantities. Storm water run-off from the parking lot will be captured and treated in a bioswale before it flows into the wetlands. Storm waters beyond the wetland's capacity will be captured and directed elsewhere per City Codes. G. The wetland and wetland buffer preservation area will be set aside in a recorded Wetland Conservation Easement which will give notice to any future property owner of this critical area feature and preserve the feature from future development. Threshold Determination: The responsible official of Auburn finds that the above described proposal does not pose a probable significant adverse impact to the environment. This finding is made pursuant to RCW 43.21 C, ACC 16.06 and WAC 197-11 after reviewing the environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency and considering mitigation measures which the agency or the applicant will incorporate as part of the proposal. The responsible official finds this information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of this proposal. The lead agency has determined that the requirements for environmental analysis, protection, and mitigation measures have been adequately addressed in the development regulations and comprehensive plan adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW, and in other applicable local, state, or federal laws or rules, as provided by RCW 43.21C.240 and WAC 197-11-158. Our agency will not require any additional mitigation measures under SEPA. Optional DNS/MDNS Process: This Determination of Non-significance (DNS) is issued under the optional DNS/MDNS process in Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11-355. There is no further comment period for the DNS and there is no agency appeal available. Contact: For more information about this project, please contact the planner at the phone number or e-mail listed above. You may review the application and any environmental documents or studies in City Hall at the address listed. nsible Official: p L ° October 23. 2008 Cindy Baker, irector Planning, Building & Community Date Mailed: CITY OI UBURN WASHINGTON NOTICE OF APPLICATION & SEPA NOTICE for OPTIONAL DNS/MDNS PROCESS WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WA APPLICATION REQUESTED: Critical Areas Variance w/ SEPA Threshold Determination APPLICATION NUMBER/NAME: CA008-0001 / Waste Management of WA SEP08-0020 / Environmental Threshold Determination under State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) PROPONENT: Maureen Mitchell APPLICATION FILED: August 27, 2008 Summit Law Group COMPLETE APPLICATION: September 19, 2008 315 Fifth Ave S. Ste 1000 NOTICE OF APPLICATION: September 29, 2008 Seattle, WA 98104 PROPERTY LOCATION: 260 feet north of 2nl Street NW and 300 feet east of H Street Parcel # 446340-0136 with access via 701 2nd Street NW w/ Parcel # 446340-0090 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: A Critical Areas Variance from the minimum 25 foot wide wetland buffer requirement in order to construct a driveway and automobile parking lot. The buffer width proposed tapers from a 25 foot width to minimally 7 feet over a distance of 45 feet of buffer length. AUBURN PROJECT/SEPA CONTACT: Karen Scharer, Senior Planner e-mail: kscharer(a)auburnwa gov Phone: 253-931-3090 STUDIES SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION: Environmental Checklist and Wetlands Report, wetlands delineation, and other documents. OTHER PERMITS AND PLANS WHICH MAY BE REQUIRED: Grading Permit, Facilities Extension Permit STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY AND LIST OF APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: This project is subject to and shall be consistent with the City of Auburn Zoning Code, Auburn Construction Standards, Road Standards, Storm Water Utility Codes, Excavation & Grading Code, and International Fire Code. PROJECT PUBLIC HEARING & COMMENT PERIOD: The Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing and issue a final decision regarding the CAO variance application. Written comment up to the hearing and testimony during the hearing will be considered by the Hearing Examiner prior to rendering a decision. A_hearing date has not yet been scheduled. SEPA COMMENT PERIOD: The City of Auburn will issue an environmental threshold determination pursuant to SEPA on this application and future construction of a parking lot following a 15-day public comment period ending on October 14 2008' Written comments may be submitted to the City of Auburn at the address below prior to the end of the comment period prior to the City issuing a threshold determination. The responsible official has a reasonable basis for expecting to issue a SEPA Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) on this project. As such, the optional DNS/MDNS notice process is being used pursuant to WAC 197-11-355. The project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. For more information about this project, please contact the City representative at the phone number or e-mail listed above. You may review the application and any environmental documents or studies at City Hall, address listed below. City of Auburn Planning, Building & Community Department EXHIBIT 025 West Main Auburn, Washington 98001-4998 4I _ ?I ¢ 4 ' 4 L 1 U 2 4 4 ?? ?I ? / 44 40o 3R0 ST. 0 ! ? 2 Sl E s I 2Nd ST. N z RD N 4 N , ? I f ? TI -MM -jil Q 11 g rin CITY OF .AUBURN WASHINGTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 19, 2008 at 5:30 PM AUBURN COUNCIL CHAMBERS AUBURN CITY HALL APPLICATION REQUESTED: Critical Areas Variance APPLICATION NUMBER & NAME: CA008-0001 / Waste Management of WA PROPONENT: Maureen Mitchell APPLICATION FILED: Aug. 27, 2008 Summit Law Group COMPLETE APPLICATION: Sept. 19, 2008 315 Fifth Ave S. Ste 1000 NOTICE OF APPLICATION: Sept. 29, 2008 Seattle, WA 98104 PROPERTY LOCATION: 260 feet north of 2nd Street NW and 300 feet east of H Street - Parcel # 446340-0136. And, with access via 701 2nd Street NW over Parcel # 446340-0090 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: A Critical Areas Variance from the minimum 25 foot wide wetland buffer requirement in order to construct a driveway and automobile parking lot. The buffer width would tapers from a 25 foot width down to minimally 7 feet over a distance of 45 feet of buffer length. AUBURN PROJECT/SEPA CONTACT: Karen Scharer, Senior Planner e-mail: kscharer(dauburnwa'gov / Phone: 253-931-3090 STUDIES SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION: Environmental Checklist and Wetlands Report, wetlands delineation, and other documents. OTHER PERMITS AND PLANS WHICH MAY BE REQUIRED: Grading Permit, Facilities Extension Permit STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY AND LIST OF APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: This project is subject to and shall be consistent with the City of Auburn Zoning Code, Auburn Construction Standards, Road Standards, Storm Water Utility Codes, Excavation & Grading Code, and International Fire Code. PROJECT PUBLIC HEARING & COMMENT PERIOD: All persons may comment on this application either in writing to the address below or by submitting written or oral testimony during the public hearing. Any person wishing to become a party of record and receive future notices, copies of the PB&C report with recommendation (one week prior to hearing), Hearing Examiner decision or any appeal decision must notify PB&C by providing their name, mailing address and reference the application number - CA008-0001 For more information about this project, please contact the City representative at the phone number or e-mail listed above. You may review the application and any environmental documents or studies at City Hall, address listed below. City of Auburn Planning, Building and Community Department EXHIBIT 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA. 98001- 4998 253-931-3090 CITY OF_?'"4 . WASHINGTON f° AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING OF LEGAL NOTICE BY APPLICANT Application No.: SEP08-0020 Applicant: WASTE MANAGEMENT Location: 7012 ND STREET NW, AUBURN, WA Date of Public Hearing: October 14, 2008 I certify that on Z (? > I did erect a land use posting board at the location bove, hich included a Notice of Public Hearing for the above referenced application, as required by Auburn City Code 1.27, 14.07.040 and 18.66.130. The board was erected at least 10 days prior to the public hearing date noted above. 1. declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. G\ a. v c? C u b e c-?s p IJ Name (please print or type) Date NOTE This affidavit must be retumed to-the Planning and Community Development Department at least one week prior to the scheduled hearing date or the hearing may be postponed. 60 2T Wd 92 J39 PON 213.I.N30 1111113d EXHIBIT i 2 ),8 63A1303t1 GAHearing ExamineffAffidavit OF Posting - Applicant.doc s Page I of 1 Karen Scharer From: Carolyn Brown Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 3:19 PM To: 'Legals' Cc: Karen Scharer Subject: Request to Publish NOA/DNS Attachments: Notice to Pub SEP08-0020.doc Good afternoon, Please publish the attached Notice of Application and DNS for SEP08-0020 in the legal section of the September 29, 2008 edition of the Seattle Times. Thank you, Carolyn Brown Assistant Secretary Planning Department City of Auburn The information contained in this electronic communication is personal, privileged and/or confidential information intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) to which it has been addressed. If you read this communication and are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication, other than delivery to the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail. Thank you. CA 0 0) F; -0- EXHIBIT 1 3 REQUEST TO PUBLISH ATTN: Legal Notice Account Representative Please publish in the Seattle Times on September 29, 2008. Send the bill for the cost of publishing to: City of Auburn Finance Department 25 West Main Auburn, WA 98001-4998 Please publish below this line only. NOTICE OF APPLICATION & SEPA NOTICE for OPTIONAL DNS/MDNS PROCESS WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WA APPLICATION REQUESTED: Critical Areas Variance w/ SEPA Threshold Determination APPLICATION NUMBER / NAME: CA008-0001 / Waste Management of WA. SEP08-0020 / Environmental Threshold Determination under State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) PROPONENT: Maureen Mitchell Summit Law Group, 315 Fifth Ave S. Ste 1000, Seattle, WA 98104 PROPERTY LOCATION: 260 feet north of 2"d Street NW and 300 feet east of H Street Parcel # 446340-0136 with access via 701 2"d Street NW w/ Parcel # 446340-0090 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: A Critical Areas Variance from the minimum 25 foot wide wetland buffer requirement in order to construct a driveway and automobile parking lot. The buffer width proposed tapers from a 25 foot width to minimally 7 feet over a distance of 45 feet of buffer length. AUBURN PROJECT/SEPA CONTACT: Karen Scharer, Senior Planner E-mail: kscharer(a)auburnwa.gov Phone: 253-931-3090- LEAD AGENCY: City of Auburn RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Cindy Baker, Director of Planning, Building & Community STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY AND LIST OF APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: This project is subject to and shall be consistent with the City of Auburn Zoning Code, Auburn Construction Standards, Road Standards, Storm Water Utility Codes, Excavation & Grading Code, and International Fire Code. PROJECT PUBLIC HEARING & COMMENT PERIOD: The Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing and issue a final decision regarding the CAO variance application. Written comment up to the hearing and testimony during the hearing will be considered by the Hearing Examiner prior to rendering a decision. A hearing date has not yet been scheduled. SEPA COMMENT PERIOD: The City of Auburn will issue an environmental threshold determination pursuant to SEPA on this application and future construction of a parking lot following a 15-day public comment period ending on October 14. 2008, Written comments may be submitted to the City of Auburn at the address below prior to the end of the comment period prior to the City issuing a threshold determination. The responsible official has a reasonable basis for expecting to issue a SEPA Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) on this project. As such, the optional DNS/MDNS notice process is being used pursuant to WAC 197-11-355. The project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. For more information about this project, please contact the City representative at the phone number or e-mail listed above. You may review the application and any environmental documents or studies at City Hall, address listed below. EXHIBIT 1 -a , 4 :T Page 1 of 1 Karen Scharer From: Carolyn Brown Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:15 PM To: 'Legals' Cc: Karen Scharer Subject: Request to Publish Attachments: Notice to Pub CAO08-0001.doc Good afternoon, Please publish the attached notice of Public Hearing for CA008-0001 in the legal section of the Thursday, October 30, 2008 edition of the Seattle Times. Thank you, Carolyn Brown Assistant Secretary Planning Department City of Auburn The information contained in this electronic communication is personal, privileged and/or confidential information intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) to which it has been addressed. If you read this communication and are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication, other than delivery to the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail. Thank you. EXHIBIT c-f 4 REQUEST TO PUBLISH ATTN: Legal Notice Account Representative Please publish in the Seattle Times on October 30, 2008. Send the bill for the cost of publishing to: City of Auburn Finance Department 25 West Main Auburn, WA 98001-4998 Please publish below this line only. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AUBURN COUNCIL CHAMBERS AUBURN CITY HALL NOVEMBER 19. 2008 at 5:30 PM APPLICATION REQUESTED: Critical Areas Variance APPLICATION NUMBER & NAME: CA008- 0001 / Waste Management of WA PROPONENT: Maureen Mitchell Summit Law Group315 Fifth Ave S. Ste 1000, Seattle, WA 98104. PROPERTY LOCATION: 260 feet north of 2nd Street NW and 300 feet east of H Street.- Parcel # 446340-0136. And, with access via 701 2"d Street NW over Parcel # 446340- 0090 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: A Critical Areas Variance from the minimum 25 foot wide wetland buffer requirement in order to construct a driveway and automobile parking lot. The buffer'width would tapers from a 25 foot width down to minimally 7 feet over a distance of 45 feet of buffer length. AUBURN PROJECT/SEPA CONTACT: Karen Scharer, Senior Planner Phone: 253-931-3090 e-mail: kscharerna auburnwa.gov / STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY AND LIST OF APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: This project is subject to and shall be consistent with the City of Auburn Zoning Code, Auburn Construction Standards, Road Standards, Storm Water Utility Codes, Excavation & Grading Code, and International Fire Code. PROJECT PUBLIC HEARING & COMMENT PERIOD: All persons may comment on this application either in writing to the address below or by submitting written or oral testimony during the public hearing. Any person wishing to become a party of record and receive future notices, copies of the PB&C report with recommendation (one week prior to hearing), Hearing Examiner decision or any appeal decision must notify PB&C by providing their name, mailing address and reference the application number - CA008-0001. City of Auburn Planning, Building and Community Department 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA. 98001- 4998 PHONE: 253-931-3090 For citizens with speech, sight or hearing disabilities wishing to review documents pertaining to this hearing, should contact the City of Auburn within 10 calendar days prior to the meeting, as to the type of service or equipment needed. Each request will be considered individually according to the type of request, the availability of resources, and the financial ability of the City to provide the requested services or equipment. EXHIBIT i72 4 'C ? I From: Karen Walter [mailto:Karen.Walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 5:07 PM To: Karen Scharer Subject: RE: Waste Management Critical Areas Variance, CA008-0001, SEP08-0020, Notice of Application and optional DNS/MDNS process Hi Karen, Thanks for your prompt reply to our email below. According to Alternative 8 of the SAMP, Wetland 50 (as you correctly noted) is identified as priority mitigation. See the attached map. Karen Walter MITFD From: Karen Scharer [mailto:kscharer@auburnwa.gov] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 3:24 PM To: Karen Walter Cc: Kelly McLain Aardal Subject: RE: Waste Management Critical Areas Variance, CA008-0001, SEP08-0020, Notice of Application and optional DNS/MDNS process Hi Karen - took a look at the maps & confirmed the wetland # as "50" (not "5Q"). There were no wetland restoration recommendations identified in the Mill Creek SAMP for "50". Thank you for your other comments. We will be preparing our SEPA TD & also our recommendation to the Auburn Hearing Examiner in the near future. I will make sure copies are sent to you. Karen J. Scharer, Senior Planner Planning, Building & Community Department City ofAuhurn Phone: 253-804-3111 kscharer@aubumwa.gov From: Karen Walter [mailto:Karen.Walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 9:28 AM To: Karen Scharer Subject: Waste Management Critical Areas Variance, CA008-0001, SEP08-0020, Notice of Application and optional DNS/MDNS process Ms. Scharer, The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the notice of application materials, including the environmental checklist, the site and mitigation plan, and the Critical Area Report (CAR) and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan for the above referenced project. We have three comments about this proposed project as noted below. EXHIBIT i 1. It appears that the larger wetland on this site has been identified as wetland SQ in Alternative #8 of the Special Area Management Plan for Mill Creek (SAMP). If this is correct, this wetland was to be targeted for mitigation. Please verify if this wetland is wetland SQ and the proposed mitigation measures for this wetland, which were identified in the SAMP. 2. As noted in the CAR/Mitigation Plan, the existing wetland buffers for both wetlands appear to be dominated by reed canarygrass and other non-native species. From the information provided, it is not clear if the entire wetland buffer for Wetland A will be enhanced by removing these non-native plants and replanting with native species or if only the areas shown as proposed wetland buffer will be enhanced. If the non-native species are not removed from both wetlands and enhanced with native species, it is unlikely that this wetland buffers will achieve their full functional potential. 3. Similarly, the monitoring period (i.e. three years) is too short to adequately demonstrate that the wetland buffers were successfully mitigated. The monitoring period should be increased to at least 5 years and more likely 10 years to confirm the success of this project. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Please call me at 253-876-3116 should you have any questions or would like to meet to discuss these comments. Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015172 nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 The information contained in this electronic communication is personal, privileged and/or confidential information intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) to which it has been addressed. If you read this communication and are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication, other than delivery to the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail. Thank you. EXHIBIT I? FIGURE 4-1 II FLOOD MANAGEMENT PLAN Legend Basin Boundary - "' Areas proposed for E......... i Regional Detention Wetlands PE? Streams Wetlands protected by R` i o - Existing Regulations Railroads ,' _. ... _ Nc r.,,,Mm w,unMwn P,oy,m nP,<an,a P,m,<m„zwN Roads r?Note: Approximately 12 tomes would be floodproofed or purchased N r. .... w . )MILEY+MpE FIEMEMT3 a',»... ? _ ... -.. nuwEL AMp WSNAT .' , ..:.; MAIN7ENAW EFItOraAM '":': Mill Creek SAMP . December, 1999 C .? w MRl IilO{Fi'R SIDE ,. '? rj wFir VPLLEV UTE Ill \ .: _ DaTUA9AMDE i -' ? ? , Y•'. /ja Gw :,.. '... ?, 1 w -' ,q - ? ,e?... IMPNWEIIEMT ? . i'.?-, N y x r ; A. 'S 27M ST I I .^ sru AREa1 1 - F I 7 NNfN Y»?Y.? 1°?Q?.? I cONVE N P"T O 37th ST NYV a Son o r YF ., f _ Federal i j ? MSIMAL' .. t Way,-; • D ? + ?""Y0:^.?w p3T131eANtE Cy Auburn - ': 'f i;,'? ,. 15thsT raw i' I WATER QUAItIY T r7 i L DEIENTIDMTNEATYEN -..;- SREGIOMA Y ?r a t r 7 i i EXHIBIT _ Y j _ - T+ak MASnAw AUSURM , - y r 5../,??E/? NO PoNDS r v ` .? ?... _ TA m h. - fdu -d n d rol - f < t - f f'm<, t 4 MJ a.rrlan hx i Yt:ox,+^I?? Algona a ,w,n,."` lumwl y ,mp.,?.Ymw,L ?mNeDw <Vn pm, h fa,d b6ha, ,..a r C E t d i. P<«1t ."...-,? C xM nNm p a,W h f ne de d. The. iN, m,p ne cwt Vii. Ude -1 n<n? u, -1, nr m, pmpouJ.c.„mtew.e t - .hvMCls mi, .,p,, h: d ups», hs, a.,iLhl inllrmvninn. h h ' - m,rni4A fn' Pldmine pmpV+cx adv,nd is nw guwm< d m ?? F Notice of Public Hearing, Application Number CAOOS-0001 /Waste Management of WA Page 1 of 1 Karen Scharer From: Printz, Jacalen M NWS [Jacalen.M.Printz@usace.army.mil] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 2:26 PM To: Karen Scharer Subject: Notice of Public Hearing, Application Number CA008-0001/Waste Management of WA Good afternoon, I received the Notice of Public Hearing for application CA008-0001/Waste Management of WA on October 27, 2008. 1 wanted provide the following comment: The project may require authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, if there is the discharge of dredged or fill material (e.g., fill, excavation, or mechanized land clearing) into waters of the United States, including wetlands and navigable waters of the U.S. Please advise the applicant that, depending on the proposed work, a Department of the Army permit may be required. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Regards, Jacalen M. Printz Project Manager, King County Regulatory Program U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Seattle District PO Box 3755 Seattle, Washington 98124 Phone: 206.764.6901 Fax: 206-764-6602 jacalen.m.printz@usace.army.mil EXHIBIT ( 5 1 1 /3/2008