The Woodlands Request for Clarification and or Reconsideration
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION
AND/OR MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 1
113185
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY In the Matter of the Application of:
Woodlands at Redondo Creek Preliminary Plat
19-105072-00-SU, 19-105073-00-SE
and 19-105074-00-UP
Applicant
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION AND/OR MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
I. INTRODUCTION AND RELIEF REQUESTED
Pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (“FWRC”) Section 2.95.050 and Rules 23
and 24 of the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner Rules of Procedure (“RoP”),
Applicant RMJ Holdings, LLC files this Request for Clarification and/or Motion for
Reconsideration (“Request”) of the Hearing Examiner’s Findings, Conclusions, and
Decision (“Decision”) for the above-referenced development applications
(“Applications”). Condition 3 of the Decision should be clarified or modified to state that,
prior to the city’s approval of the final plat, the graded area adjacent to the proposed
retaining wall must be stabilized and replanted with native shrubs and trees to help
preserve the functionality of the remaining intact wetland buffer. Although the Applicant
believes the record supports that the Request is appropriate for treatment as a request for
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION
AND/OR MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 2
113185
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
clarification pursuant to RoP 23, in an abundance of caution, Applicant also files this
Request in compliance with RoP 24 applicable to motions for reconsideration.
II. ARGUMENT
The record before the Hearing Examiner supports that planning staff for the city
recommended modifying the timing as to when Applicant must complete Condition 3 of
the Decision. Additionally, the record supports that clarifying or modifying Condition 3,
consistent with this Request, will ensure the provisions contained therein will accomplish
their substantive intent.
Section XII.4 of the Staff Report submitted into the record before the Hearing
Examiner recommended approval of the Applications subject to conditions. Condition
numbered 4 of the Staff Report reads as follows:
Prior to the city’s approval of engineering plans, the graded area adjacent to
the proposed retaining wall must be stabilized and replanted with native
shrubs and trees to help preserve the functionality of the remaining intact
wetland buffer. A replanting plan of this area must be included with the
plans submitted for engineering review.
Staff Report, Exhibit (Ex.) 1 at 17.
At the public hearing held on October 7, 2020, Senior Planner Becky Chapin’s
presentation included updates and clarifications to certain conditions contained in the Staff
Report. One of those clarifications addressed condition numbered 4 in the Staff Report,
specifically to highlight the following as the pertinent component of that condition:
4. Prior to engineering approval, replanting plan of graded area adjacent to
the proposed retaining wall.
Ex. 2. at 20. Ms. Chapin orally clarified that the condition was intended to ensure the
required planting plan was submitted for approval at engineering review, but that actual
replanting would occur subsequent to engineering review and approval of the replanting
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION
AND/OR MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 3
113185
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
plan (i.e., prior to approval of the final plat). This clarification is noted in the Decision.
Decision at 3-4 (…recommendation #4 has been clarified to require the planting plan at
the time of engineering approval.”).
However, Condition 3 of the Decision is identical to condition numbered 4 in the
Staff Report:
Prior to the city’s approval of engineering plans, the graded area adjacent to
the proposed retaining wall must be stabilized and replanted with native
shrubs and trees to help preserve the functionality of the remaining intact
wetland buffer. A replanting plan of this area must be included with the
plans submitted for engineering review.
Decision at 15.
Clarification of Condition 3 is appropriate to preserve staff’s recommendation, as
well as Applicant’s understanding, as to the sequence of events that must occur to satisfy
this condition: (1) Applicant must submit a replanting plan for the area adjacent to the
proposed retaining wall, with the plans submitted for engineering review; (2) Applicant
must obtain engineering approval of that replanting plan; and then, (3) Applicant must
stabilize the graded area and replant with native shrubs and trees to help preserve the
functionality of the remaining intact wetland buffer prior to obtaining final plat approval.
Condition 3, as written, requires Applicant to stabilize the graded area and
complete replanting prior to city approval of the engineering plans. As a practical matter,
Applicant cannot complete the grading work prior to approval of the engineering plans.
Read literally, Condition 3 requires Applicant to complete stabilization and replanting
prior to obtaining the necessary engineering approvals to complete the grading work for
which the stabilization and replanting is intended to remediate. Clarification of Condition
3 to require replanting occur prior to approval of the final plat, rather than prior to
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION
AND/OR MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 4
113185
719 Second Avenue Suite 1150
Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 623-9372
approval of the engineering plans, is consistent with the substantive intent of this
condition.
In the alternative, Applicant requests that the Examiner issue an amended Decision
modifying Condition 3. The record supports that staff requested a replanting plan be
submitted with the engineering plans, that replanting cannot achieve its intended purpose
of preserving the functionality of the remaining intact wetland buffer if it must be
implemented prior to Applicant receiving the necessary engineering approvals to complete
grading of the area to be replanted, and that modification of Condition 3 to require that
replanting occur by the time of final plat approval fulfills the substantive intent of this
condition.
III. REQUESTED RELIEF
For the foregoing reasons, the Applicant respectfully requests that the Examiner
clarify or modify Condition 3 of the Decision as follows:
Prior to the city’s approval of the final plat, the graded area adjacent to the
proposed retaining wall must be stabilized and replanted with native shrubs
and trees to help preserve the functionality of the remaining intact wetland
buffer. A replanting plan of this area must be included with the plans
submitted for engineering review.
DATED this 3rd day of November, 2020.
VAN NESS FELDMAN, LLP By:
Ray Liaw, WSBA #40725
Attorneys for Applicant