17-105489-Critical Area Response to ESA Comments-02.16.23
Wet.land, LLC
Jennifer Marriott, PWS
8201 164th Ave NE, Suite 200, PMB 141
Redmond, WA 98052
9 February 2023
City of Federal Way
Department of Community Development
PROJECT: Woodbridge Business Park, Federal Way, Washington
SUBJECT: Response to City Comments (16 August 2022)
Dear City,
The City provided comments on this Project in a letter dated 16 August 2022 that also included a comment letter
from ESA dated 20 July 2022. The following is provided in response to those comments. The original comments are
in normal font with responses following in bold font.
The below responses and attached documents supersede the previous Critical Areas Addendum as the Site Plan
has been adjusted to reflect City comments.
1. The critical areas report dated April 9, 2020 states that 48 wetlands were identified on the project site.
However, technical memo titled Addendum to 9 April 2020 Critical Areas Report and Proposed Mitigation Plan
(hereinafter referred to as the CAR Addendum) only identifies 45 wetlands, 21 of which are outside of the
project area. It is recommended that the critical areas report be revised to include all delineated wetlands or
provide an explanation as to why three wetlands (Wetlands BA, BB, and BD) were omitted.
See CAR addendum and revised Mitigation Plan for a summary of the wetlands. The wetlands that were
omitted no longer occur within the Project or Study Area.
PAGE 2
2. According to Table 1 in the technical memo titled Response to City Comments (hereinafter referred to as the
Comment Response), Figure 2 in the Woodbridge Business Park Project In-Lieu Fee Plan (hereinafter referred
to as the ILF Plan), and the summary of proposed wetland impacts & mitigation table on Sheet W1.4 of the
Woodbridge Business Park Critical Areas Mitigation Plan (hereinafter referred to as the Mitigation Plan) the
project will result in a total of 8,492 SF of direct wetlands impact. However, the actual total of the direct
wetland impacts in these tables equals 8,612 SF, a difference of 772 SF. It is recommended that these tables
be corrected and the credit analysis be revised, as needed. Additionally, these tables include mitigation ratios
and wetland creation requirements. It is recommended that these values be removed as no wetland creation
is being proposed.
The tables have been updated with accurate numbers based on the new site plan with the new values
carried throughout these revised documents. The updated direct and indirect impacts to wetlands are
as follows in Table 1. The ILF Plan has also been updated accordingly to reflect the below impact areas
for a total number of credits to be purchased from the ILF Program adjusted to 20.96 units.
Table 1. Summary of Direct & Indirect Wetland Impacts.
PAGE 3
3. The text in the CAR Addendum is inconsistent with the figures in the Mitigation Plan. For example, in Section
2.1, the CAR Addendum states that 5,413 SF of the buffer of Wetland AG will be temporarily impacted and
2,926 SF of new buffer will be added. However, Sheet W1.4 of the Mitigation Plan, calls out 6,248 SF of
temporary buffer impacts and 3,100 SF of buffer replacement. Additionally, Section 2.2. states that 406 SF of
Wetland AV will be indirectly impacted but Sheet W1.3 of the Mitigation Plan calls out 380 SF. ESA
recommends the text in the CAR Addendum or the Mitigation Plan be revised to be consistent.
Both the CAR addendum and Mitigation Plan have been revised to be consistent and reflect the most
recent site plan. Additional plan sheets have been added to the Mitigation Plan that show the wetland
and buffer impacts and averaging wetland by wetland for a clear and concise accounting of impacts.
4. Table 1 in the CAR Addendum states that the square footage of buffer reduction for several wetlands was
included for wetlands that either had indirect wetland impacts that modified the standard buffer, or lacked
a full standard buffer due to existing constraints of the Site. It is recommended that the amount of buffer
reduction for all wetlands be included to ensure that the proposed buffer creation is sufficient.
The Mitigation Plan has been revised to reflect the new Site Plan. All impacts have been recalculated
based on the new Site Plan and are reflected in both the new CAR addendum and the revised Mitigation
Plan. Additional plan sheets have been added to the Mitigation Plan that show the wetland and buffer
impacts and averaging wetland by wetland for a clear and concise accounting of impacts.
5. As stated in our January 25, 2021 review memo, the City considers grading within a wetland buffer to be
development, and therefore, simply restoring the buffer post-construction does not meet FWRC
requirements. The applicant needs to show that the proposed temporary buffer impacts due to site grading
meet the criteria under FWRC 19.145.440 – Development within wetland buffers, including requirements for
buffer averaging and/or buffer reduction if proposed. ESA does not believe this has been met. For example,
according to the CAR Addendum, 5,413 SF of the buffer of Wetland AG will be temporarily impacted through
site grading and only 2,926 SF of buffer will be added, which does not meet the requirements of buffer
averaging per FWRC 19.145.440(5).
Noted. Where grading within buffers is required, buffers have either been modified through identifying
areas of indirect impacts where impacts exceed the 25% allowable reduction from the standard buffer,
or through buffer averaging. See the Addendum for more details.
6. According to the CAR Addendum, 17,531 SF of temporary buffer impacts will occur through the restoration of
an existing trail to functioning buffer. It is recommended that a description of the proposed restoration be
included in the critical areas report. Similar to grading, this work may be considered to be development by
the City and would need to meet the criteria under FWRC 19.145.440. The same is recommended for the
restoration of the unpaved access road to functioning buffer proposed in the buffer of Wetland AV.
PAGE 4
Noted. The buffer impacts for trail restoration are discussed in the revised CAR Addendum in more
detail.
7. According to Section 2.3 of the CAR Addendum a small swale is proposed within the buffer of Wetland BR that
will temporarily disturb 362 SF of buffer. The construction of this feature would likely require grading and
therefore be considered to be development by the City and would need to meet the criteria under FWRC
19.145.440. Additionally, this does not appear to be a temporary impact and should be included in the
permanent buffer impact calculations.
The swale has been shortened so that it no longer extends into the minimum wetland buffer. There is
still a small encroachment but only into the outer 25% of the wetland buffer that has been replaced
elsewhere adjacent to the remaining wetland buffer. See CAR Addendum for detailed discussion.
8. According to the CAR Addendum the indirect impacts to Wetland AV exceed the 25% buffer reduction allowed
per FWRC 19.145.440(6). Because this does not meet code requirements, this should not be part of the
proposal.
Impacts to Wetland AV have been modified with the new site plan. There are several impact areas of
note that are discussed in more detail in the revised CAR Addendum.
9. The applicant is proposing reducing several of the wetland buffers by 25 percent. According to FWRC
19.145.440(6), this is done on a case-by-case basis with the decision is based on the following criteria:
a. It will not adversely affect water quality;
b. It will not adversely affect the existing quality of the wetland or buffer wildlife habitat;
c. It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities;
d. It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards;
e. It will not be materially detrimental to any other property or the city as a whole; and
f. All exposed areas are stabilized with native vegetation, as appropriate.
It is recommended the critical areas report be revised to include a discussion on how the proposed buffer
reductions meet these requirements.
Pure buffer reduction with enhancement is not proposed for this Project. Where buffers are reduced,
they are either reduced beyond the allowable reduction per code and mitigated for through the
purchase of ILF credits, or buffer averaging has been used to give back at least an equal amount of
buffer for no net loss of buffer area. See the revised CAR Addendum for the updated discussion on buffer
modifications proposed for this Project.
PAGE 5
10. According to Section 2.12 of the CAR Addendum, the indirect impacts to Wetland GB-North were calculated
based on a 45-foot minimum buffer, or the reduced buffer. It is our understanding that when proposing
wetland as buffer, the standard buffer should be used as the requirements for buffer reduction in FWRC
19.145.440(6) have not been met.
The USACE allows buffers less than the standard for the calculations for indirect wetland impacts where
buffer averaging is applied to ensure no net loss of buffer areas. Based on that guidance, indirect
impacts were only calculated for ILF credit purchase where buffer reductions were below the 25%
reduction allowable by code. Where buffer averaging could be applied, it was applied for no net loss of
buffer area before and after the Project proposed.
11. In the January 25, 2021 memo, ESA stated the wetland buffers on the Site Plan are inconsistent with the
wetland buffers on the figures in the Revised Report. We agree with the Comment Response that Site Plan
has been revised to reflect the buffers presented in the Report and Mitigation Plan.
Noted. No further response.
12. As stated in our January 25, 2021 review memo, sheets of the Site Plan that contain the proposed
development should only show the buffers post-development and should not include existing buffers for
wetlands that will be filled or indirectly impacted. We agree with the Comment Response that the Site Plan
sheets have been sufficiently revised to meet this request.
Noted. No further response.
13. In the January 25, 2021 memo, it was recommended that the methodology used to flag the ordinary high
water mark (OHWM) of North Lake be included in the critical areas report. ESA agrees that Section 1.1 of the
CAR Addendum sufficiently meets this recommendation. ESA will verify the location of the OHWM in the field
during the application review. It recommended that the applicant reflag the OHWM of North Lake before field
verification is conducted.
The OHWM of North Lake was redelineated on 10 November 2022 and subsequently reviewed by ESA
Staff as the 3rd party reviewer for the City. A discussion of the findings and updated photos are included
in the revised CAR Addendum.
14. In the January 25, 2021 memo, it was recommended that the line representing the 200-foot Shoreline
Management Zone be added to all relevant figures. ESA agrees that this revision has been made to the figures
in the Mitigation Plan. However, it is recommended that revised figures showing th e Shoreline Management
Zone (SMZ) also be included in future revisions of the critical area report.
PAGE 6
Noted. The 200-foot shoreline management zone line has been adjusted based on the redelineation of
the North Lake OHWM and updated on all relevant figure and plan sheets.
15. According to the Comment Response, road improvements will occur within the SMZ. A discussion of this work
is not included in the CAR Addendum. It is recommended that a description of this work, as well as an analysis
of how this work may impact shoreline functions be included in the critical areas report. This information,
including a no net loss analysis, could be submitted to the City in an additional addendum to the CAR.
The redelineation of the North Lake OHWM resulted in an adjustment to the 200-foot shoreline
management zone. The proposed road improvements are no longer within the shoreline management
zone.
Should you have any questions or require additional information regarding this Project, please contact me at
jen@wet.land (cell: 813-846-1684).
Jennifer Marriott, PWS
Owner, Wet.land, LLC
Attachments:
1. Addendum to the Critical Areas Report, Wet.land, LLC, revised 26 January 2026
2. Revised Mitigation Plan, Wet.land, LLC, 26 January 2023
3. In Lieu Fee Plan, Wet.land, LLC, revised 26 January 2023