The URL can be used to link to this page

15-102547 (2)ary of L Federal Way CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway.. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor June 23, 2017 Mr. Alexey Ancheyev Urban Design Group 879 Rainier Avenue North, Suite A200 Renton, WA 98057 FILE Re: File #15-102547-00-UP; PROCESS III `PROJECT APPROVAL' CNI Investment — Redondo Bay Tranquility, Parcel #720250-0070, Federal Way Dear Mr. Ancheyev: The City of Federal Way has completed the administrative review of the proposed stream buffer intrusion for a proposed single family residence. The applicant proposes to develop a vacant single-family residential lot with one residence. The subject property is irregular in shape and approximately 9,622 square feet. Access to the property is via an existing paved public roadway, South 293xd Street. A portion of the house will encroach into a 35-foot Type Ns stream buffer. Stream buffer enhancement is proposed as mitigation for the impacts. The Process III application received May 27, 2015, and "Critical Areas Assessment and Stream Corridor Buffer Enhancement Program", prepared by Habitat Technologies (November 3, 2015, revised August 31, 2017), are hereby approved with conditions based on the enclosed Exhibit A, Findings forProjeaApprawl, incorporated into this decision in full, and the following conclusions: 1. The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan; 2. The proposal is consistent with all applicable provisions of the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC); 3. The proposal is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare; 4. The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property, are adequate to serve the anticipated demand from the proposal; 5. The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and configuration; and 6. Traffic safety impacts for all modes of transportation, both on and off site, are adequately mitigated. The remainder of this letter outlines the review processes required, states the conditions of approval, and outlines procedure relating to appeals and approval periods for this decision. This land use decision does not authorize initiation of construction activities. REVIEW PROCESSES REQUIRED The site is within the residential Single -Family (RS9.6) zoning district. Detached dwelling units are permitted in this zone subject to the provisions of FWRC 19.200.010. Using Process III, `ProjeclAppmval,'the city can administratively permit stream buffer intrusions with a buffer enhancement plan pursuant to FWRC 19.145.330, "Intrusions into Stream Buffers," subject to criteria. Mx. Alexey Ancheyev Page 2 of 3 June 23, 2017 SEPA PROCESS The application is exempt from review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) as it does not exceed the city adopted flexible thresholds set forth in FWRC 14.15.030(a), for construction of residential structures up to 20 dwelling unit. 110 w amp osed within the ordinary high water mark of the stream. NOTICE OF APPLICATION The application was deemed complete on December 2, 2015, and a Notice of Application was posted on December 11, 2015. The notice was posted at the subject property, posted at each of the city's official notification boards, published in the Federal Way Mirror, and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. The comment period due date was December 28, 2015. The city received one comment letter and one party of record request. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Prior to commencement of any work related to the stream buffer intrusion, performance and maintenance bonding and/or assignment of funds for the stream buffer enhancement program shall be submitted to the city in conformance with FWRC 19.25.020. 2. Prior to commencement of any site work, the temporary silt fence must be installed according to the plan. The applicant must submit a written letter from the stream consultant (Habitat Technologies) verifying the required fence was installed correctly along the stream buffer edge. 3. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the mitigation planting and permanent split rail fence must be installed. Please contact Associate Planner Becky Chapin at 253-835-2641 to schedule an inspection. 4. The applicant shall provide copies of the buffer enhancement monitoring reports, prepared by Habitat Technologies, to the City of Federal Way annually, for five years following completion of the stream buffer planting. BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE REQUIRED This Process III land use decision does not constitute building permit approval, or authorize clearing/grading activities. The associated single-family building permit application for the new house (file #13-104614-00-SF), is still under review by city staff. If you have any questions regarding the building permit review, please contact the Permit Center at 253-835-2607, or permitcenter@cityoffederalway.com. APPROVAL DURATION Per FWRC 19.15.100(2), unless modified or appealed, the Process III decision is valid for a period of five years from the effective date of the decision. Time extensions to the decision may be requested prior to the lapse of approval following the provisions listed in FWRC 19.15.110. The improvements must be substantially completed within the five-year time period, or the land use decision becomes void. File 15-102547-00-UP Doc I.D. 74879 Mr. Alexey Ancheyev Page 3 of 3 June 23, 2017 APPEALS Per FWRC 19.05.360, the effective date of issuance is three calendar days following the date of this letter, or June 26, 2017. Pursuant to FWRC 19.65.120(1), this land use decision may be appealed by the applicant, any person who submitted written comments or information, or any person who has specifically requested a copy of the decision. In compliance with FWRC 19.65.120(2), any appeals must be in the form of a letter delivered to the Department of Community Development, with the established fee, and within 14 calendar days after the effective date of the decision, or July 10, 2017. The appeal letter must contain a clear reference to the matter being appealed and a statement of the factual findings and conclusions of the Director of Community Development disputed by the person filing the appeal. The Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hear any appeals of the Process III decision. PROPERTY TAX VALUATION Per FWRC 19.65.100(4)(i), affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes, notwithstanding any program of revaluation. CLOSING This decision does not constitute building permit approval, and it does not waive compliance with future City of Federal Way codes, policies, and standards relating to this development. If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact Associate Planner Becky Chapin, at 253-835- 2641, or becky.chapin@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely,' Brian Dav Community Development Director enc: Exhibit A, Findings for Project Approval Approved Buffer Enhancement Plan c: Beclg Chapin, Associate Planner Peter Lawrence, Plans Examiner Ann Dower, Senior Engineering Plans Reviewer Ken Pierson, KRP1192@aol.com CNI Investments, lawofficcnow@gmail.com Mr. & Mrs. I Ieunisch, 152 South 293rd Street, Federal Way, WA 98003 Doc. I.D. 74879 File 15-102547-00-11P ", CITY OF 4A Federal Way Findings for Process III Project Approval CNI Investment — Redondo Bay Tranquility Stream Buffer Intrusion File #15-102547-00-UP Proposal — The applicant proposes to develop a vacant single-family residential lot with one detached dwelling unit. The subject property is. irregular in shape and approximately 9,622 square feet. Access to the property is via an existing paved public roadway, South 293nd Street. A portion of the house will encroach into a 35-foot Type Ns stream buffer. Stream buffer enhancement is proposed as mitigation for the impacts. 2. Zoning and Review Process — Zoning for the subject site is Single -Family Residential (RS 9.6). Construction of a detached dwelling unit is a permitted use in this zone subject to the provisions of Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.200.010. The Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) designation for the subject site is Single -Family High Density. The stream buffer intrusion is subject to reviewed under Process III, Project Approval, as provided in FWRC 19.150.040. 3. SEPA Environmental Review — The application is exempt from review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) as it does not exceed city adopted flexible thresholds set forth in FWRC 14.15.030(a) for construction of residential structures up to 20 dwelling units. No work is proposed within the ordinary high water mark of the stream. 4. Public Notice — The application was deemed complete on December 2, 2015, and a Notice of Application was posted on December 11, 2015. The notice was posted at the subject property, posted at each of the city's official notification boards, published in the Federal Way Mirror, and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. The comment period due date was December 28, 2015. The city received one comment letter one party of record request. 5. Public Comment —The city received one comment dated December 28, 2015, from Ken Pierson. Mr. Pierson's letter stated that he and the neighbors are concerned about the height restrictions and potential light glare. The comments provided pertain to the single-family building permit review and do not concern the Process III Stream Buffer Intrusion review. The single-family building permit (file #13-104614-SF) is still under review and no decisions have been made. Based on the plans submitted, the building meets the city height requirements of 30 feet above average building elevation. The city does not require a lighting plan as part of a single-family building permit. 6. Geologically Hazardous Area —The subject property is located within a Geologically Hazardous Area (GHA), and landside and erosion hazard areas. The applicant submitted a Geologic Hazard Assessment report, prepared by GeoResources, LLC (July 19, 2014 and. updated May 4, 2016). The city sent the report; Grette recommended that the buffer enhancement plan be revised to include a map that identifies the specific location where enhancement will occur, type of vegetation/groundcover installed, and a permanent fence be installed along the western edge of the stream buffer. In response, Habitat Technologies revised the assessment to include additional groundcover. Upon invasive plant and garage removal, jute mapping will be placed throughout the enhancement areas for erosion control. In addition, the buffer landscape plan was revised to depict the buffer area, plant schedule, and location of the permanent split rail fence. Grette verified that the planting schedule for the project and quantities are sufficient for the enhancement area. Per the April 5, 2016, Critical Areas Assessment and September 19, 2016, Buffer Landscape Plan, following successful completion of the enhancement program, a five-year monitoring and evaluation program shall commence. An annual monitoring report (including photos) shall be provided to the city by the applicant for the duration of five years. Pursuant to FWRC 19.145.100, the city may require a bond under FWRC Chapter 19.25 to ensure compliance with critical area standards. Prior to any actions approved in the stream buffer, a performance and maintenance bond or assignment of funds shall be submitted to the city in conformance with FWRC 19.25.020. Seventy percent of the bond will be released upon satisfactory completion of the mitigation planting, and the remaining thirty percent of the bond will be released at the successful conclusion of the five-year monitoring period. 8. Decision Criteria —Pursuant to FWRC 19.145.330(3), the city may approve a stream buffer intrusion based on the following criteria: a) It will not adversely affect water quality; b) It will not adversely affect the existing quality of wildlife habitat within the stream or buffer area; 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 in the area of the subject property nor to the city as a whole; and f) It is necessary for reasonable development of the subject property. Based on the recommendations and mitigation planting as proposed by Habitat Technologies, and reviewed by Grette, the applicant has met the above criteria. As conditioned, the proposed site plan and application attachments have been reviewed for compliance with the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, pertinent zoning regulations, and all other applicable city regulations. Final construction drawings associated with the single family building permit (file #13- 104614-SF) will be reviewed for compliance with specific regulations, conditions of approval, and other applicable city requirements. These findings shall not waive compliance with future City of Federal Way codes, policies, and standards relating to this development. Prepared by: Associate Planner Becky Chapin Findings for Project Approval CNI Investment — Redondo Bay Tranquility Stream Buffer Intrusion Date: June 22, 2017 File #15-102547-00-UP/Doc. I.D. 74878 Page 3 of 3 CITY OF � Federal Way February 15, 2017 Alexey Ancheyev Urban Design Group 879 Rainier Avenue North, Suite A200 Renton, WA 98057 C17Y HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Jim Ferrell, Mayor RE: File #15-102547-00-UP; TECHNICAL COMMENT LETTER Redondo Bay Tranquility Lot 7, Stream Buffer Intrusion, Parcel 720250-0070, Federal Way Dear Mr. Ancheyev: The Community Development Department is in receipt of your January 30, 2017, project resubmittal. This correspondence provides technical review comments on the aforementioned resubmittal. City departments have provided the following comments that will need to be addressed prior to land use application approval, or as otherwise noted. Questions regarding the technical review comments should be addressed to the referenced staff representative. Becky Chapin — Planning Division, (253) 835-2641, becky.chapin@cityoffederalway.com The following technical comments regarding the geotechnical report were emailed to the applicant and GeoResources on December 9, 2016, and still need to be addressed: 1. On page 2, paragraph 2, of the Geologic Hazard Assessment report, prepared by GeoResources, updated November 21, 2016, the last sentence is not complete. Please identify the causative factors of the ground deformation and how it will be impacted/mitigated by the proposed construction. 2. The definition of Geologic Hazard Areas is incorrect. Please refer to FWRC 19.05.070, g definitions and revise accordingly. 3. Based on the definition above, the Landslide Hazard Area Conclusions in the updated report are incorrect, as the site does meet the definition of a landslide hazard area. Please revise the report accordingly. 4. Bullet point 3 of GeoDesign's summary and recommendations is not completely addressed. On the site plan include the location and extent of the tension crack and site areas classified as Landslide Hazard. 5. The report mentions reference to a 25-foot setback from geologically hazardous areas. Please refer to FWRC 19.145.220-250 as the code has changed. The Environmentally Critical Areas chapter regulates development activities on or within 50 feet of a geologically hazardous area. Please revise the report accordingly. 6. Bullet points 7 and 8 of GeoDesign's summary and recommendations have not been addressed. The City needs written verification that GeoResources has reviewed the TESC plan and the project plan drawings and in their opinion the plans and specifications meet the intent of the geotechnical report. The applicant must provide GeoResources these plans to review. The City cannot issue the Process III Stream Buffer Intrusion decision without written confirmation from GeoResources. Mr. Ancheyev February 15, 2017 Page 2 The Critical Areas Assessment and Stream Corridor Buffer Enhancement Program, prepared by Habitat Technologies, dated April 5, 2016, has been approved by the City's Stream Consultant, Grette Associates. This report, however, did not address the proposed stormwater design plan. Any additional impacts (temporary and/or permanent) to the stream and stream buffer will have to be addressed and approved by Habitat Technologies. The applicant must submit a letter from Habitat Technologies that they have reviewed the drainage plan and provide mitigation for any impacts to the stream and/or stream buffer. Ann Dower — Development Services, (253) 835-2732, ann.dower@cityoffederalway.com The stormwater design provided on January 30, 2017, cannot be approved as submitted. The applicant will need to provide the following information: 1. The drainage report dated 1/10/17 states that infiltration is not feasible on this site due to soils characteristics, which makes pervious pavement for the driveway infeasible. This issue is made even more critical by the location of the home downslope of the driveway on a steep slope, increasing the possibility of damage due to water seepage from the slope. Soils testing, additional pervious pavement design information, and a written explanation stamped by the geotechnical engineer will be required for pervious pavement to be considered. 2. The dispersion pipe detail provided is not shown in the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). The system must conform to one of the approved methods in the KCSWDM. Requirements for setbacks, sizing, flowpath length, location relative to steep slopes, etc. must be met. 3. Due to a downstream erosion issue, a downstream analysis is required in order to discharge directly into either the city system or the stream. Any proposed flow control facility or Flow Control Best Management Practice that does not meet all requirements outlined in the KCSWDM will be considered to be direct discharge. This project will not be allowed to discharge storm runoff in a way that impacts downstream property. 4. The stream and steep slopes, with percentages, must be clearly shown on the site plan. 5. The following note must be added to sheet C-1: • Clearing, grading, trenching, and excavation for the foundation is restricted to the "dry" season — May 1 through September 30. The site must be fully stabilized by October 1. Any deviation from this must be specifically approved by the Public Works Department. Please use the enclosed resubmittal form and submit two copies of the revised geotechnical report and two copies of any drawings to the Permit Center. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your project, please contact me at 253-835-2641 or becky.chapin@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, Becky Cpin Associate Planner enc: GeoDesign, Inc. Memo, dated September 16, 2016 Resubmittal Form c: Nos Ivanchuk, lawofficenow@gmail.com Brad Biggerstaff, bradb@georesources.us Ann Dower, Senior Engineering Plans Reviewer 15-102547-00-UP Doc. I.D,75423 r . DESIGNS September 16, 2016 City of Federal Way Department of Community and Economic Development 33325 8t1 Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 Attention: Becky Chapin, Associate Planner On -Call Geotechnical Engineering Services Geotechnical Consultation CNI Investment - Redondo Tranquility Lot 7 Building Permit - 13-104614-00-SF Federal Way, Washington GeoDesign Project: FederalWay-5-01 INTRODUCTION This letter presents a summary of our third party peer review of the submitted geotechnical report regarding the construction of a new, single-family residential house along South 293'd Street on King County Parcel 7202500070. As part of our scope of services, we reviewed the following documents: Geologic Hazard Assessment, prepared by GeoResources, LLC, dated July 19, 2014, updated May 4, 2016 • Site Plan, prepared by Urban Design Group, 2-foot contours, received May 27, 2015 Architectural Drawings, prepared by Urban Design Group, dated September 10, 2013 Structural Details, prepared by Myers Engineering, LLC, dated July 21, 2014 • Critical Areas Assessment and Stream Corridor Buffer Enhancement, prepared by Habitat Technologies, dated revised November 3, 2015 (as background) • Technical Memorandum, prepared by Grette Associates, dated March 24, 2016 (as background) DOCUMENT REVIEW GeoResources, LLC's (GeoResources') Geologic Hazard Assessment provides conflicting information with regards to whether Environmental Critical Areas exist on the subject property. 10700 Meridian Avenue North, Suite 402 1 Seattle, WA 98133 1 206.838.9900 www.geodesigninc.com The first sentence in the "Conclusions" section indicates that no geologic hazards exist on site. However, subsequent discussion indicates the site soil has a severe erosion hazard, as defined in FWRC 19-05.70.G, and that the slope in the central portion of the site meets the criteria for a "Steep Slope Hazard" as defined in FWRC 19.05.070.G(4). The "Steep Slope Hazard" definition was recently revised and eliminated from FWRC 19.05.070.G. The document will need to be revised to address recent changes in the FWRC. GeoResources indicates that the severe erosion hazard will be addressed through conventional construction best management practices (BMPs) and has recommended that soil not worked for seven days should be covered with plastic sheeting or mulch. GeoResources was not provided a temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) plan for review, but did provide a minimal risk statement regarding erosion. Surface water management and impacts to adjacent areas was not discussed in the report. GeoResources assumes the structure will have a daylight basement and that excavation for it will mitigate the area where a Steep Slope Hazard exists, as allowed by FWRC 1 5.10.160 Limitations section. Preliminary design drawings provided for review indicate the structure does indeed have a daylight basement; however, no additional information was provided indicating that excavation of the daylight basement will mitigate the area identified as a Steep Slope Hazard. GeoResources also indicated that they did not observe any surficial indications of recent or past landsliding activity. Surface water drainage from the proposed structure and potential impacts and mitigation measures were not addressed in the report. SITE OBSERVATIONS We visited the site on September 7, 2016 to observe the existing site conditions. Adjacent to the road, the ground surface appears to have been flattened by past grading activities, beyond which the eastern portion of the property slopes steeply down to the stream drainage channel addressed in the Grette Associates' technical memorandum. We confirmed that the central portion of the site appears to contain a slope that meets the definition for a Landslide Hazard as defined in FWRC 19.05.70.G definitions (2h). We also observed what appears to be a tension crack feature along the top of the steep slope area in the central portion of the lot. The crack appeared generally arcuate in shape and extended eastwards for several feet. The ground surface on the downhill side of the crack is approximately 1 foot lower than the uphill portion. Along the toe of the slope we observed a small, irregular -shaped bulge of material that appeared to be fill or disturbed native material. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS The reviewed documents appear to be compliant with FWRC 19.145.130. The proposed building location appears to be in the flatter portion of the site as shown on the "Survey Exhibit", which was provided for our review. The proposed location should help eliminate the Landslide Hazard XUDESIGM 2 FederalWay-5-01:091616 area, along with the areas where a tension crack is evident through re -grading and construction of.a retaining wall. The remaining slope below the development will be limited in height and may no longer meet the definition•of,a Landslide Hazard. We anticipate the proposed development can be accomplished in accordance with the FWRC; however, additional investigation is necessary to address the ground deformation that appears to be a tension crack, and additional information and clarifications are necessary to address conformance with FWRC 19.145.220 to 250, discussed below as follows: • Revise the existing Geologic Hazard Assessment to conform to the current FWRC and update referenced codes. • Complete additional geotechnical explorations to identify causative factors of the ground deformation observed on site and how it will be impacted/mitigated by the proposed construction. • Include in the Geologic Hazard Assessment the site plan with 2-foot contours depicting the existing topography. On the site plan, include the location and extent of the tension crack, site areas classified as Landslide Hazard, including an overlay of the building basement and building footprint along with finish floor elevations. The information will be used to verify the areas meeting the Landslide Hazard classification will be mitigated through the basement excavation (FWRC19.145.250). • Provide an updated statement regarding the impact on slope stability that the daylight basement will have and how it mitigates the area identified as a Landslide Hazard. • Provide updated foundation setback criteria based on International Building Code Section 1805, and provide updated Figure 9, which is missing from the reviewed report. • Provide recommendations to address surface water drainage and impacts on slope stability or erosion as required in FWRC 19.145.240(3). • Provide a letter indicating the TESC plan has been reviewed and a statement that the severe erosion potential will be addressed through installation of the BMP elements identified on the plan, and permanent landscaping. • Submit a letter by the geotechnical engineer stating that they have reviewed the project plan drawings and in their opinion the plans and specifications meet the intent of the geotechnical report. ♦♦♦ Me DESIGM 3 Fed eralWay-5-01:091616 We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services on this project. Please call if you have questions regarding this submittal Sincerely, GeoDesign, Inc. ;��- /—, � ' Kevin J. LaE. Principal Engineer pp'-4INJ•L ,� off. ■�':■.5f1�� ''ITS 29447 I •` �1►s7 ONAL�� KJL:rc One copy submitted (via email only) Document ID: FederalWay-5-01-091516-geol.docx © 2016 GeoDesign, Inc. All rights reserved. CUDESIGN= Signed 09/16/2016 Federal Way-5-01:091616 RESUBMITTED GeoResources, LLC Ph. 253-896-1011 5007 Pacific Hwy. E, Suite 16 Fx. 253-896-2633 MAY 3 1 2017 Fife, Washington 98424 COMMUN17Y DEVELOPMEYT Mr. Nazary Ivanchuk c/o Urban Design Group 879 Rainier Avenue N, Suite A-200 Renton, Washington 98057 (206) 838-8250 Attention: Mr. Alexey Ancheyev July 19, 2014 Updated May 4, 2016 Updated November 21, 2016 Updated May 10, 2017 Geologic Hazard Assessment Proposed Single Family Residence xxxx South 293rd Place Federal Way, Washington PN: 7202500070 Job: UrbanDesignGroup.293rd.GHA2 INTRODUCTION This updated report provides additional information requested by the City related to our original geologic hazards assessment for the proposed single family residence to be constructed on the above referenced vacant parcel. The location of the site is shown on the attached Site Vicinity Map, Figure 1. Our understanding of the project is based on our discussions with you; our previous 2012 and 2014 site visits, and a more recent June 26, 2014 site visit; our past experience in the site area; and our understanding of the City of Federal Way updated relevant municipal codes; revised code Chapter 19 (September 2016). We understand that you propose to construct a new single family residence in the upper portion of the subject parcel as shown in Figure 2. The residence will be a two-story, wood -framed structure supported on spread footings, likely deepened in portions of the structure to meet the recommended setbacks. We understand that the residence will include a daylight basement. The purpose of our original services was to evaluate the surface and subsurface conditions at the site as a basis for assessing potential adverse impacts to and from the slopes located within the site area. We understand that because of the height and inclination of the slopes in the vicinity of the site, that an assessment is being required by the City of Federal Way Revised Code Chapter 19 to address geologic hazards at the site. Two hand auger explorations were completed, but no laboratory tests were performed as part of the scope for this assessment. Specifically, our scope of services for the project included the following: 1: Visiting the site and conducting a geologic reconnaissance to assess the site's soil, groundwater and slope conditions; 2. Excavating two shallow hand auger explorations at selected locations across the property; and 3. Addressing the appropriate geotechnical regulatory requirements for the proposed site development. U rban De sig n G ro u p.293 rd. G HAu 2 (July 19, 2014) (November 21, 2016) May 10, 2017 Page 2 SITE CONDITIONS The subject parcel is located in the Redondo area of Federal Way, Washington. The parcel is irregular in shape and generally measures 115 to 129 feet wide (north to south) by 91 to 150 feet deep (east to west) and encompasses approximately 0.22 acres. The parcel is bounded by South 293'd Street on the west, by existing residences on the north and south, and by a wooded, undeveloped slope to the east. A shallow seasonal drainage course is located along the eastern property line. The upland portion of the parcel, near the existing 293rd Street right of way, is flat to gently sloping. Between 10 to 30 feet east of the roadway, the site slopes steepen to between 35 to 60 percent, with the steeper portion located in the south-central portion of the site. Based on our recent observations, the ground rupture discussed in the GeoDesign September 16, 2016 letter is likely related to soil creep on the slope area. No evidence of deep seated movement were observed. This feature will be mitigated during site developmentlgrading. The central portion of the site, where slopes are steeper than 40 percent, has a vertical height approximately 10 to 12 Meet. As the slope gets closer to a seasonal drainage channel located along the east side of the site, the ground surface flattens to 25 to 35 percent. The proposed location of the residence and site topography are shown on the attached Site Plan, Figure 2a. An aerial photograph of the site with topography obtained from the King County Map website is included as Figure 2b. Vegetation on the site consists of tall grasses, blackberries, and both native and invasive brush. Some scattered young deciduous trees and occasional older fir trees are located along the north and east sides of the parcel. No springs or seepage was observed at the time of our site visit. No evidence of erosion, soil movement, landslide activity or deep- seated slope instability was observed at the site or the adjacent areas at the time of our site visit. We did observe what was described by others to be tension cracks in the steeper area of the site. Based on our site observations, these cracks appear to be desiccation cracking, but in either case will be mitigated by the site development excavation and construction of the basement. Site Soils The USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey for King County maps the soils as Alderwood and Kitsap soils (AkF). The Alderwood and Kitsap soils are derived from glacial till, that form on 25 to 70 percent slopes. These soils are listed as having a moderate to severe erosion hazard a severe building limitation for slopes. These soils are listed in hydrologic soils group B/C. A copy of the SCS map for the site vicinity is attached as Figure 3. Site Geology The Geologic Map of the Poverty Bay 7.5-minute Quadrangle, Washington, Derek B. Booth, Howard H. Waldron, and Kathy G. Troost (2003) indicates the site underlain by coarse - grained older glacial deposits (Qpogc). These soils were generally deposited before the Vashon stade of the Fraser Glaciation, some 12,000 to 15,000 years ago. The glacial deposits consists of a heterogeneous mixture of clay, silt, sand and gravel that has been over ridden by the continental ice mass associated with the Vashon stade of Fraser glaciation. The glacial deposits are considered overconsolidated, are typically in a very dense condition, and exhibits high strength and low compressibility characteristics where undisturbed. Surficial soils are typically weathered to a loose to medium dense condition. No areas of landslides or mass wasting or noted on the map within the immediate vicinity of the site, however, a mass wasting deposit is shown on the map south and east of the parcel by about 500 to 600 feet. The mapped mass wasting deposit is on the east side of the stream channel valley from the site UrbanDesignGroup.293rd.GHAu2 (July 19, 2014) (November 21, 2016) May 10, 2017 Page 3 and immediately below an area of existing residential development. An excerpt of the above referenced map is included as Figure 4. The Washington State Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas for the site area indicates the flatter upland area to be "stable", while the slopes on the east side of the stream channel are mapped as "unstable". The unstable designation is likely attributed to the height and slope of the slopes east of the streams. No areas of unstable recent or unstable historic landslides are shown on the Coastal Atlas within the site area. A copy of the Coastal Atlas map for the site area is attached as Figure 5. A series of oblique aerial shoreline photos obtained from the Coastal Atlas website are attached as Figures 6a through 6d. The photographs, taken between 1977 and 2006 show the site and adjacent areas. The three more recent photographs (1996, 2000, 2006) show the existing residential developments and site to be well vegetated. The 1977 shows the residential development below the site to be existing and the neighbor hood that the site is located in to be under construction. The photographs are attached as Figures 6a through 6d.. Subsurface Conditions Two hand augers were excavated on the slope below the roadway in order to observe shallow soil conditions at the site. The hand augers generally confirmed the mapped stratigraphy, however the upper hand auger did encounter fill material, likely associated with the original grading of the roadway and lot. The soils encountered in our hand augers were characterized in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, a copy of which is attached as Figure 7. Logs of the test pits are attached as Figure 8. In general, the soils encountered below the topsoil and then layer of fill material (about 24 inches) consisted of medium dense to dense silty sand with gravel, weathered glacial till. We expect that very dense undisturbed glacial till occurs at depth. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS The City of Federal Way Critical Areas Ordinance for Geologically Hazardous Areas state "geologically hazardous areas shall mean areas that, because of their susceptibility to erosion, landsliding, seismic or other geological events, are not suited to siting commercial, residential or industrial development consistent with public health or safety concerns." The Revised Code of Federal Way is copied in italics, while our comments to the code are immediately following the code. Erosion Hazard Areas per Federal Way Revised Code The City of Federal Way code defines erosion hazard areas as `Those areas having a "severe" or "very severe" erosion hazard due to natural agents such as wind, rain, splash, frost action or stream flow." Landslide Hazard Areas per Federal Way Revised Code The Federal Way City Code defines landslide hazard areas as "those areas potentially subject to episodic downslope movement of a mass of soil or rock including but not limited to the following areas: a. Any area with a combination of.• 1. Slopes greater than 15 percent, 2. Permeable sediment overlying a relatively impermeable sediment or bedrock, 3. Springs or groundwater seeps. Urban DesignGroup.293rd. G HAu2 (July 19, 2014) (November21, 2016) May 10, 2017 Page 4 b. Any area which has shown movement during the Holocene epoch, from 10,000 years ago to the present, or which is underlain by mass wastage debris of that epoch. c. Areas potentially unstable as a result of rapid stream incision, stream bank erosion, and undercutting by wave action. d. Areas located in a canyon or on an active alluvial fan, presently or potentially subject to inundation by debris flows or catastrophic flooding. e. Areas that have a "severe" limitation for building site development because of slope conditions, according to the USDA SCS. f. Those areas mapped as Class U (Unstable), Uos (Unstable old slides), and Urs (unstable recent slides) by the Department of Ecology. g. Slopes having a gradient steeper than 80 percent subject to rock fall during seismic shaking" V1. - Seismic Hazards per Federal Way Revised Code The City of Federal Way Municipal Code defines seismic hazard areas as "those areas subject to severe risk of earthquake damage as a result of seismically induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement or soil liquefaction, or surface faulting. These conditions occur in areas underlain by cohesionless soils of low density usually in association with a shallow groundwater table." CONCLUSIONS Based on our observations and site evaluations, it is our opinion that portions of the site meet the technical criteria of a landslide, erosion and steep slope hazard area. The following addresses these issues in general accordance with FWRC 19.145.130, 19.145.220 and 19.145.250. Erosion Hazard Areas per Federal Way Revised Code The site soils are mapped as AkF, which have a severe erosion hazard when exposed. Conventional construction BMP's should be installed prior to beginning construction. This will provide adequate erosion control for the disturbed areas of the site. It is critical that the installed erosion control measures be monitored and maintained, and if necessary modified based on changing site conditions. In the event that the site is not worked for 7 days or more, the disturbed areas should be adequately erosion protected and maintained in the event of a significant storm event. This may include the use of plastic sheeting or mulch. Erosion control should specifically include the installation of silt fencing along the downslope and side slopes of the active construction area. Straw waddles and berms may also be necessary. We have not been provided with a copy of the proposed Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) plan at this time. However, provided standard BMP's are installed prior to beginning construction, the potential for erosion or sediment leaving the site should be minimal. Landslide Hazard Areas per Federal Way Revised Code (19.145.220-250) The site has slopes steeper than 15 percent, but no adverse or intersecting contracts are mapped on the site, nor were any seeps or springs noted on the slope or along the seasonal stream channel. No areas of mapped landslide debris or activity were noted on the published USGS geologic map or coastal zone atlas. Isolated areas of minor ground ruptures were observed and appear to be related to soil creep. The stream channel is not deeply incised, and we anticipate that runoff from the developments along the margins of the stream channel have greatly decreased the amount of season flow, thereby reducing the potential for rapid stream incision or stream bank erosion. No areas of alluvial fans are mapped nor were UrbanDesignG roup.293rd.GHAu2 (July 19, 2014) (November 21, 2016) May 10, 2017 Page 5 any alluvial fans noted in the vicinity of the site at the time of our past site visits. The site soils (AkF) do have a severe building limitations because of slopes. The site is listed as being stable by the Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas, however the slope on the east side of the stream are mapped as unstable because of their height and inclination. No areas of historic or recent landslide activity were identified on the Coastal Atlas. The site slopes are not steeper than 80 with and subject to rock fall during seismic shaking. Based on our observations and literature review, the site has several of the above indicators; severe limitations for buildinglsite development and evidence of soil creep. As previously stated, we observed no evidence of active or ongoing landslides hazards on the site or within 25 feet of the site. The ground ruptures observed are related to soil creep. In our opinion, the site meets the technical definition of a landslide or hazard. It is our opinion that the proposed site development will mitigate the typical risks associated with steep slope site; grading of surficial disturbed/weathered soils, drainage and erosion control. As no evidence of deep seated instability were observed at the site, no prescriptive buffer should be imposed by the City of Federal Way. Recommended building setbacks are provided below. The tension cracks observed in the central steeper portion of the site appear to be soil creep cracks. These features will be mitigated by the site development excavation, grading and construction of the basement. Seismic Hazards per Federal Way Revised Code The City of Federal Way Municipal Code defines seismic hazard areas as 'those areas subject to severe risk of earthquake damage as a result of seismically induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement or soil liquefaction, or surface faulting. These conditions occur in areas underlain by cohesionless soils of low density usually in association with a shallow groundwater table." Based on our observation and the subsurface units mapped at the site, we interpret the structural site conditions to correspond to a seismic Site Class "C" in accordance with Chapter 20 of ASCE 20. This is based on the likely range of equivalent SPT (Standard Penetration Test) blow counts for the soil types, observed in the site area. These conditions were assumed to be representative for the conditions based on our experience in the vicinity of the site. These soils are not prone to liquefaction and do not constitute a seismic hazard area. Given the mapped stratigraphy of Pre -Olympia age gravel, which was overridden by the more recent Vashon stade of the Fraser Glaciation, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction is minimal. BufferslSetbacks per Federal Way The CFVV regulates development within 50 feet from geologically hazardous areas, unless specifically reduced by a geotechnical engineer. Because of the site slopes, virtually the entire site meets the technical definition of a steep slope site, and therefore the entire parcel would be within the hazard or buffer area. City of Federal Way Municipal Code allows for reduction or modifications of the setback area if "n❑ reasonable alternative exists and only if the development activity or land surface modifications will not lead to or create any increased slide, seismic, or erosion hazard." Very little grading and filling will be required to accommodate the proposed residence, as most of the residence will be situated in the excavation for the daylight basement. The excavation of the upper slope area will effectively remove the existing ground rupture area near the top of the slope and address the old fill material placed on this portion of the site. We expect that the basement retaining wall will support a structural fill that will support the driveway and front yard area, thus eliminating the risk of slope instability in this area. UrbanDes1gnGroup.293rd.GHAu2 (July 19, 2014) (November 21, 2016) May 10, 2017 Page 6 Recommended Setback The City of Federal Way building department may require a building setback in accordance with IBC (International Building Code) standard requirements. IBC section 1805 requires a building setback from slopes that are steeper than 3H:1 V (Horizontal: Vertical) unless evaluated and reduced, and/or a structural setback is provided, by a licensed geotechnicai engineer. The setback distance is calculated based on the vertical height of the slope. The typical IBC setback from the top of the slope equals one third the height of the slope. Using the IBC Setback criteria and given the vertical height of the slope below the proposed daylight basement residence, the foundations on the east (down slope) side of the residence should be setback a minimum of 4 feet from slope area. The 4-foot distance is based on a maximum vertical height of the slope between the residence and the stream of 12 feet. Since the recommended setback distance likely cannot be met with typical construction methods, the foundation elements should be extended vertically to meet the recommended horizontal setback distance as a Structural Setback. Where the foundation is extended vertically, we recommend that the structural setback be measured horizontally from the lower outside edge of the foundation element to the face of the slope. We recommended minimum structural setback depth of 3 feet below finish floor elevation for the foundations along the east side of the residence. A detail showing the structural setback configuration is attached as Figure 9. This will meet the recommended setback criteria, and the IBC setback criteria. Storm Drainage Based on the results of our explorations, the site soils consist of glacial till material. These soils are will not support infiltration of the collected storm runoff. Based on our discussions, it will be possible to direct the collected roof and driveway runoff to the roadway, South 293 Place where an existing stormwater system exists. We have reviewed the TESC plan as well as the project documents and drawings. It is our opinion that the recommendations provided in the geotechnical report have been included in these documents/plans. Further, we have reviewed the documents prepared by Habitat Technologies related to the stream buffer, and are in agreement with the recommendations included therein. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for Mr. Nazary Ivanchuk, Urban Design Group, and members of the design team for use in evaluating a portion of this project. Subsurface conditions described herein are based on our observations of exposed soils on the parcel. This report may be made available to regulatory agencies or others, but this report and conclusions should not be construed as a wammnty of subsurface conditions. Subsurface conditions can vary over short distances and can change with time. Variations in subsurface conditions are possible between the explorations and may also occur with time. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and schedule. Sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation should be provided by our firm during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with contract plans and specifications. . The scope of our services does not include services related to environmental remediation and construction safety precautions. Our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. U rbanDesignGroup.293rd.GHAu2 (July 19, 2014) (November 21, 2016) May 10, 2017 Page 7 If there are any changes in the loads, grades, locations, configurations or type of facilities to be constructed, the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report may not be fully applicable. If such changes are made, we should be given the opportunity to review our recommendations and provide written modifications or verifications, as appropriate. � t � We have appreciated working for you on this project. Please do not hesitate to call at your earliest convenience if you have any questions or comments. Respectfully submitted, GeoResources, LLC Brad P. Biggerstaff, LEG Principal �p - •a e, 'd 50040C— SIQVAL sr Dana C. Biggerstaff, PE Senior Geotechnical Engineer BPB:DCB:bpb Doc ID: UrbanDesignGroup. NAZ.293rd.GHA Attachments: Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2a: Site Plan Figure 2b: Site Aerial Photo Figure 3: SCS Soil Survey Figure 4: USGS Geology Map Figure 5: Coastal Zone Atlas Figures 6a through 6d7 Oblique Shoreline Photographs Figure 7: Soil Classification System Figure 6: Hand Auger Logs Figure 9: Structural Setback 9 T76itt JI � � �g SONHPL �¢ 5379h!S1 yl S20LSTU � S2WH FL 'SW!kfYrHH Des Moines Kanraii,r�.lr . q P.c:iar.ca i'IG[••rlranr-Farl�"J S:43 -Sr Puget Sound SMTNSr $ s s2"Of PL cy 32wrNSr p S S APL to ` S2UTHSr r' S2wrH ST � s s y It V SNlP3,iiO ST a y S2MROST � ; SW 2UT14 Sr W a 4MROK 1 y dam• s `y laurrrwaod- ►k de1 i 1 9 n a 32EM ;} .b .gs ti d" Sw2MHST S2W-4 a ' S2AM R q I', f� S4tiff" g� 5291SM5T- r ._ 2991HSr 9 S AMPL S 2iTM,Si } S29n"FL 2 ,sr � Federal Way g I. �r w yof, W S2WTHPL 3 i ia"l7 s3MMST .r SWr In I S-r 52ggTH5T C1 AA '� x�. '� ' ❑ H t' 3 y y� Fri a3MOST r i s3msrPL � S X= N �g i H j� ;n. S3nwsT cq 4i 4E4 (J rz sw.111"ST � S339 HST S33a<niPL , C.'1 'k15n1 ST 4 TO - 6945M Sr ~ i rA to d c S3WMST S SAIL! Pi 7, Q y ! �u ` N SteelLake 0, 37Trlf Si iV ��j d ,� > MY 3" ST N A a r GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 Approximate Site Location Site Location Map Proposed Single Family Residences xxx & xxx South 29311 Place Federal Way, Washington Not to Scale Doc: UrbanDesignGroup.S293rdPlace.F July 2014 Figure 1 �«mgez 4a ------------ ! % m«¥KA'),I Nmoge@ 13 S gR9 &ms qx \ G @s -ame mISICIW»n r< , ! . |; !2 § § � !; ;a [2 isj §( §[ 0m $ 22 k; �)! /\ }\ S dZ LU W E CL k) (\ §§ § \\ |i. ) ] 2O} )} § § § \ [ r _ \ LU Ln k j L j @; iA -Z7. _„• ."� r�� ice. 4 Approximate Site Location (map created on King County Nap website: http://www.kingcounty.gov/operations/gis/Maps/iMAP.aspx) GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway E, Ste 16 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 Site and Topography Map Proposed Single Family Residences xxx & xxx South 2931 Place Federal Way, Washington Doc: UrbanDesignGroup.S293rdPlace.F Not to Scale Approximate Site Location ma created from the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service Web Soil Surve Soil Hydrologic Type Soil Name Parent Material Slopes Erosion Hazard Soils Grou AkF Alderwood Kitsap Formation Glacial Till /Outwash 25 to 70 Moderate/Severe B GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 Not to Scale NRCS SCS Soils Map Proposed Single Family Residences xxx & xxx South 293rd Place Federal Way, Washington Doc: UrbanDesignGroup.S293rdPlace.F July 2014 Figure 3 QPoOt , 'CUs� ' QPat]c • 1 ❑LY f i3r a r. ! [ • t.— I f�091� I� f�1 1 # l I CG J •p �1 �1• � Sk •4 . a '•r' �y,,°�w�. jl QP og `IP QVrs 09c ; I4 i a•� % Yam'=:- ` I 1 `.-- �^- Qrn l Q �~ ' QP I ; yr . 731 VA ' 6 y 1 QVB~=Y}'} �F^ I I I ova .-..r.._ Jam/�r tz - G.Lrf ?J 1 Approximate Site Location An excerpt from the Geologic Map of the Poverty Bay 7.5-minute Quadrangle, Washington by Booth, Howard, and Troost, 2003 •�►'�o� 1. v Not to Scale GeoResources, LLC USGS Geologic Map 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Proposed Single Family Residences Fife, Washington 98424 xxx & xxx South 2931 Place Phone: 253-896-1011 Federal Way, Washington Fax: 253-896-2633 Doc: Urban DesignGroup.S293rdPlace.F July 2014 — Figure 4 Approximate Site Location Map created at Washington State Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas Website (https.Ilfortress. wa. gov/ecy/coastalatlas/tools/Map. asp) GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 C Slope stability Q Stable lZ- Intermediate I� Modified F1J Unstable I41 Unstable (old slide) 001111110 Unstable (recent slide) DOE Coastal Atlas Proposed Single Family Residences xxx & xxx South 293rd Place Federal Way, Washington Doc: UrbanDesignGroup.S293rdPlace.F 1 July 2014 Not to Scale Figure 5 Approximate Site Location Photo taken 7/26/2006 and obtained from the Washington State Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas Website (https.Ilfortress. wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/tools/Map. asp) GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 DOE Coastal Atlas Oblique Shoreline Photograph Proposed Single Family Residences xxx & xxx South 2931 Place Federal Way, Washington Doc: UrbanDesignGroup.S293rdPlace. F July 2014 Approximate Site Location Photo taken 9/25/2006 and obtained from the Washington State Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas Website (hops://fortress. wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/tools/Map. asp) GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 DOE Coastal Atlas Oblique Shoreline Photograph Proposed Single Family Residences xxx & xxx South 293rd Place Federal Way, Washington Doc: UrbanDesignGroup.S293rdPlace.F I July 2014 Approximate Site Location Photo taken 5/19/1993 and obtained from the Washington State Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas Website (https.Ilfortress. wa. govlecylcoastala tlasltoolslMa p. asp) GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 DOE Coastal Atlas Oblique Shoreline Photograph Proposed Single Family Residences xxx R xxx South 2931 Place Federal Way, Washington Doc: UrbanDesignGroup.S293rdPlace. F Approximate Site Location Photo taken 6/26/1977 and obtained from the Washington State Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas Website (https.Ilfortress. wa.goy/ecy/coastalatlas/tools/Map.asp) GeoResources, LLC DOE Coastal Atlas 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Oblique Shoreline Photograph Fife, Washington 98424 Proposed Single Family Residences Phone: 253-896-1011 xxx & xxx South 2931 Place Fax: 253-896-2633 Federal Way, Washington Doc: Urban DesignGroup.S293rdPlace.F ` July 2014 1 Figure 6d 5 r COARSE GRAINED SOILS More than 50% Retained on No. 200 Sieve FINE GRAINED SOILS SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL GROUP NAME GRAVEL 1 CLEAN GW I WELL -GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE More than 50% Of Coarse Fraction Retained on No. 4 Sieve SAND More than 50% Of Coarse Fraction Passes No. 4 Sieve SILT AND CLAY Liquid Limit Less than 50 SILT AND CLAY More than 50% Passes No. 200 Sieve Liquid Limit 50 or more GRAVEL GRAVEL WITH FINES CLEAN SAND SAND WITH FINES INORGANIC ORGANIC INORGANIC ORGANIC NOTES: 1. Field classification is based on visual examination of soil in general accordance with ASTM D2488-90. 2. Soil classification using laboratory tests is based on ASTM D2487-90. 3. Description of soil density or consistency are based on interpretation of blow count data, visual appearance of soils, and or test data. a GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 GRAVEL GP 1 POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH SILTY GRAVEL CLAYEY GRAVEL WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND POORLY -GRADED SAND SILTY SAND CLAYEY SAND SILT CLAY ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT PT PEAT SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS: Dry- Absence of moisture, dry to the touch Moist- Damp, but no visible water Wet- Visible free water or saturated, usually soil is obtained from below water table Soil Classification System Proposed Single Family Residences xxx & xxx South 293rd Place Federal Way, Washington Doc: UrbanDesignGroup.S293rdPlace.F July 2014 Depth (inches) Soil Type 0 - 6 - 6 - 24 - 24 - 36 SM Hand Auger HA-1 Location: Upper west central portion of site Approximate Elevation: 276 feet Soil Description Topsoil Dark Orange -brown silty fine to medium SAND with gravel, some, asphalt (loose to medium dense, mosit)(fill) Orange -brown silty fine to medium SAND with gravel (medium dense, moist)(weathered till) Terminated at 36 inches No caving observed. No groundwater seepage observed. Hand Auger HA-2 Location: East central portion of site, above stream channel Approximate Elevation: 270 feet Depth (inches) Soil Type Soil Description 0 _ 4 - Topsoil 4 - 22 - Dark Orange -brown silty fine to medium SAND with gravel, some wood (loose to medium dense, moist)(weathered till/fill?) 22 - 42 SM Orange -brown silty fine to medium SAND with gravel (medium dense, moist)(weathered till) Terminated at 42 inches No caving observed. No groundwater seepage observed. Loaced bv: KSS GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 Excavated on: June 15, 2012 Hand Auger Logs Proposed Single Family Residences xxx & xxx South 293111 Place Federal Way, Washington Doc: UrbanDesignGroup.S293rdPlace.F I July 2014 1 Figure 8 Slopes Greater Than 30 Percent Slopes Greater Than 30 Percent Conventional Footing Setback Distance Footin-cl Extension Setback Distance GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424 Phone: 253-896-1011 Fax: 253-896-2633 Deck Post Foundation Foundation Element Foundation Footing Extension Foundation Element Structural Setback Proposed Short Plat S 293rd Place Federal Way, Washington Doc: UrbanDesignGroup.S923rdPlace.F 1 July 2014 Not to scale Figure 9 PLANT SCHEDULE RYMRnI OTY_ BOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAME 10 ACER CIRCINATUM I VINE MAPLE 10 CORNUS STOLONIFERA /RED OSIER DOGWOOD ® 10 CORYLUS CORNUTA CALIFORNICA / WESTERN HAZELNUT Q 10 HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR / OCEAN SPRAY O 10 LONICERA INVOLUCRATA I BLACK TWINBERRY 25 MAHONIA NERVOSA/ LONGLEAF MAHONIA 25 POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM / WESTERN SWORD FERN O 10 RIBES SANGUINEUM / RED FLOWERING CURRANT ® 40 ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA-URSI / KINNIKINNICK 25 GAULTHERIA SHALLON/SALAL SPACING, CONDITION AREA COVERED 1 GAL. CONTAINER LOCATE AS INDICATED 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36- O.C. 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36.O.C. 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. 4" CONTAINER 36" O.C. 1 GAL. CONTAINER 36" O.C. Total Layered SF of Plant Cover Total Buffer Planting Area Location of temporary silt fence and permanent split rail fence Location of invasive species removal,—" location of jute map placement, and location of buffer planting. 15 BASIS OF BEARING 5 PLAT OF REDONDO BAY TRANQUILITY 1 VOLUME 102, PAGES 93-94 / T IN LEGAL DESCRIPTION W LOT 7, REDONDO BAY TRANQUILITY, M ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 102 OF PLATS, PAGE 93-94 IN PIERCE COUNTY, I WASHINGTON TAX PARCEL NUMBER 720250-0070 Buffer Landscape Plan SCALE, 1" 10'-0' o s ro• z , RESUBMITTE APR 12 2017 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPME ,e_,__Grette 1 ssociates= -IV ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Prepared for: City of Federal Way March 24, 2016 Attention: Becky Chapin, Associate Planner 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 Prepared by: Grette AssociatesLLc File No.: 205.017 2102 North 301h Street, Ste A Tacoma, WA 98403 Re: CNI Investment — Redondo Bay Tranquility Lot 7: Third Party Review 1 INTRODUCTION The City of Federal Way (City) has contracted with Grette AssociatesLLc to assist in the review of a Critical Areas Assessment and Stream Buffer Enhancement Plan prepared by Habitat Technologies (Reports; dated October 2, 2014 and November 3, 2015) and a Site Plan prepared by the Urban Design Group (Site Plan; dated 05/10/16). These documents were submitted to the City in support of a proposed single-family residence located along South 293' Street in the City of Federal Way, Washington (King County parcel 7202500070). 2 METHODS 2.1 Site Review Grette Associates completed a site visit on March 23, 2016 to assess the subject property for consistency with the information provided in the Reports. All relevant portions of the property were inspected. 2.2 Document Review A Grette Associates biologist conducted a thorough review of the Reports and Site Plan. The review focused on verifying the accuracy of the descriptions within the documents and compliance with the current version of the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC). 3 RESULTS 3.1 Site Visit Review The site assessment identified one drainage feature within the subject property. The Reports correctly classify the stream as a Type Ns stream and provide an accurate description of the plant communities within the subject property. Per FWRC 19.145.270, Type Ns streams are subject to a 35 foot stream buffer. 2102 North 301h Street, Ste. A Tacoma, WA 98403 Ph: 253.573.9300 Fx: 253.573.9321 3.2 Document Review Based on Grette Associates' review of the submitted documents, the Reports and Site Plan are largely compliant with Chapter 19.145 of the FWRC. However, as discussed below there are several deficiencies that should be addressed prior to the City's acceptance. The Reports are consistent with the description and analysis requirements of FWMC 19.145.080. The Reports provide adequate descriptions of the plant communities and identifies and characterizes all critical areas on or near the subject property. In summary, Habitat Technologies identified one Type Ns stream that is located within the subject property. According to the Reports, the only feasible location for the proposed Project would require extending the proposed Project into the outer portion of the stream buffer associated with the onsite Type Ns stream. Per FWRC 19.145.330, the City may approve an intrusion into a stream buffer with an approved buffer enhancement plan. A buffer enhancement plan shall provide an assessment of existing habitat, water quality, hydrology, and erosion functions within the buffer and demonstrate that remaining and enhanced reduced buffer will function at an equivalent or higher level than the standard buffer (FWRC 19.145.330). The proposed buffer enhancement plan provided in the revised Report (Habitat Technologies 2015) largely complies with the requirements of FWRC 19.145.330 and provides appropriate goals and objectives, performance standards, monitoring plan, and maintenance and contingency plan. However, while the buffer enhancement plan states that enhancement will occur on the western portion of the stream buffer, the buffer enhancement plan does not provide a map identifying the specific location of the proposed enhancement. Therefore, Grette Associates is unable to determine if the plant quantities defined in the planting plan are suitable for the proposed enhancement area. At a minimum, a buffer enhancement plan should provide a map showing that the reduced buffer area is being enhanced to ensure that the buffer function will be at an equivalent or higher level than the standard buffer. The buffer enhancement plan proposes to manually remove the dense thickets of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) and replant these areas with the native vegetation defined in the planting plan. Grette Associates concurs that removing the blackberry and replanting those areas with native shrubs will provide more suitable buffer functions. However, no groundcover is proposed in the areas where the shrubs will be installed. Generally, there is very little vegetation beneath dense thickets of blackberry. Therefore, even though the blackberry will be removed manually, the removal of the blackberry will likely expose soils, making them more susceptible to erosion. Furthermore, the subject property is moderately sloped and any bare soils that are not revegetated will likely have erosion issues. Action #4 (page 11) of the stream buffer enhancement program states that if required by the City, a stream buffer fence will be installed around the western stream buffer boundary. Per FWRC 19.145.170, a permanent buffer fence shall be required along a critical area buffer under the following circumstances: any development proposals for plats, short plats, parks, etc.; when buffer reductions are employed as part of a development proposal, when buffer averaging is employed as part of a development proposal, or at the director's discretion to protect the values and functions of a critical area. 2102 North 30" Street, Ste. A Tacoma, WA 98403 Ph: 253,573.9300 Fx: 253.573.9321 2 4 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Upon thorough review, the submitted documents are largely compliant with Chapter 19.145 of the FWRC. However, prior to acceptance of these documents, Grette Associates recommends that the deficiencies within the Reports and Site Plan be revised. The deficiencies that were identified by Grette Associates are summarized below. Once the Reports and Site Plan are revised to include these recommendations, Grette Associates recommends that these documents be accepted. The proposed buffer enhancement plan is largely compliant with FWRC 19.145.330. However, the plan does not provide a supporting map showing the specific locations where the proposed enhancement will occur. At a minimum, a buffer enhancement plan should provide a map that identifies the specific locations where enhancement will occur. The proposed buffer enhancement plan does not propose installing any type of groundcover in the areas where enhancement would occur. Based on the existing vegetation and topography, it is Grette Associates' professional opinion that an approved native seed mix and jute mat should be applied throughout the enhancement areas for erosion control. • Per FWRC 19.145.170, a permanent buffer fence shall be required along a critical area buffer when buffer reductions are employed as part of a development proposal. Therefore, the proposed buffer enhancement plan should be revised to specifically state that a buffer fence will be installed along the western edge of the stream buffer. Additionally, the buffer fence should be shown on all site plans. The review of these Reports was conducted using the best available scientific information and methodologies and the best professional judgment of Grette staff biologists. Final acceptance and approval of the report is at the discretion of City staff. If you have any questions on the site assessment observations or stewardship recommendations, please contact me at (253) 573-9300, or by email at chadw(d7gretteassociates.corn. Regards, �O Chad Wallin Biologist 2102 North 30"' Street, Ste. A Tacoma, WA 98403 Ph: 253.573.9300 Fx: 253.573.9321 Location of temporary silt fence and permanent split rail fence Location of invasive species removal, \ location of jute map placement, and .� location of buffer planting. y$ N4 �3 =3125'13\' R=115.00' / L=63.06 \� \ \ cNO W W —1 1 1 REDONDO PROPERTY - Buffer Plan Prepared by Habitat Technologies 12 August 2016 r r r r r / rr _ ------ --------------- LA 91 .32' S 88'55'28" E w cy,IN r) N :n O LEGEND r� MONUMENT FOUND AS NOTED • REBAR & CAP LS 48745 SET O SURVEY PIN FOUND AS NOTED BASIS OF BEARING PLAT OF REDONDO BAY TRANQUILITY, VOL. 102, PAGES 93— 94 LOT 7. REDONDO BAY TRANQUILITY, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 102 OF PLATS, PAGE 93-94 IN PIERCE COUNTY, WASHINGTON. TAX PARCEL N0. 720250— 0070 RESULB :�� CED AUG, 31 2016 C17rY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS PLANT SCHEDULE SYMBOL CITY. BOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAME SIZE SPACING, CONDITION AREA COVERED 10 ACER CIRCINATUM / VINE MAPLE 1 GAL. CONTAINER LOCATE AS INDICATED ��ffff Q 10 CORNUS STOLONIFERA / RED OSIER DOGWOOD 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. 0 10 CORYLUS CORNUTA CALIFORNICA / WESTERN HAZELNUT 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. Q 10 HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR / OCEAN SPRAY 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. Q 10 LONICERA INVOLUCRATA I BLACK TWINBERRY 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. 25 MAHONIA NERVOSA I LONGLEAF MAHONIA 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. 25 POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM / WESTERN SWORD FERN 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. O 10 RIBES SANGUINEUM / RED FLOWERING CURRANT 1 GAL. CONTAINER FULL FOLIAGE, 36" O.C. ® 40 ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA-URSI / KINNIKINNICK 4" CONTAINER 36" O.C. 25 GAULTHERIA SHALLON I SALAL 1 GAL. CONTAINER 36" O.C. Location of temporary silt fence and permanent split rail fence Location of invasive species removal, location of jute map placement, and location of buffer planting. BASIS OF BEARING 5 PLAT OF REDONDO BAY TRANQUILITY VOLUME 102, PAGES 93-94 T / IN LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 7, REDONDO BAY TRANQUILITY, o ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 102 OF PLATS, PAGE 93-94 IN PIERCE COUNTY, WASHINGTON TAX PARCEL NUMBER 720250-0070 R=115.00' 1 L-63.06' I1 1 1 1 � , t Total Lam SF of Plant Cover Total Buffer Planting Area 1 PROPOSED x0"0HOUSE Buffer Landscape Plan 1� 1 1 1 I I ----_---- _ _ S 88'5 28" E 500 sf Low Tree Canopy 70 sf Shrub Cover 70 sf Shrub Cover 70 sf Shrub Cover 70 sf Shrub Cover 175 sf Shrub Cover 175 sf Shrub Cover 70 sf Shrub Cover 512 sf Groundcover 320 sf Groundcover 2,032 sf 1,350 sf / / / / / / 3 W z;rN 0In N 1A o qffi.-5 I z \44a�' SCALE' 1"=10'-0' 0 5' 10' 20' z J LU >- t2 Q L W a U V) 0 � 0 ° C ° V z Q V N Y u N d v z Q J 0 M� = LU Qm W Vi LL. ILL m REVISION No. Date By Sheet No. .«1 . xoifi or 1 sneer C& amiaal nx r. _ _ r 25P-'vary January 8, 2016 Jim Ferrell, Mayor Alexey Ancheyev Urban Design Group 879 Rainier Avenue North, Suite A200 Renton, WA 98057 RE: File #15-102547-00-UP; STREAM CONSULTANT REVIEW ESTIMATE /TECHNICAL COMMENTS CNI Investment - Redondo Bay Tranquility, *No Site Address' Federal Way Dear Mr. Ancheyev: Enclosed please find the consultant task authorization with scope of work for review of the Redondo Bay Tranquility Critical Areas Assessment and Stream Corridor Buffer Enhancement report. The department's stream consultant, Grette Associates, was asked to provide an estimate for their review of information prepared by Habitat Technologies. The stream consultant authorization form/task scope is enclosed. The normal course of action is for the City to set up an account to be funded by the applicant and drawn down by the work performed by Grette. Please note that if any of the finds are not used, they will be returned to the applicant. A check in the amount of $1,918.20, payable to the City of Federal Way, and signature on the consultant authorization form must be submitted before the review will begin. Following receipt, I will authorize Grette to begin their formal review. In addition to the Critical Areas Assessment and Stream Corridor Buffer Enhancement plan that was submitted, the City needs additional information to identify all impacts to critical areas associated with the new single-family house development. The site is located in an area identified as being geologically hazardous. A geotechnical report prepared by a geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist is required. The report must address the criteria established in Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.080 and 19.145.250. The city may choose to utilize our third party geotechnical engineering firm to review the report submitted by your geotechnical engineer. If so, the cost of this review would be at the applicant's expense. A feasible flow control system for roof and driveway runoff must be shown on the plans. Roof downspouts are shown; however, no method of controlling the roof runoff or driveway runoff has been proposed. Steep slope and critical area restrictions outlined in the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual will apply to this lot. The lot is not large enough for splash block, and flow control was not provided for this lot when it was platted. Pumping the runoff uphill to the City storm system is not allowed. Any flow control located on steep slopes must be designed and stamped by a Washington State licensed geotechnical or civil engineer. A detention tank or other detention facility may be required. An elevation drawing that identifies both the existing and proposed finished grade around the house is also required. 33325 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Mr. Ancheyev January 8. 2016 Page 2 Please use the enclosed resubmittal form and submit two copies of the geotechnical report, four copies of the elevation drawing, signed consultant authorization, and payment to the Permit Center. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your project, please contact me at 253-835-2641 or becky.chapin@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, t)o I lvfv- Becky Chapi Associate Planner enc: Stream Consultant Authorization Form City of Federal Way Invoice Resubmittal Form 1?-102547 Doc. LD. 719Qs HABITAT TECHNOLOGIES January 17, 2017 Mr. Brad Biggerstaff, PE @ GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, #16 Fife, Washington 98424 RE: Parcel 720250070 located along South 293rd Street, City of Federal Way Dear Mr. Biggerstaff, Pursuant to our discussions, I have reviewed the proposed location for two dispersion pipes (see attached) to be placed along the outer boundary of the buffer to be established and restored adjacent to the onsite stream corridor. As noted, the two dispersion pipes would release seasonal stormwater runoff from the proposed homesite to filter through the restored buffer prior to entry into the identified Type Ns Stream (a seasonal non -fish habitat stream). As outlined in the CRITICAL AREAS ASSESSMENT AND STREAM CORRIDOR BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOMESITE dated April 5, 2016 the established buffer along the western side of the onsite stream is to be cleared of invasive shrubs and then planted with a variety of native shrubs species. The planting of the native species shall also include the placement of jute matting to help protect local water quality and to help with the establishment of a viable stream buffer plant community. All onsite actions are to be completed at the direction of the onsite biologist to further ensure the protection of the stream channel, the adjacent buffer area, and overall project success. CONCLUSION It is the opinion of Habitat Technologies that the proposed location for the two dispersion pipes, coupled with the buffer restoration actions as presently outlined, would not adversely impact local water quality or produce adverse erosion within the established stream buffer. The placement of the two dispersion pipes would also provide hydrologic support for the buffer plant community during the summer and early fall storm events. Please contact me with any questions. RESUBMITTED Sincerely, nowai a Dewflig APR 12 2017 Thomas D. Deming, PWS Habitat Technologies CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT wetlands, streams, fisheries, wildlife — mitigation and permitting solutions P.O. Box 1088, Puyallup, Washington 98371 voice 253-845-5119 contact@habitattechnologies.net HABITAT TECHNOLOGIES July 18, 2017 Mr. Alexey Ancheyev @ Urban Design Group 879 Rainier Avenue North, Suite A200 Renton, Washington 98057 RE: Initial Implementation — Stream Buffer Enhancement Program Parcel 720250070 located along South 293rd Street, City of Federal Way Dear Mr. Ancheyev, As we have discussed, one of the first elements of the Stream Buffer Enhancement Program to be implemented as a part of the development of a new single family homesite within Parcel 72025007 focuses on the installation of erosion management controls to ensure that homesite development does not adversely impact the physical or biological character of the stream corridor, the retained stream corridor vegetation, or local water quality. As defined in the approved homesite development permit, a primary erosion management control would use the placement of protective silt fencing along the outer edge of the established stream buffer area. I visited the project site earlier today and noted that protective silt fencing has been placed along the stream corridor as defined in the approved site plan. In addition, the project team was onsite to complete the final installation of the protective silt fencing consistent with guidance and approval provided by the City of Federal Way site inspector. Following final installation and any potential follow-up proper maintenance throughout the site development process, the silt fencing should meet the intended stream corridor protections. Please contact me with any questions or wish to meet onsite. Sincerely, Thomas D. Deming, PWS Habitat Technologies wetlands, streams, fisheries, wildlife — mitigation and permitting solutions P.O. Box 1088, Puyallup, Washington 98371 253-845-5119 contact@habitattechnologies.net Becky Chapin Associate Planner City of Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 December 28, 2015 Ken Pierson 717 Industry Drive Seattle, WA 98188 Sent Via Fax: 253-83572609 and Sent e-mail to: Becky.Chapion@cityoffederalway.com RE: Redondo Bay Tranquility Stream Buffer Intrusion Parcel #72250-0070 Dear Ms. Chapin: I received from you A Notice Master Land Use Application dated December 11, 2015. 1 am responding on December 28, 2015, Public Comment and Appeals. Myself as well as our neighbors are concerned about the development of this property with regards to the height restrictions, presently at a maximum height of 30 feet. The surrounding neighbors will be greatly impacted if the height requirement is not enforced. Based on the developers other three houses that were built on the other three (3) lots, the height restrictions exceeded the 30 foot maximum, pictures attached hereto. Secondly, each of these three (30) houses has created a Glare that annoys our tranquility and those glares create a disturbance of our views at night. Pictures also attached to show the effect of the lights that surrounds the back of these houses. Under FWRC 7.05.030 Glare regulation and 19.105.030, Lighting regulation. There is no reason to place any type of lighting on the back side of this future house. Under the Glare regulation, those glare that are created annoys, endangers the comfort of each neighbor and is a public nuisance and a development regulation violation and is a violation of this Code. I would like to request a copy of any and all decisions, as well. Sincerely, Ken Pierson 206-669-3776 E-mail: krp1192@aol.com 4 1 0 4 f aj 0 6 f • CITY OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cityoffederal�.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: AS Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significarce (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated•Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was Kmailed ❑ faxed 0 e-mailed and/or 0 posted to or at each of the attached addresses on j 2015. Project Name File Number(s) 5 D Signature -a-- Date ' K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 1 /8/2015 10:07'.00 AM VW w"Is, 7g9q_yflK9 NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name: CNI Investment— Redondo Bay Tranquility Stream Buffer Intrusion Project Description: Proposed stream buffer intrusion to accommodate anew single-family residence. Applicant:. Alexey Ancheyev, Urban Design Project Location: Parcel #720250-0070 Date of Application: November 17, 2015 Date Determined Complete: December 2, 2015 Date of Notice of Application: December 11, 2015 Comment Due Date: December 28, 2015 Permits Under Review: Use Process III (File #15- 102547-UP) and Building Pen -nit (File 13-104614-SF). u_44t:R ROL4 N40 i4:ryi'J130 S 2g3R� SS .4x� mzo .norm�4 f :am4as y, .axe n„4 ,�ypys o-e i4srli; "r'1,n�.INC O:: W-Ot2o ✓:E,n;,d�_, m.�ef .. iu A S 293RD PL Environmental Review: The proposed action is categorically exempt from review under the State Environmental Policy Act pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)/FWRC 19.15.030(1)(a). Existing Environmental Documents: Critical Areas Assessment, dated October 2, 2014, prepared by Habitat Technologies and Critical Areas Assessment and Stream Corridor Buffer Enhancement Program, revised date November 3, 2015, prepared by Habitat Technologies. Development Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: Title 16, "Surface Water Management" and Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code" Public Comment & Appeals: Any person may submit written comments regarding the application to the Director of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on December 28, 2015. Only persons who submit written comments to the director (address below) or specifically request a copy of the decision, may appeal the decision. Details of appeal procedures for the requested land use decision will be included with the written decision. Availability of File and Environmental Documents: The official project file and referenced environmental documents are available for public review during normal business hours at the Community Development Department, 33325 8"' Avenue South, 2"d Floor, Federal Way, WA 98003 Staff Contact: Becky Chapin - Associate Planner, 253-835-2641, becky.chapin@cityoffederalway.com Published in the Federal Way Mirror December 11, 2015. Doc I.D, 71559 �eoAdvantage: King County of Washington State (App4) Page 1 of 2 ti r • w r x, Jeff Burkhardt a Customer Service Manager 9 4707 S 19th St, Tacoma, INN 98405 Phone: 253.471.5551 Fax: 866-651-5634 RrqAtnerican Email: fjburkhardtQFIrstam.com ParcelID Site Addr Site City Site Zip Acres Beds Baths SgFt Owner 0521049009 29020 1st Ave Des Moines 98198 9.9908 0 0.00 0 Del Rey Park LI 0521049041 Federal 98003 0.3030 0 0.00 0 Velasco Robert Jr & Fe C Way 0521049063 157 S 293rd PI Fe Y ral 98003 0.4026 4 3.25 3640 Smith Glen L & Patsy M 0521049094 515 S 288th St Des Moines 98003 6.0230 0 0.00 8174 Lakehaven Utility District 0521049216 142 S 293rd PI WaYral 98003 0.3030 4 3.00 4190 Karnik Nitin Murlidhar & Rath 0521049217 146 S 293rd PI WaYral 98003 0.3440 4 3.50 4010 Ali Amina H 0521049218 150 S 293rd PI WaYral 98003 0.2680 4 2.50 4461 Wang Cheng Fu & Chang Yan Xia 0521049220 126 S 293rd PI WaYral 98003 0.7197 6 9.00 6480 Pinsonnault Pierre 0521049222 135 S 293rd PI WaYral 98003 0.2325 5 3.50 6160 Pham Thanh V & Kim T Nguyen 0521049223 141 SW 293rd Federal 98003 0.2263 4 2.50 3970 Watanabe Barbara St Way 0521049224 149 S 293rd PI WaYral 98003 0.2243 5 3.25 4190 Martz William Bryan 0521049228 29324 1st Ave Federal 98003 0.2560 6 4.00 3726 Dang, Tran Ngoc S Way 1862700470 Federal 98003 12.1127 0 0.00 0 Federal Way City Of Way 5437200090 150 S 294th PI Fe y ral 98003 0.2784 3 2.50 2260 Garvey -Zimmerman Karen M Federal Christophersen Norman D & Christophersen 5437200100 146 S 294th PI Way 98003 0.2326 4 2.75 2960 Judy A 5437200110 140 S 294th PI WaYral 98003 0.2242 5 4.25 4400 Flygare Roger G & Karla J 5437200120 132 S 294th PI WaYral 98003 0.2242 5 2.50 3640 Pierson Ken R 7202500010 171 S 293rd St WaYral 98003 0.3517 4 3.50 3970 Schneider Richard H 7202500020 165 S 293rd St WaYral 98003 0.1653 4 2.50 3330 Musselman Lloyd R & Tina 7202500030 159 S 293rd St WaYral 98003 0.1843 5 3.25 4950 Won James H & Hyun J 7202500040 137 S 293rd St WaYral 98003 0.2079 3 2.25 2820 Holman R & B Trust 7202500050 153 S 293rd St WaYral 98003 0.2476 3 2.50 4550 Moon Hyungin Phoebe 7202500060 152 S 293rd St WaYral 98003 0.2276 3 2.50 3200 Heunisch T 7202500070 WaYral 98003 0.2209 0 0.00 0 Rpn Ma EIVED Federal MAY 2 7 2015 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 5/22/2015 http://geo.sentrydynamics.net/wa_king/default.aspx CDS -geoAdvantage: King County of Washington State (App4) Page 2 of 2 7202500080 Way 7202500090 128 S 293rd St Federal Way 7202500100 120 S 293rd St Federal Way 7202500110 112 S 293rd St Federal Way 7202500120 Federal Way 98003 0.4319 0 0.00 0 Rpn Management LLC 98003 0.2538 3 2.50 2990 Storaasli Allen G 98003 0.2297 3 2.50 2900 Berg Mickael3 & Karen L 98003 0.3205 4 3.25 2880 Rippentrop David C & Sandra 3 98003 0.5950 0 0.00 0 Ngonevolalath Nicole K http:Hge,o.sentrydynarnics.net/wa,_king/default-aspx 5/22/2015 I ' aw 292nd sr L Vt. 3 1 Fj a u N 00 S 294th 14 _ i FirstAmerican Title i �s- S c - IS {a I, entry Dynamics, Inc. and its ustomers make no representpreations, geoAdvantage warranties or conditions, exss or mplied, as to the accuracy or completeness of information www•sentlydynamics.net contained in this report. RECEIVED MAY 2 7 2015 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS 41k CITY Federalo. Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003-6325 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cityoffederalway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of shington, that a: IN Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on 1 ro ( - Project Name Cis t File Number(s) S /C] " F / - I b - g F Signature Date /v K:\PLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc Posting Sites: Federal Way City Hall - 33325 8th Avenue Federal Way Regional Library - 34200 1 St Way South Federal Way 320th Branch Library - 848 South 320th Street Subject Site - K:\PLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc FM F, 7 - :"-:� ILL December 9, 2015 Jim Ferrell, Mayor Alexey Ancheyev Urban Design 1926 Lighthouse Lane NE Tacoma, WA 98422 RE: File #15-102547-00-UP; LETTER OF COMPLETE APPLICATION CNI Investment - Redondo Bay Tranquility, *No Site Address* Federal Way Dear Mr. Ancheyev: The Community Development Department is in receipt of your November 17, 2015, Process III Master Land Use (MLU) application for the proposed intrusion into a stream buffer to construct a new single family residence. The proposal includes a stream mitigation plan prepared by Habitat Technologies. Pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.15.045, within 28 days of receiving an MLU application, the city shall determine whether all information and documentation required for a complete application has been submitted. NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION Please consider this correspondence a formal Letter of Complete Application. The Process III MLU application is deemed complete as of December 2, 2015. This determination of completeness is based on a review of your submittal relative to applicable requirements referenced within FWRC 19.15.040, "Development Application Submittal Requirements." This notice of complete application does not represent any form of preliminary approval of the proposed site plan. A technical review of the application will now begin. The Director of Community Development will issue a decision within 120 days of this letter. Please be advised that the 120-day review time will stop whenever the city or agencies with jurisdiction request corrections, additional studies, or information. The 120-day review time will begin within 14 days from the date the information has been provided to the city. The Development Review Committee (DRC) staff is preparing initial technical review comments that will be forwarded to you in separate correspondence. PUBLIC NOTICE The Notice of Application will be distributed within 14 days of this letter as follows: (1) at least one notice will be posted at the subject property; (2) one copy will be posted at each of the official notification boards; (3) one copy will be published in the Federal Way Mirror; and (4) a copy will be mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. The department also has the responsibility to notify other agencies that may have jurisdiction over your development project or an interest in it. 33325 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com -Mc. I nch. �elg December 9. 2015 Page 2 CLOSING If you have any questions regarding this letter or your development project, please contact me at 253-835- 2641, or Becky.chapin@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, Becky C pin Associate Planner enc: Notice of Application I5-102547 Doc I D 71557 NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name: CNI Investment— Redondo Bay Tranquility Stream Buffer Intrusion Project Description: Proposed stream buffer intrusion to accommodate a new single-family residence. Applicant: Alexey Ancheyev, Urban Design Project Location: Parcel #720250-0070 Date of Application: November 17, 2015 Date Determined Complete: December 2, 2015 Date of Notice of Application: December 11, 2015 Comment Due Date: December 28, 2015 Permits Under Review: Use Process III (File #15- 102547-UP) and Building Permit (File 13-104614-SF). u�o-§un zatamw :az:a;nao co:��•r,o �nrwxs> ..n.=..wiz. S Z93RD S� y i2�9N t� R.,�9 Pla+ Qn�i: �1RCf •rnzm�.., v o:aw.-sm .c�c=�aa rrv:,., N S 293RD PL :,.. ,R« Environmental Review: The proposed action is categorically exempt from review under the State Environmental Policy Act pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)/FWRC 19.15.030(1)(a). Existing Environmental Documents: Critical Areas Assessment, dated October 2, 2014, prepared by Habitat Technologies and Critical Areas Assessment and Stream Corridor Buffer Enhancement Program, revised date November 3, 2015, prepared by Habitat Technologies. Development Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: Title 16, "Surface Water Management" and Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code" Public Comment & Appeals: Any person may submit written comments regarding the application to the Director of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on December 28, 2015. Only persons who submit written comments to the director (address below) or specifically request a copy of the decision, may appeal the decision. Details of appeal procedures for the requested land use decision will be included with the written decision. Availability of File and Environmental Documents: The official project file and referenced environmental documents are available for public review during normal business hours at the Community Development Department, 33325 8"' Avenue South, 2"d Floor, Federal Way, WA 98003 Staff Contact: Becky Chapin - Associate Planner, 253-835-2641, Becky.chapin@cityoffederalway.com Published in the Federal Way Mirror December 11, 2015. Doc 1 D 71558 CITY OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.citvoffederalway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: 2 Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significarce (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Pemit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed X e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on )e o 9 2015. Project Name � I File Number(s) Signature Date /J - 9 -/ ,5 K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 1 /8/2015 10:07:00 AM n E O V O c C G � Q cp 0 -0,1 1 C `i O O N Ln tn > _0C C C E V i cu V 6 O C co x Z Q Lz Ln m J C >aJ V N O �^ Li CA 7� �3 a m 0 0 co a m (0 LO 0 Li m co �w o C N 0 0 �ri a) i L)- Off a) Lo r--- Cf) _ m N 0 L? m a�M°"OQ y O, A CN ONi C ,n 0 .ulN_Lo C E a) CN c > ' V a) x (T7 a)-0 m� n < 0 LL M 0 c c� 0 3 Y m a) .M a I 4 ai a E :r FW wil 1-1 N W - m cz .fl o O Cd O U U 7 cd 4O Cd t.0 ° � Ut., w CLI off V N p o" C U C,3 N :� to U— 00 M cd to oz O 4c", 5- 4- U V] Ocn � Q >_ � U % �r U �" iC L: 4C., U O -d Cd (n H "" N bA to O, o C's u as °4-4 oU a cd ctj M M ^+Oi O Q Ski O � C cn S," O O ul U O cn o.� y�j aW.A V ^, 0 �, bA o o' bp o o cn ci 3 akr)-C� M LL ca L cu >4 M CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL REVISED SUBMITTAL DATE: TO: FROM: FOR DRC MTG. ON: FILE NUMBER(s): RELATED FILE NOS.: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: ZONING DISTRICT. - November 23, 2015 E.J. Walsh, Development Services Manager Becky Chapin, Associate Planner Please email completeness/technical comments. Completeness letter needs to go out on or before December 15, 2015. 15-102547-00-UP None CNI Investment - Redondo Bay Tranquility *NO SITE ADDRESS* RS 9.6 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New SFR located within stream buffer. Applicant has submitted a mitigation plan for intruding into a Type Ns stream. The application originally submitted a UPIV application prior to the updated critical area code. Applicant has since revised the report and submitted under the new Environmentally Critical Area Chapter of FWRC which requires UPIII reivew. LAND USE PERMITS: PROJECT CONTACT. MATERIALS SUBMITTED: Process III Alexey Ancheyev Urban Design 879 Rainier Ave N SuiteA200 Renton, WA 98057 ■ Critical Areas Assessment and Stream Corridor Buffer Enhancement Program • Original Critical Areas Assessment (submitted prior to code change. • Site Plan • Mailing Envelopes 31919 111 Ave S, SuitMIOIFedgera, ay, WA 98003 253.925.5565 1253.925.5750 (f) Affidavit of Publication Rudi Alcott, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is the Publisher of The Federal Way Mirror, a weekly newspaper. That said newspaper is published in the English language continually as a weekly newspaper in Federal Way, King County, Washington, and is now and during all of said time has been printed in an office maintained by the aforementioned place of publication of said newspaper. That the annexed is a true copy of a legal advertisement placed by City of Federal Way - Community Development as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplemental form) of said newspaper once each week for a period of one consecutive week(s), commencing on the 11th day of December 2015, and ending on the 11th day of December 2015 . both dates inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its readers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $100.45, which amount has been paid in full, or billed at the legal rate according to RCW 65.16.020. Subscribed to and sworn before me this 15th day of January 2016. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, Residing at Buckley ',Ali ` • U NOTARY — i — u, ; PUBLIC �o fF' /j11111 s 110� wa mirror.com LEGAL h Al federal way NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATIDN Project Name: CNI Investment — Redonda Bay Tranquility Stream Butter Intrusion Project Description: Proposed stream buffer intru- sion to accommodate a new single-family resi- - dance. App[Wm: Alexey Ancheyev, Urban Design Project Location; Parcel 4720250.0070 Dale of Application: November 17. 2015 Date Determined Complete: December 2, 2015 Date of Notice of Application: December 11, 2015 Comment CO.' Data: December 28, 2015 Permits Under Review: Use Process III (File 115- 102547-UP) and Building Permit (File 13-104614- SF). Environmental Review: The proposed action is categorically exempt lrom review under the State Environmental Policy Act pursuant to WAC 197- 11.800(1)(b)IFWRC 19.15.030(1)(a). Existing Environmental Documents: Critical Areas Assessment, daled Oclober 2, 2014. prepared by Habitat Technologies and Critical Areas Assess- , mart and Stream Corridor Butler Enhancement Program, revised date iyevember 3, 2015. pre - Pa red hY Habitat Technologies. Development Regulations Used for Project Mitiga- i Uon: Title 16. "Surface Water Managemant- and TNIe 19. "Zoning and Development Code" Public Comment & Appeals: Any person may sub- mit written comments regarding the application to the Director of Community Oevelopment by S:uo p.m. on December 28. 2015. Only persons who submit written comments to the director (address below) or specifically request a copy of the deci- s€on, may appeal the decision. Details of appeal procedures for the requested Land use decision will be included wilIt the written decision. Avallability of File and Environmental Documents The official project file and referenced envirenmen- tat documents are available for public review dur• ing normal business hours at the Community Do- veiopmant Department, S3325 8th Avenue South, 2nd Floor, Federal Way, WA 98003 Staff Contact: Becky Chapin - Associate Planner, 263.035.2641, Becky. chapinfttyolf ed eralway.com Published in the Federal Way Mirror December 11, 2015. FWM 2299 1 4ik CITY OF Federal Way STREAM CONSULTANT AUTHORIZATION FORM Date: December 30, 2015 City: City of Federal Way Community Development Department 33325 81' Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 Consultant: Grette Associates Matthew Boyle 2102 North 30`" Street, Suite A Tacoma, WA 98403 (253)573-9300 Project: CNI Investment — Redondo Bay Tranquility Lot 7 File No.: 15-102547-00-UP, Process III Land Use Review Project Proponent: Alexey Ancheyev Urban Design 879 Rainier Avenue North, Suite A200 Renton, WA 98057 Project Planner: Becky Chapin Associate Planner (253) 835-2641 becky.chapin@cityoffederalway.com Project Background: The applicant proposes to construct a new single family residence that intrudes into a stream buffer. Proposal includes buffer enhancements. The applicant is in - the process of submitting a geotechnical report; please let me know if you would like a copy. Documents Provided: ■ Critical Areas Assessment and Stream Corridor Buffer Enhancement Program for the Development of a Single Family Homesite, Prepared by Habitat Technologies, revised date November 3, 2015 ■ Critical Areas Assessment, Prepared by Habitat Technologies, dated October 2, 2014 + Site Plan, Prepared by Urban Design Group, received May 27, 2015 Task Scope: 1. Review the Critical Areas Assessment for consistency with the requirements of Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.145, `Environmentally Critical Areas," (recently updated per Ordinance No. 15-797) especially: a. FWRC 19.145.270 (stream buffers) b. FWRC 19.145.330 (intrusion into stream buffers) 2. Conduct site visit(s) as necessary. 3. Possible meeting with applicant's stream biologist. 4. Review of resubmitted/corrected documents as needed. 5. Provide written response to findings, recommendations, and request additional information from applicant if needed. Task Cost: Not to exceed $ 1 without a prior written amendment to this Task Authorization. Acceptance: Consultant Wetland Consultant Authorization Form Page -2- Date 3�2�Ib IJULU ,�2_ /. l(a Date File # 15-102547-UP/Doc ID 71831 A,-Grette AssociatesLLC -I%r ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS January 5, 2016 Becky Chapin City of Federal Way 33325 8th Ave S Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 RE; File #15-102547-00-UP; Request for Third Party Review CNI Investment — Redondo Bay Tranquility Stream Assessment Dear Ms. Chapin, RECEIVE!) 13Y CDMMUNrry & ,eCONOm,c DEVELpPME-NT DEp4p AN hfENT I � ��6 Thank you for the opportunity to conduct the third -party review of CNI Investment's stream assessment for their proposed single-family residence. Grette Associates greatly values our relationship with the City of Federal Way, and we look forward to again providing quality third - party review services pursuant to our On -Call contract. I have included the Wetland Consultant Authorization Form signed by Matthew Boyle, Principal at Grette Associates. Please note the Task Cost included on the signature page. This cost includes time and materials to conduct the work outlined in the Task Scope identified on page 2 of the form. This work includes a potential meeting at the project site with the applicant's stream consultant and review of resubmitted/corrected documents as needed, in addition to review of the submitted materials, an initial site visit, and preparation of a review summary memorandum. If you have any questions on our Task Cost, please feel free to contact me at (253) 573-9300. Again, thank you for the opportunity to work with the City on this third -party review. Best Regards, GRETTE ASSOCIATESLLc 8 Scott Maharry Senior Biologist Enclosure: Wetland Consultant Authorization Form WENATCHEE TACOMA 509-663-6300 253-573-9300 Fax 509-664-1882 Fax 253-573-9321 151 S. WORTHEN ST. STE. 101 • WENATCHEE, WA 98801 2111 NORTH 30TH STREET • TACOMA, WA 98403 December 30, 2015 Matthew Boyle Grette Associates 2102 North 30'h Street, Suite A Tacoma, WA 98403 Jim Ferrell, Mayor RE: File #15-102547-00-UP; REQUEST FOR THIRD PARTY REVIEW CNI Investment — Redondo Bay Tranquility Stream Assessment Dear Mr. Boyle: Please find the enclosed task authorization form, critical areas assessment, and supporting document for third party review of the CNI Investment— Redondo Bay Tranquility Stream Buffer Intrusion. The applicant is proposing to construct a new single family residence within,a stream buffer. Buffer enhancement is proposed; however, no planting/landscape plan has been submitted. Also, this property is located within a Geologically Hazardous Area. The city is in the process of obtaining a geotechnical report from the applicant which I can provide to you if needed. City staff is requesting review pursuant to the agreed terms of the on -call contract. Please review the scope of work on the task authorization form, enter the task cost on page 2 of the document, and return to the city. Following the deposit of funds by the applicant, staff will provide you with an authorization to proceed with the scope of work. Please contact me at 253-835-2641 or becky. chap in@c ityoffederalway. corn if you have any questions regarding this task. Sincerely, Becky *in Associate Planner enc: Task Authorization Form Critical Areas Assessment, prepared by Habitat Technologies Site Plan Doc I D 71866 33325 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com CITY OF Federal Way RECEIVED MAY 2 7 2015 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS APPLICATION NO(S) �Iaa� Project Name Property Address/Location L-0 +- _. IN MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8`h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-835-2V7;Fax 253-835-2609 Li'�3'1�'.0 it�rUl tCdtiidl lV a1�.CQI71 s" - .2--%—I Y Date ` Parcel Numbers) �( Project Description b G < S I U `� O CV\ 01 PIN A.CF. PRINT Type of Permit Required Annexation Binding Site Plan Boundary Line Adjustment Comp Plan/Rezone Land Surface Modification Lot Line Elimination Preapplication Conference Process I (Director's Approval) �rocess II (Site Plan Review) vt Process III (Project Approval) V 111110 rocess earing xaininer s e Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone) Process VI SEPA w/Project SEPA Only Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use Short Subdivision Subdivision Variance: Commercial/Residential Required Information Zoning Designation . Comprehensive Plan Designation Value of Existing Improvements Value of Proposed Improvements International Building Code (IBC): Occupancy Type Constriction Type a. to q f.4 t i I Applicant kr CIM& Ur err P51 �, C",iyVQ Name: �(�� 5 Address: } q' �aj h P� �jve Svc4t PfLdO City/State: (Lt,{,jv, wf9r Zip: 1% (7S7 Phone: 2Gio _ 3 9 1 2- 5'0 Fax: Email: e�d.vNih-ir�rVa�a�CStStiS,.�.5 Signature: /v `� Agent (if different than Applicant) Name: ` se, rn� Address: City/State: Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Signature: Owner Name: �� Diu, roy G Address: 7t(W ('50 4` " l City/State: Zip: 30 Phone: Fax: Email: I&L. dA� t G r<aw fD9 o ek . L Signature: , e A Bulletin #003 - January 1, 2011 Page I of I k:\Handouts\Master Land Use Application HABITAT TECHNOLOGIES RESUBMITTED NOV 17 2015 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS CRITICAL AREAS ASSESSMENT AND STREAM CORRIDOR BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SINGLE FAMILY HGMESITE PARCEL 7202500070 South 293rd Street City of Federal Way, King County, Washington This document has been revised to incorporate changes to the City of Federal Way's Critical Areas Ordinance effective June 30, 2015 prepared for Ms. Irina Dmitroychuk prepared by HABITAT TECHNOLOGIES P.O. Box 1088 Puyallup, Washington 98371-1088 253-845-5119 October 2, 2014 Revised November 3, 2015 wetlands, streams, fisheries, wildlife — mitigation and permitting solutions P.O. Box 1088, Puyallup, Washington 98371 voice 253-845-5119 habitattech@gwestoffice.net INTRODUCTION This document details the culmination of activities and onsite evaluations undertaken to complete an onsite critical areas assessment (i.e. wetlands, surface water drainages, critical fish and wildlife habitats) of a presently vacant parcel (Parcel 720250070 - project site) located along South 293rd Street within the City of Federal Way, King County, Washington (part of Section 5, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M.) (Figure 1). Included within this document is a buffer enhancement program to ensure that the development of this homesite does not adversely impact the biological or physical functions of an onsite Type Ns Stream. The project site was located within a residential community and accessed via South 293rd Street - an existing paved public roadway. The project site had been modified by prior land uses actions, the development of South 293`d Street, the development of adjacent single family homesites, and the placement of public utilities. An intermittent drainage corridor (a City of Federal Way Type Ns Stream) was located within a ravine along the eastern boundary of the project site. immediately north (downstream) of the project site the surface water within this drainage corridor was captured within a culvert and taken downslope to the north and then to the east. The onsite assessment and evaluation of critical areas within and immediately adjacent to the project site was completed following the methods and procedures defined in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) with the 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (2010 Supplement); the guidance provided for the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Wash Manual); the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Forest Practice Rules (WAC 222-16-030); and the City of Federal Way Title 19 - Critical Areas Ordinance. Additional assessment was completed during October 2015 to ensure consistency with modifications to the City of Federal Way Title 19 - Critical Areas Ordinance which became effective June 30, 2015. The evaluation and characterization of onsite and adjacent critical areas (i.e. wetlands, surface water drainages, wildlife habitats) is a vital element in land use planning. The goal of this approach is to ensure that present and proposed planned site development, to include the establishment of protective buffers, does not result in adverse environmental impacts to identified wetlands or other critical areas. PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION The project site was vacant, approximately 9,622 square feet (0.22 acres) in total size, irregular in shape, and located within an urban residential area dominated by similarly sized lots with existing single family homesites. The project site was vacant and the western portion of the project site had been managed to control the establishment of Himalayan blackberries (Rubus procera). The eastern portion of the project site was dominated by a ravine that included an intermittent surface water drainage. The ravine area was dominated by a mixed forest plant community that had undergone prior 1 14100 clearing actions. A public sewer utility corridor was present along the northern boundary of the project site. In addition, prior land use actions had installed a capture system to covey the seasonal surface water from within the intermittent drainage generally around the residential community located to the north and downslope of the northeastern corner of the project site. Directions to Project Site: From northbound on Pacific Highway South through the City of Federal Way turn west onto 32oth Street South and continue to 1st Way South. Turn north onto Isc Way South and continue to South 293rd Street. Turn east onto South 293�d Street and continue to the project site. BACKGROUND INFORMATION NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping completed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 2). This mapping resource did not identify any wetlands or surface water drainages within the project site. STATE OF WASHINGTON PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES The State of Washington Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 3). This mapping resource did not identify any wetlands or surface water drainages within or immediately adjacent to the project site. This mapping resource did identify a surface water drainage well offsite to the east. STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE The State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This mapping resource did not identify any streams within the project site (Figure 4). This mapping resource did identify a stream offsite to east of the project site. This offsite stream was identified to provide habitats for coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES The State of Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 5). This mapping resource did not identify any streams within the project site. This mapping resource identified a stream offsite to the east as noted in the WDFW mapping above. This offsite stream was further identified as a Type F Water (fish -bearing) and included a Type U Water (unknown) to the east of the project site. 2 14100 KING COUNTY MAPPING The King County inventory mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 6). This mapping resource did not identify any wetlands or streams within the project site. SOILS MAPPING The soil mapping inventory completed by the Soils Conservation Service was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 7). This mapping resource identified the soil throughout the project site as Alderwood and Kitsap soils — very steep (AkF). This soil series is not as listed as a "hydric" soils. WASHINGTON STATE NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM The Washington State Natural Heritage Program was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This resource did not identify any high quality, undisturbed wetland or a wetland that supports state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species within the Section/Township/Range of the project site. ONSITE ANALYSIS CRITERIA FOR CRITICAL AREAS IDENTIFICATION The City of Federal Way has identified that the following areas of the environment are designated as critical areas pursuant to RCW 36.70A.030(5) (14.30.010): a) Critical aquifer recharge areas and wellhead protection areas; b) Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; c) Frequently flooded areas; d) Geologically hazardous areas; e) Regulated wetlands; and f) Streams. For the purpose of this document only fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, wetlands, and streams were assessed. Wetlands: Wetlands are transitional areas between aquatic and upland habitats. In general terms, wetlands are lands where the extent and duration of saturation with water is the primary factor determining the nature of soil development and the types of plant and animal communities living in the soil and on its surface (Cowardin, et al., 1979). Wetlands are generally defined within land use regulations as "areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater 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" (1987 Manual). Wetlands exhibit 3 14100 three essential characteristics, all of which must be present for an area to meet the established criteria within the 1987 Manual. These essential characteristics are: 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation: A predominance of plants that are typically adapted for life in saturated soils. 2. Hydric Soil: A soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper horizons. 3. Wetland Hydrology: Permanent or periodic inundation, or soil saturation to the surface, at least seasonally. Streams: A stream (aquatic area) is generally defined as a location where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed. A defined channel or bed is typically an area which demonstrates clear evidence of the passage of water and includes, but not limited to, bedrock channels, gravel beds, sand and silt beds, and defined channel swales. A stream need not contain water year-round. A stream typically does not include irrigation ditches, canals, storm or surface water run-off devices, or other artificial watercourses unless the constructed watercourse conveys a stream which naturally occurred prior to the construction of such watercourse. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservations Areas: "Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas" are defined by the City of Federal Way as the management of land for maintaining species in suitable habitats within their natural geographic distribution so that isolated subpopulations are not created. Habitat conservation areas include but are not limited to such areas as. a) Areas with which endangered, threatened, and sensitive species have a primary association; b) Habitats and species of local importance; c) Commercial and recreational shellfish areas; d) Kelp and eelgrass beds; herring and smelt spawning areas; e) Naturally occurring ponds under 20 acres and their submerged aquatic beds that provide fish and wildlife habitat; f) Waters of the state; g) Lakes, ponds and streams planted with game fish by a governmental or tribal entity; h) State natural area preserves and natural resource conservation areas; or i) Streams. 4 14100 STUDY METHODS Habitat Technologies completed a series of onsite assessments between July and September 2014. Additional onsite assessment was completed during October 2015. In addition, Habitat Technologies has completed similar assessments for parcels located within the general area of the project site. The objective of this evaluation was to define and delineate potential critical areas (wetlands, drainage corridors, and critical habitats) that may be present within or immediately adjacent to the project area. Onsite activities were completed in accordance with criteria and procedures established in the 1987 Manual with 2010 Supplement, guidance provided for the Wash. Manual, the City of Federal Way Title 19, and the WDNR Forest Practice Rules. FIELD OBSERVATION The project site was accessed via an existing paved public roadway — South 293`d Street - that formed the western boundary of the project site. The entire project site had been impacted by prior land use actions to include prior forest harvest, prior clearing and grading, the placement of imported fill materials, the placement of public facilities, and the development of adjacent parcels. The project site was located within an urban residential area dominated by similarly sized lots with existing single family homesites. The area offsite to the east was vacant and dominated by a mixed forest plant community. Plant Communities The plant community throughout the entire project site had been modified by prior land use actions, onsite and offsite. The western portion of the project site had been cleared and somewhat leveled as a part of the development of South 293", Street, the development of adjacent homesites, and the placement of public utilities. The plant community throughout the western portion of the project site includes areas of dense thickest of blackberries intermixed with areas dominated by a variety of grasses, herbs, shrubs, and sapling trees. Observed species included sapling red alder (Alnus rubra), sapling black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procera), evergreen blackberry (Rubus laciniatus), Pacific blackberry (Rubus ursinus), Scots broom (Cytisus scoparius), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilium), Canadian thistle (Cirsium arvensis), bluegrass (Poa spp.), nettle (Urtica dioica), English plantain (Plantago major), cats ear (Hypochaeris glabra), trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). This plant community was identified as non-hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of non -wetlands). The plant community within the eastern portion of the project site was dominated by a mixture of trees and shrubs and appeared to extend offsite to the east. Observed species included Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), Western red cedar (Thuja plicata), red alder, black cottonwood, Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), cherry (Prunus spp.), Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis), Himalayan blackberry, evergreen 5 14100 blackberry, reed canarygrass, rose (Rosa spp.), snowberry (Symphoricarpus albus), vine maple (Acer circinatum), holly (Ilex spp.), hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), snowberry (Symphoricarpus albus), sword fern (Polystichum munitum), salal (Gaultheria shallon), and thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus). This plant community as indentified as non- hydrophytic in character. An intermittent drainage corridor was identified within a ravine in the eastern portion of the project site. The area of active seasonal surface flow within this corridor was generally lacking of a plant community. However, a scattering of lady fern (Athyrium filix-femina) were present along the edge of active seasonal surface flow (see photos). OFFSITE: The plant community within the parcel directly to the north was similar to the plant community within the western portion of the project site. As noted above, the plant community within the area to the east was similar to the forested plant community within the eastern portion of the project site. The plant community offsite to the south was managed as a part of the existing single family homesite. • Hydrology The majority of the project site appeared to drain moderately well and did not exhibit seasonal hydrology patterns typical of wetland areas. An intermittent surface water drainage corridor was located within the bottom of the ravine within the eastern portion of the project site. This corridor appeared to originate offsite to the south/southeast within a forested area and to continue generally northward through the eastern portion of the project site. At the northeast corner of the project site prior land use actions had installed a surface water capture system that conveyed seasonal surface water to the north and then to the northeast. This surface water capture system was located in the area of the buried public utility corridor. • Soils As identified at representative sample plots throughout the project site the onsite soil appeared to drain moderately well and did not exhibit field indicators of "hydric" soil characteristics. The soil throughout the western portion of the project site had been modified by prior land use actions to include clearing, grading, and the import of fill materials. The onsite soil exhibited a texture of gravelly loam to very gravelly loam. • Wildlife Species and Habitats The project site had been modified and manipulated by prior and ongoing land use activities. The parcel directly to the east was dominated by a mixed forest plant 6 14100 community. The areas offsite to the north, west, and south were dominated by residential development. Wildlife Observations: The project site provided limited habitats for a variety of wildlife species. The majority of the wildlife species observed were also noted to be using offsite habitats. The project site did not provide habitats for fish species or suitable spawning habitats for amphibians. Wildlife species observed or that would be expected onsite or within the immediate vicinity of the project site based on existing habitats would include tree swallow (Tachycineta bicolor), violet green shallow (Tachycineta thallassina), song sparrow (Melospiza melodic), dark eyed junco (Junco hyemalis), American crow (Corvus brachynchos), starling (Sturnus vulgaris), American robin (Turdus migratorius), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), house finch (Passer domesticus), Steller's jay (Cyanocitta stellen), black -capped chickadee (Parus atricapillus), brown creeper (Certhia americans), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), Northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus), hairy woodpecker (Picoides villosus), purple finch (Carpodacus purpureus), black tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus), coyote (Canis latrans), opossum (Didelphis virginianus), eastern squirrel (Sciurus griseus), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), shrew (Sorex spp.), bats (Myotis spp.), common garter snakes (Thamnophis sirtalis), and Pacific treefrogs (Hyla regilla). Movement Corridors: The project site has been modified by prior land uses and was generally bound by existing urban developments. The movement of wildlife appeared restricted by the development of adjacent homesites and residential developments, and both public and private roadways. The project site is within the seasonal migratory pathways for a variety of passerine birds. State Priority Species: Priority species require protective measures for their survival due to their population status, sensitivity to habitat alteration, and/or recreational, commercial, or tribal importance. Game Species: "Game species" are regulated by the State of Washington through recreational hunting bag limits, harvest seasons, and harvest area restrictions. Observed or documented "game species" within and adjacent to the project site included black -tailed deer. State Candidate: State Candidate species are presently under review by the State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) for possible listing as endangered, threatened, or sensitive. One State Candidate species - pileated woodpecker — may use the habitats provided offsite to the east. State Monitored: State Monitored species are native to Washington but require habitat that has limited availability, are indicators of environmental quality, require 7 14100 further assessment, have unresolved taxonomy, may be competing with other species of concern, or have significant popular appeal. No critical habitat was identified onsite for State Monitored species. However, a single State Monitored species — great blue heron — has been documented offsite along the shoreline of Puget Sound. State Sensitive: State Sensitive species are native to Washington, are vulnerable to decline, and are likely to become endangered or threatened throughout a significant portion of its range without cooperative management or removal of threats. No critical habitat was identified onsite for State Sensitive species. However, a single State Sensitive species — bald eagle — has been documented offsite along the shoreline of Puget Sound. State Threatened: State Threatened species are species native to the state of Washington and are likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout a significant portion of its range within the state without cooperative management or removal of threats. Neither the project site nor areas within the immediate vicinity of the project site were not observed to provide critical habitats for State Threatened species. State Endangered: State endangered species are species native to the state of Washington and are seriously threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range within the state. Neither the project site nor areas within the immediate vicinity of the project site were not observed to provide critical habitats for State Endangered species. Federally Listed Species: The project site has not been documented to provide critical habitats for federally listed species. A single, federally listed species of concern — bald eagle — has been documented to use the habitats associated with the shoreline of Puget Sound. A second species of concern — coho salmon — is identified to use the habitats associated with a stream located offsite to the east. CRITICAL AREAS DETERMINATION Onsite critical areas assessment activities were completed in accordance with criteria and procedures established in the 1987 Manual with 2010 Supplement, guidance provided for the Wash. Manual, City of Federal Way Title 19, and the WDNR Forest Practice Rules. This assessment identified that no portion of the project site exhibited characteristics associated with a wetland. This assessment did identify an intermittent surface water drainage corridor within the eastern portion of the project site. This surface water drainage was identified as not providing direct habitats for fish species and was separated from downstream habitats by gradient, a surface water capture and conveyance system (buried culverts), and prior land use actions. However, the seasonal flow from this corridor appeared to enter Cold 8 14100 Creek in the area adjacent to the Lakehaven Treatment Facility offsite to the north/northeast via a system of buried culverts. As noted in the initial October 2014 report this intermittent surface water drainage corridor appeared best defined as a City of Federal Way Minor Stream and included a few wetland indicators waterward of the ordinary high water mark. However, with the City's modification of Title 19 which became effective June 30, 2015 this intermittent surface water drainage corridor would be defined as a Type Ns Stream (a seasonal non -fish habitat stream). The standard buffer for a City of Federal Way Type Ns Stream is 35 feet measured perpendicular to the edge of the ordinary high water mark. The City of Federal Way Type Ns Stream would also be identified as a City of Federal Way Habitat Conservation Area. This stream does not provide direct habitats for federally or state listed endangered, threatened, and sensitive species and does not provide direct habitats for species of local importance. However, this stream would be defined as a "Water of the State," and as a "Stream" pursuant to provisions of the City of Federal Way Title 19. SELECTED DEVELOPMENT ACTION The Selected Development Action for Parcel 720250070 focuses on the planning and development of a new single family homesite within the western portion of the project site consistent with the City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan and local zoning. The Selected Development Action would avoid any direct impact to the identified Minor Stream. However, because of the limited size of the existing parcel and the location of the identified City of Federal Way Minor Stream in the eastern portion of the parcel the development of the new single family homesite would require the unavoidable encroachment into the outer, western portion of the standard 35-foot City of Federal Way buffer associated with the identified Type Ns Stream (see Site Plan). As outlined in City of Federal Way 19.145.330 (effective June 30, 2015) the City may approve a request for an intrusion into a stream buffer using the Process III in Chapter 19.65. Stream buffer intrusions may be permitted with a buffer enhancement plan and that the established final buffer would function as an equivalent or higher level that the standard buffer. These functions include habitat, water quality, stormwater retention capabilities, groundwater recharge, and erosion protection. The City may approve a stream buffer intrusion based on the following criteria: (a) The action will not adversely affect water quality; (b) The action will not adversely affect the existing quality of wildlife habitat within the stream or setback area; (c) The action will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities; 9 14100 (d) The action will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards; (e) The action will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the area of the subject property nor to the city as a whole, including the loss of significant open space; and (f) The action is necessary for reasonable development of the subject property not otherwise prohibited by the shoreline master program. As presently outlined in the overall site development plan, all six (6) of the specific criteria can be met as a part of the site development permitting package. In particular, the required reduction of the standard buffer width is the minimum necessary for the reasonable development of a new single family homesite within this irregularly shaped parcel. In addition, the homesite development would retain the existing plant community along the western and eastern sides of the identified minor stream, would use the appropriate Best Management Practices to ensure no adversely affect onsite or downstream water quality, would not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities of the project site, would not adversely affect the existing quality of the habitat within the buffer reduction area, and would not be materially detrimental to other properties in the area. STREAM BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM As a part of the development of the new single family homesite, the buffer area associated with the western side of the Type Ns Stream shall be enhanced through the removal of invasive species; the removal of existing garbage and yard waste; and the planting of native shrubs to provide terrestrial and aquatic habitats, as well as to provide erosion control protection. The overall GOAL of this Stream Buffer Enhancement Program is to enhance the plant community within the western side of the buffer area adjacent to the homesite development area. To meet this GOAL the following actions shall be implemented: Existing invasive shrubs (i.e. blackberries), along with an assortment of existing garbage within the retained stream buffer shall be removed prior to planting activities. The invasive shrubs shall be removed using hand -methods that also removal as much of the root structure as possible without adversely impacting the soil profile. All removed plants and garbage shall be taken to an approved offsite disposal site. 2. The established stream buffer shall be planted with a variety of native shrubs common to the local area and which provide a variety of habitats for local wildlife. Plant placement shall use the "pit plant" method which would place each plant within a planting pit approximately twice the size of the existing rootball. The pit with plant would then be re -filled with a mixture of 50% native soil and 50% plant material compost. Following installation a 2-inch layer of well composted mulch shall placed around the base of each plant. Each plant shall also be flagged for identification during subsequent invasive species control actions. 10 14100 3. All planting actions and plant placements shall be completed at the direction of the project biologist. 4. If required by the City, the outer boundary of the established western stream buffer shall be fenced with a two -rail, split -rail fence (or other fence approved by the City) and posted with standard City of Federal Way buffer boundary signs to limit human intrusions. 5. Upon the completion of onsite planting activities an implementation report shall be submitted to the City of Federal Way. Following acceptance of the implementation report by the City of Federal Way, the property owner shall undertake a five-year monitoring and maintenance program to ensure the survival of the planted trees and shrubs and the establishment of a viable buffer plant community. To achieve the defined GOAL, the following OBJECTIVE and PERFORMANCE CRITERIA have are defined: Objective A. The established western stream buffer area shall exhibit an enhanced scrub vegetation class within five years following initial planting. Performance Criterion #A1: As defined by plant counts 100% of the shrubs initially planted shall exhibit survival through the end of the first growing season following initial planting. Performance Criterion #A2: As defined by plant counts 80% of the shrubs initially planted shall exhibit survival through the end of the second, third, fourth, and fifth growing seasons following initial planting. Performance Criterion #A3: As defined by aerial coverage non-native shrub species (blackberries, Scot's broom) shall not exceed 10% at the end of the first, second, third, fourth, or five year monitoring periods following initial planting. SELECTED PLANTS The plants selected for the buffer areas shall be obtained as nursery stock. These selected species are native and commonly occur in the local area. The plant species prescribed are selected to increase plant diversity, increase wildlife habitats, and enhance the buffer environment. NUMBER COMMON NAME (ID) - SCIENTIFIC NAME SIZE 10 Vine maple (ACC) — Acer circinatum 1 gal 10 Oceanspray (HOD) — Holodiscus discolor ; 1 gal 11 14100 10 Hazelnut (COC) — Corylus cornuta 1 gal 10 Flowering currant (RIS) — Ribes sanguineum 1 gal 10 Black twinberry (LOI) — Lonicera involucrata 1 gal 10 Red osier dogwood (COS) — Cornus stolonifera 1 gal 60 TOTAL IMPLEMENTATION INSPECTION Essential to the success of the stream buffer enhancement program is the accurate inspection of onsite activities immediately prior to and during the initial planting. These activities include pre -implementation site inspection, onsite inspection and technical direction during planting activities, and post -planting site inspection and evaluation. The pre -implementation site inspection allows the property owner and the project biologist to evaluate and, if necessary, undertake minor adjustments in the onsite implementation steps. These steps include analysis of project site elevation features, project sequencing and timing, unforeseen required minor modifications to the original establishment plan, and the establishment of environmental protections (silt fences, etc.) required during implementation. The project biologist shall perform implementation oversight and address minor unforeseen implementation difficulties to assure that the intent of the stream buffer enhancement program is met. The project biologist shall also be responsible for ensuring that the species and sizes of native plants selected and noted within the planting plan are utilized during implementation. If selected native species become unavailable, the project biologist shall consult with the City of Federal Way for substitute plant species to assure that the intent of the compensatory mitigation program is met. Post -implementation site inspection/ evaluation shall include the preparation of a "record -drawings" which shall be submitted to the City of Federal Way and along with an implementation report and photo documentation. PROJECT MONITORING Following the successful completion of the stream buffer enhancement program a five- year monitoring and evaluation program shall be undertaken. The purpose of this monitoring program is to ensure the success of the selected enhancement actions as measured by an established set of performance criteria. This monitoring shall also provide valuable information on the effectiveness of enhancement procedures. STANDARDS OF SUCCESS The evaluation of the success of the stream buffer enhancement program shall be based on a 100% count of desirable shrub. The defined performance criteria shall be applied at the times of yearly monitoring. Shrubs shall be visually evaluated to determine the rate of survivorship, health, and vigor of each plant. 12 14100 1. As a part of each monitoring period the project biologist shall count the number of live plants which were planted within the enhanced buffer. Plants shall be identified to species and observations of general plant condition (i.e., plant health, amount of new growth) are to be recorded for each plant. 2. As a part of each monitoring period the project biologist shall assess the number of undesirable invasive plants and estimate the aerial coverage (as if the observer were looking straight down from above) of these invasive plants. Undesirable plants include blackberries, Scot's broom, tansy ragwort, reed canarygrass, and plants listed in the Washington State Noxious Weed List. 3. As a part of each monitoring period the project biologist shall count the number of desirable "volunteer" plants and estimate the aerial coverage of these plants within the enhanced buffer. 4. As a part of each monitoring period the project biologist shall take photographs that show the entire stream buffer enhancement program area. During the five-year monitoring period the photos shall be taken in the same direction and at the same location to provide a series of photos. These photos shall show plant growth, plant species, and plant coverage. 5. Upon the completion of each annual monitoring period the project biologist shall prepare a letter report defining the onsite observations and overall plant survival. Each report shall include photo documentation of the enhanced buffer. Each report shall be provided to the City of Federal Way. MONITORING YEAR PLANT COMMUNITY MONITORING SU BMITTAL OF MONITORING REPORT YEAR-1 On or about April 15, 201 x+1 On or about Sept. 15, 201x+1 Report due Oct. 7, 201x+1 YEAR-2 On or about April 15, 201 x+2 On or about Sept. 15, 201x+2 Report due Oct. 7, 201x+2 YEAR-3 On or about Sept. 15, 201 x+3 Report due Oct. 7, 201 x+3 YEAR-4 On or about Sept. 15, 201x+4 Report due Oct. 7, 201x+4 YEAR-5 On or about Sept. 15, 201x+5 Report due Oct. 7, 201x+5 201x represents the implementation years. VEGETATION MAINTENANCE PLAN Maintenance of the stream buffer enhancement program may be required to assure the long-term health and welfare of the associated environmental functions. Such maintenance shall be identified during the monitoring period and undertaken only following discussion and coordination with the City of Federal Way. The overall 13 14100 objective is to establish an undisturbed plant community that does not require maintenance. Activities may include, but are not limited to, the removal of invasive non- native vegetation and the irrigation of selected areas. Established maintenance activities include the removal of any trash within the stream buffer. REMOVAL OF INVASIVE NON-NATIVE VEGETATION As a contingency, should the removal of invasive non-native vegetation become necessary, the project team shall contact the City of Federal Way to establish and define specific actions to be taken. Resultant contingency plan activities shall be implemented when the ongoing vegetation monitoring program indicates that plants listed in the Washington State Noxious Weed List, blackberries, reed canarygrass, or Scot's broom are becoming dominant in the community or exceed 10% of the aerial coverage of the planting areas. The following maintenance program shall also be enacted to limit the re-establishment of invasive species. MONITORR_G7 FIRST REMOVAL SECOND REMOVAE_F THIRD REMOVAL YEAR ACTION ACTION ACTION YEAR-1 On or about April 20, On or about May 30, On or about July 15, 201x+1 201x+1 201x+1 YEAR-2 On or about April 20, On or about May 30, On or about July 15, 201x+2 201x+2 201x+2 YEAR-3 On or about April 20, On or about July 15, 201x+3 201x+4 _ YEAR-4 On or about April 20, On or about July 15, 201x+4 201x+4 YEAR-5 On or about April 20, On or about July 15, 201x+5 201x+5 * Based on a year X implementation. CONTINGENCY PLAN As a contingency, should the proposed stream buffer enhancement program fail to meet the performance criteria, the landowner shall undertake the required remedial actions. Where plant survival is the failing component, the project proponent shall replant and ensure the success of this second planting which shall be held to the same standard of success as measured by performance criteria and monitoring processes. Where non-native, invasive vegetation exceeds 10% aerial coverage the project proponent shall undertake removal actions. Such removal actions shall be completed using hand tools or pulling the plants by hand to remove the invasive vegetation without disrupting the soil profile. All cut or pulled vegetation shall be removed from the mitigation area and disposed in an approved location. Herbicides shall only be used following approval by the City of Federal Way. All herbicide application shall be completed by a licensed professional. Should additional remedial actions be required, 14 14100 the landowner shall meet with the City of Federal Way to establish and define actions to be taken to meet the desired goal of this stream buffer enhancement program. TEMPORARY IRRIGATION The landowner shall ensure that a minimum of one (1) inch of water is supplied each week to the restore buffer area between May 1 and October 15 for a least the first two years following initial planting. The calculated amount of required water shall include both natural rainfall and temporary irrigation. The need for additional years of irrigation shall be determined based on site conditions and overall plant survival. The amount of water supplied to the mitigation area shall be increased at the direction of the City of Federal Way or if onsite monitoring defines such a need. A temporary irrigation system may be installed at the time of buffer planting. The temporary irrigation system may utilize above ground sprinklers, a drip system, or a manual hose system. The final selected irrigation system shall be detailed within the implementation report following the planting of the buffer area. FINANCIAL GUARANTEE Financial guarantees shall be provided for this project and shall be defined in two parts. Part One (Implementation Guarantee) shall be associated with the initial onsite compensation elements of the proposed buffer program. Part Two (Performance Guarantee) shall be associated with the monitoring and reporting elements of the proposed buffer program. These guarantees shall be held by the City of Federal Way and be equal to 120% of the actual estimated costs for identified activities. This increased percentage shall allow for adequate funds to be available as a contingency should actions be required to meet the goals of these plans. The Implementation Guarantee shall be deemed to be released by the City of Federal Way upon the successful completion of the initial onsite buffer program elements and the acceptance by the City of Federal Way. The Performance Guarantee shall be deemed to be released upon meeting the established performance criteria and acceptance by the City of Federal Way of the required reporting documents. lementation Guarantee TASK ASSOCIATED COST Initial team meeting to define works areas and timing j $ 250.00 Site preparation for planting buffer area (invasive species and $ 300.00 garbage removal: 4-person crew 3hrs plus disposal) 60 shrubs and installation $10/each) $ 600.00 Split rail fence installation (64ft at $8/ft) $ 525.00 Buffer posting $ 35.00 Implementation report 3 hrs at $120/hr . $ 360.00 SUB -TOTAL $2,070.00 Required 20% Contingency $ 414.00 IMPLEMENTATION GUARANTEE TOTAL $ 2,484.000 15 14100 Performance Guarantee TASK Year -One onsite monitoring with expenses and travel ASSOCIATED COST $ 550.00 Two times for plants (4 hrs at $100/hr) Annual report with photos (1.5 hrs at $100/hr) $ 550.00 Year -Two onsite monitoring with expenses and travel Two times for plants (4 hrs at $100/hr) Annual report with photos (1.5 hrs at $100/hr) $ 350.00 Year -Three onsite monitoring with expenses and travel One time for plants (2.5 hrs at $100/hr) Annual report with photos (1 hrs at $100/hr) $ 350.00 Year -Four onsite monitoring with expenses and travel One time for plants (2.5 hrs at $100/hr) Annual report with photos (1 hrs at $100/hr) $ 350.00 Year -Five onsite monitoring with expenses and travel One time for plants (2.5 hrs at $120/hr) Annual report with photos (1 hrs at $120/hr) $ 1,500.00 Invasive species control program (3 time for years one and two; 2 times years three, four, and five. 2 person crew 2 hrs each visit with disposal) Irrigation system set-up and water (years one and two) SUB -TOTAL Required 20% Contingency $ 300.00 $3,950.00 $ 790.00 PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE TOTAL $ 4,740.00 STANDARD OF CARE This document has been completed by Habitat Technologies for use by Ms. Irina Dmitroychuk. Prior to extensive site planning the findings documented in this document should be reviewed and verified by City of Federal Way. Habitat Technologies has provided professional services that are in accordance with the degree of care and skill generally accepted in the nature of the work accomplished. No other warranties are expressed or implied. Habitat Technologies is not responsible for design costs incurred before this document is approved by the appropriate resource and permitting agencies. Bryan W. Peck Wetland Biologist 7�iowraJ D. 'During Thomas D. Deming, PWS Habitat Technologies 16 14100 FIGURES 17 14100 d a n a 2 07 N � � > o ® m a 1° f6 z w c ao Z N= lb— 3 3 3 c L •CL i a M 2 y Y m t IL w W !L U- J ei CL EL 2 1111 I I I�_ �¢o 1 S � 9 « y a 3 � r N 00 �6e L ems a =s N L F r� cc Q �M co Z Y S L _ L @ N @ O @ L @ @ O_ +L. O E a @ O o N U = O O a C cm O z N N Z' IF @ N @ 0 co T 0 E N O •- @ C LU Z• Q U)C = N 0@ Co E @ E o ❑ O) N N _ C E O N a p C C 3 C 0 U) � d J J C @ E O T O � O C _ @ � @ N > O C (6 a a $2 N O N N a aEU❑ E O U)@ ❑ ❑ ❑ =@wy w a w a w IL m n0 ? a a a a NNE L U) Z a z a z a � @ @ C 3 01 CO C @ M j o c 3 o @ O _ C L = 7 O O U a)@ N 0 Cl) ❑ w O w O LU @ @ oL N "' N U) U) U) c O @ N y J J J J c@i @ Z@ 7 = O m = a s = a s = a s = N 0 N N w LL V) a z z a z z a z z a = 0 > Lo N @ 'N LL N =�� J @ - L N E �' 0 a� DR LL = EE J I� r @ E E LL f6 � N �- >❑ N L N d 42 O. - cmQ CL 7 U E V 9 a 00 L a N a 00 L a a � O N yy O � U Z o ❑ a N z � N Q z z, ! S U @ C H C fA C N C 2 O w CD (0 O N L L C = Ui N =o U -0 'O U -O U -0 U)> y '- LL=oo m OL o 0 3 a o 0 3 a > > o E N w O a= � �° > 0) > > @`o) 6)&al a) o)Ooprn C 7 0 @ @oo� E O V T� E E = 3 aEi 3 3 3 3 0 0 N m a n =O W a= O @ (0 _0 U U C C-0 a U U C C _ m � ❑= LL N On @ o 2 Q = a s mE �EZ Q 2y a0 F-z 0OLr OtL O ow L 0 C 2 m= Y inoa) C 'O � L Y � r< m T 3 Q cn O m d) _ U � y ._ Cc OL w Q C) O o� 3 N� 8 azcn E� n0 Z m ❑ C14 13) w' O OO � rp C.mo o z V _ W ❑ [V �_ ED N C C U M. G Q Cl) o N = V = V 0 J Z O 2 0 N 7 = w = O0EO o aw a �Y N �o�w QN Q @ @ ai @ U ~ E E Q 0 73 m= cu - C, o_ IL w❑ U @@ Z Z �' L 0 o L U � W.E- o n O w = o @ :D cL 0 E c m E@ @ >_ -D o `o L U `o w 0 ) n ` U) .2 a ) a UZ m UO �O ma'U � m�� Wl S a4%y S ld IRL L g "N 7*1 s a ftv tnu. 4 any q1t V? *Kv 41ct yr s OAV 41ci pi S s 7! -5 IA I,,' 2 ti 111& 0 5thty) U3 ib QL CL ❑ Cr ?AS 2AV PU in a) 61 41S.>,',V plr� Si h A,, ifq rn ms aw t412 MS QAV k0CL 41 14 MS RAV qlz�l U) to CO z O ❑ 0- z o m w co 0 El El C) 't tf 0CL o CN (D F- z E a) > 0 z Figure 4 WDFW Mapping Hill Climb November 17, 2014 1:9,028 0 0.075 0.15 0.3 mi All SalmonScape Species 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 km Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, TomTom, Intermap, hcrement P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, Mapmylndia, 0 OpenStreetMap contributors, and the G IS UserCommunity USGSINHD 1713884 ELEV-kTION Contour. d0' interval STREAMS /,F% Stream Water Type S. F. N U. mko.— x•' X. uon-typed per WAC 222-16 ' Water Type Chance HABITAT TRAVSPORFATION Paved Road WXTER BODIES Open, � n waterJ� ^ � Unpavzd Road; Surface Ut"ou-n Flnts�Gravzl Bar Abandoned Road(--A--ay map) ke Orphaned Road (no an AC-ly—P) ?.Imr Made Feature IN a Trnil Wet .area Railroad ? ? ? ' Unl:no,vnannlnssin'ed WETLANDS-R.wmrr& xorn z�nr umar e.E .+�., • TSPe A rn rn Forested T}Te B �„ orher Figure 5 TECHNOLOGIES WDNR Mapping Figure 6 King County Mapping s1sa7su 05210R921:i 0521049009 ides Moines 1%\\0621049094 mm �jl )20250073rJ 3' 7202500100 720250005�0 Y2!0p00710 ; 7202500pFi0 Y202500120 ' 1, � v� = 72025000R0 Im2500030 X 125090YO 7202500020 ?202500050 720-500070 7202500060 1862700470 90 1 0521049216 J52104921/ :.0521#0135 0M1049220 0521049041 Federal Way s2tn as, 0521049Z1 S 057104 M C T 0527449228 0621049039 05.21049227 0527049223 0521049222 0527049063 0621049224 052104922Y 052104 TF7 A 5431207161) 5431200730 5451{00120 543T2007QA 5431200140. 543/200770 18627001A 5437200150 543/200090 186770TidC1 $ "VL 1662700130 543720L�032 5431200040 343/200= 543/200020 543MOV50 513120DO70 IC120MKkng County 0 170ft 7h6'vi�tl[[nYti0r1 InCIIWBq G'7 thls rtiap i795 tseen compllee t]y YJ[tf; Gounfy Sidi[ fsorn a Vai7klyy Gf SotuCeS and i5 Subject A G>'a[Kj8 WiEhDut nOt- King Go !!yy makes rio iepresentaiions awarranties, express or xnp4ad. as W acuaacy, cflm�sl6tenacs. tlmeElness, or nghtE !o Eha X of atrh nformsbon Thlsndocum[ ii is not mended far use as a Suryey product Kfrr�tgg Countyy 5ha1 not he Ifabte far any general, spsraa mtlifact, mcldentai, 7r C7n5Cquanilal damages ir+ciudii�g, hul na; Efmited la,ld5i revariues u loss pFofits.resulhng fnxn Shp use cr mr5usa of iho infWYM1eiIOnCOniailled an lhls map. �+ny isle dLQ King �D[.�nty th15 map a: iYAnrm81i0n on this map is prahihiiad o�orRpt M written permission to 1SuepGounty Date 11117=14 Source King Coumy iMAP -SenI:llivaArea$tm1p,Avww.Rtatrolcc.9OWGISWAP) M „W.6T oZZT M „O,OZ oZZT v Cl) M „9b,6T oZZT O O N � 0) tr N �a Zco :3 > U) = M o co n O o ?�U m c O m Z C) g in IOD O a 2 �i v � c E 0 o.2 o o t o a � d v M N 3 ryry 7 n .0 d O CD ` 3 N C z--gijj� Z U 7l REFERENCE LIST Adamus, P.R., E.J. Clairain Jr., R.D. Smith, and R.E. Young. 1987. Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET); Volume II: Methodology, Operational Draft Technical Report Y-87, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79/31. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist. 1977. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. Revised, Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #04-06-025. Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update. Publication #14-06-029. Olympia, WA: Washington Department of Ecology. Reppert, R.T., W. Sigleo, E. Stakhiv, L. Messman, and C. Meyers. 1979. Wetland Values - Concepts and Methods for Wetland Evaluation. Research Report 79-R1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-08-13. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soils Conservation Service. Soils Survey of King County Area Washington, February 1979. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication Number 96-94. Washington State Department of Fisheries, Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume 1, 1 18 14100 PHOTOS 19 14100 qW Wv / I-r fro 201 - � • • .• ,.mot h or r' �., - � . err �rF � ¢ � �F°' r` f � _ SITE ADDRESS XXX SOUTH 293RD STREET FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON PARCEL NUMBER: 7202500070 LEGAL DESCRIPTION REDONDO BAY TRANQUILITY TGW UND INT PRIVATE ROAD A OWNER URBAN DESIGN GROUP B79 RAINIER AVE N, STE A-200 RENTON,WA, 98057 (206)838-8250 ATTN:ALEXEY ANCHEYEV BENCHMARK AND DATUM TOPOGRAPHY AND SITE FEATURES PROVIDED BY CLIENT. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY. DATUM AND ELEVATIONS ARE ASSUMED. CIVIL ENGINEER GEORESOURCES,LLC 5007 PACIFIC HWY EAST SUITE 16 FIFE, WA 98424 (253) 896-1011 fax (253) 896-2633 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE 1. FLAG CLEARING LIMITS AS SHOWN. 2. INSTALL TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT. 3. INSTALL SILT FENCE. LOCATION OF SILT FENCE IS SHOWN ON TESC PLAN. 4. INSTALL INLET PROTECTION IN ALL EXISTING CATCH BASINS WITHIN 100 FEET OF THE SITE. 5. CLEAR AND GRUB SITE. ANY AREA STRIPPED OF VEGETATION, WHERE NO FURTHER WORK IS ANTICIPATED FOR A PERIOD OF 2 DAYS IN THE WET SEASON (OCTOBER THROUGH MAY) AND 7 DAYS IN THE DRY SEASON (JUNE THROUGH SEPTEMBER), SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH THE APPROVED EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL METHODS, (E.G., SEEDING, MULCHING. NETTING, EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL METHODS.). 6. ROUGH GRADE SITE. 7. INSTALL FOUNDATIONS AND BACKFILL. 8. CONSTRUCT BUILDINGS, DRIVEWAYS, DISPERSION SYSTEM, AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. 9. SEED (OR HYDROSEED) AND MULCH ALL EXPOSED AREAS. SEE AMENDED SOILS SPECIFICATIONS. 10. REMOVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL FACILITIES INCLUDING INLET FILTERS AFTER ENTIRE SITE IS STABILIZED AND THE POTENTIAL FOR EROSION HAS PASSED. 11. CLEAN ANY SILT THAT HAS ACCUMULATED IN THE DISPERSION TRENCH CATCH BASIN. CONTRACTOR NOTE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ON PLANS ARE TO BE VERIFIED HORIZONTALLY AND VERTICALLY PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. ALL EXISTING FEATURES INCLUDING BURIED UTILITIES ARE SHOWN AS INDICATED ON RECORD MAPS AND SURVEY FURNISHED BY OTHERS. WE ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR THE ACCURACY OF THOSE RECORDS AND SURVEY, FOR THE FINAL LOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES IN AREAS CRITICAL TO CONSTRUCTION CONTACT THE UTILITY OWNER/AGENCY. URBAN DESIGN GROUP - SFR ACING COUNTY, WASHINGTON SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 21, RANGE 04 NW PROJECT SUMMARY ITEM AREA I UNITS ADDITIONALNOTES EXISTING CONDITIONS LOT SIZE 9622 SF 0.22 ACRES PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RESIDENCE 2695 SF DRIVEWAY 409 SF PERVIOUS SURFACE TOTAL PROPOSED 3.104.0 5F 32.3% TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA 3104 1 SF 32.3% 5,. C` LEGEND 4" STORM PIPE 4 ■- 4" SD PERMEABLE PAVEMENT _ - Gr• - - STORMWATER PIPES 4" ROOF DRAIN 4" RD 4" FOOTING DRAIN 4" FD DISPERSION PIPE SURFACE WATER FLOW EXISTING CONTOUR LABELS DOWNSPOUT S PROPOSED CONTOUR LABELS VICINITIY , NOT TO SCALE COPYRIGHT GODGLE 2016 SITE SHEETINDEX COVERSHEET.................................................................I.............•....C-1 GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN ........................................................ C-2 DRAINAGEDETAILS............................................................................ C-3 TESC PLAN .................................................. ..................................... C-4 5 TESC DETAILS ...................................... ---- ....... ,......................... 0' Z U) LW O � Z �'—O Cn cr0<0 O O CD ro Ln 0))-7CV zC11[--O W Do 0 O U Z Z. LI-I Q X U m x ly- cw :D IL F RRl,��w/QQ�l{ is 1 F R E S� V v i �• iTTE Y�I S SHEET TINE i APR 072017 � COVER SHEET s KnoCall be CV OF FEDERAL)N fore you .dig. COMM NFY DEVE I -SHEET N0. C-1 TOP OF SLOPES STEEPER THAN 20% FOR STORMWATER FACILITY SETBACKS C' C2 RFW.W UTILITY CONNECTION t'C'Arzz:b arcs to awl S 15' STREAM BUFFER TO BE REPLANTED DOWNSPOUTS wL% Y0 wa 54 s1�1 25' SETBACK FROM STEEP SLOPES 4'4s EXISTING CURB PAVED DRIVEWAY 409 SF t� Ar—, cm UNDERGROUND POWER 54" 0 TYPE II CB (OR EQUIVALENT) — W/ FLOW RESTRICTOR AND VANED GRATE J, cc -VA mock d115 . I 1 SINGLE ; � FAMa RE ►DENCE `I GARAGE FF = 276A' ; MAIN FF = 277.5' ` 267.5 .- 1BASEMEN 895 i I { I I ti t , _ 1 -- -- e - fit VS DY1 +� 1 GRAPHIC SCALE r ' (a+F*) 10 M / 1 / / I j HWA1i roams i DISPERSION PIPE 233 5 �S 0Xt 6LA-0 awl Know what's bBIOW. l Qom &1" Call before you dig. i C� • NOTES: AREAS OF DISTURBED SOILS SHALL BE AMENDED PER �► 1 % THE SOIL AMENDMENTS NOTE, DETAIL 5 ON SHEET C-3. TYPE It CB OR EQUIVALENT MAY BE USED BASED ON TANK VOLUME, AND ORRIFICE SIZE ATRESTRICTOR �� IF A STRUCTURE 15 SELECTED THAT IS NOT CONCRETE, l ►uC. GROUND ANCHORING SHOULD BE PROVIDED. 4kk S 1 FYI P r DETENTION TANK SPECIFICATIONS: i�1 ,1 j 7 VOLUME: 2550 GAL �uJlJl.[Q �J !� W ORIFICE: 0.49INCHES ii RISER NOTCH TYPE: RECTANGLE SIZE: 0.22 INCH HEIGHT 0.09 INCH WIDTH Q!� z V)�o 1--o o U_r, In Q ��o �LO }-N ZNF. -O N (n�0� w 0 0 0 U Z Z In LjJ Q X U m X IY LY X LLJ � nne DRAINAGE PLAN %mM0. C_2 4"0 (MIN) PVC PERF ROOF DOWNSPOUT,, FOOTING DRAIN. CONNECT CONNECT TO ROOF ORAIN TO STORM DRAIN OR SYSTEM PER PLAN LOCATION DAYLIGHT TO LOWER GRADE, OF DS TO BE DETERMINED IN PIPE TO BE BEDDED IN PEA FIELD. FINISHED GRADE — GRAVEL OR WASHED ROCK 6" (min) EACH WAY AND ROOF DRAM SURROUNDED BY M PER PLAN NON-WOVEN (Permeable) SYSTEM FILTER FABRIC STORM DRAIN. REFER TO STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR FOUNDATION DETAILS ' FLOOR SLAB OR FOR BASEMENT OR FOR SPACE PER DETAILS RETAINING WALL, WASHED ARCH ROCK AND OR SYNTHETIC DRAIN MEMBRANE TO •wy...�.w EXTEND FROM FOOTING DRAIN TILE TO WITHIN 12' ' OF FINISHED GRADE. PERFORATIONS TO FACE • I •~--Iy DOWN. NOTE: LOCATION CAN VARY BUT IN NO CASE SHOULD - ) FOOTING DRAIN BE ABOVE CRAWL SPACE OR OTHER , INTERIOR ELEVATION. DRAIN TILE (PIPE) ROOF/FOOTING DRAIN G SCALE : Nrs ROOF THREADED PREFERRED FINISHED ROOF DRAIN SYSTEM PER PLAN CONNECTTO STORM DRAIN. FITTED CAP USE 'PAIR' SFr J USE "Y" FOR ELBOWSWS FOR END OF J f/ CONTINUATION UNIONS. LINE go- SWEEP ALSO SUITABLE FOR END OF LINE. ROOF DRAIN CLEAN OUT (typical) SCALE : HIS 15' 3 2% (MIN) =TfF=iT G 12' X 6' (MIN) PfXIRED IN —lip — PLACE CONCRETE EDGER J PERVIOUS PAVEMENT SECTION STORAGE COARSE, 6' MIN 6' X 6' PEA GRAVEL INTERCEPTOR TRENCH IF SLOPE IS LOCATED ABOVE PERVIOUS PAVEMENT MVEWAY SECTION PERVIOUS PAVING TOP of sLaPE S' BUTT FUSED HOPE CORRUGATED PIPE SDR 325 (MIN) TIE BARS TOGETHER WITH BD'tlB Epp7ry COATED REBAR SPACED r ROOFORA6lCLFAN(Xlr GALV. FFNCE WIRE N O.C. DRIVEN MIN 24' INTO GROUND REBAR ANCHOR AT TOP ARD BOTTOM OF SLOPE EXISTING ANCHOR REBAR ANCHOR 4'O.0 GRADE DISPERSION PIPE PERFORATIONS UP LOCATED AT STREAM BUFFER EDGE SEASONAL CREEK ORDINARY HIGH WATER (OHWM) STORM OUTFALL 4 SCALE : TUTS TYPICAL SOIL AMENDMENT GUIDE flit SINGLE F Y CONSTRUCTION OPTION 1 . AMEND EXISTING SOUS IN PLACE Landscape Areas: 1. Scarify or till existing subgrade 4 - 6 Inches. (Do not scarify or till Within drip line of existing trees to be retained), 2. Place and rototill 3 Inches of composted material (10% organic content) Into 5 Inches of soil for a finished depth of 12 Inches (4.6 Inch scarification + B Inches compost/soil-12 Inches) of un-compacted soil. Rake and remove rocks larger than 2Inches In diameter and mulch areas with 2Inches of organic mulch. Lawn Areas: 1. Scarify or till existing subgrade 4-6 Inches. (Do not scarify or hill within drip line of existing trees to be retained). 2. Place and rototill 2 inches of composted material (5% organic content) Into 6 Inches of soll for I finished depth of 12 Inches of un-compacted soil. Water or roll to compact soil as% of maximum. Rake to level. and remove surface woody debris and rocks larger than 1 Inch In diameter. OPTION 2•TMPORTTOPSOIL MEETING ORGANIC CONTENT STANDARDS Landscape Areas: 1. Scarify or UII existing subgrade In two directions to 6 Inch depth. (Do not scarify within drip line of existing trees to be retained). 2. Use Imparted lop soil mix containing 10 % organic matter (typically around 40% compost). Son portion must be sand or sandy loam. Place 3 Inches of Imported top so0 mix on surface and till Into 2 Inches of sandy soil. Place additional 3 Inches of Imported topsoil mix on the surface. Rake smooth and remove surface rocks over 2 Inches In diameter. Mulch landscape beds with 2 Inches of organic mulch. Lawn Areas: 1. Scarify or till existing subgrade In two directions to 6 Inch depth. (Do not scarify within drip line of existing trees to be retained). 2. Use Imported top sob mix containing S% organic matter (typically around 25%compam). So 11 portion must be sand or sandy loam. Place 3 Inches of Imported Iopsoll mix an surface and UII Into 2 Inches of sandy soil. Water or roll to compact son to a5% maximum. Rake to level. and remove surface rocks larger than 1 Inch In diameter. AMENDED SOILS (D pp r� CONNECRON 5PECUTEo'M P6 CMm. 7ED TES AYE DtAMLsFJt AM = RAND AS PIPE ZO X TEE DIAM. 1.5 X HOLE dAV, 1rN. - SPApNa O O O DRILL RoLE3 IN AWKI RA1di OF TEE OKX U )� DIWDED BY 6 NO tIRES OPPOSaw PIPE E DUAKTM (woes) (Eli.: 6 WCH TEE rMLIEIrlGF NDLES 1a Dda+ TIE DISPERSION PIPE DETAIL s SCALE : NIS ".I Know Wham below. Call before you dig. z U m w m o m za C w o' o s Y & Y d '1 o it _ m i o a-, Z V)LdOI— W 0 I �Zo a- (n = r-- (n O ¢ � O O OT N Z N O (ni.— ::)r bi 0 p U Z Z(nLUd < X U m X IX of X W :D I sm TfIIE DRAINAGE DETAILS SHEET n0. C-3 CLEARING LIMITS SOIL STOC C-6 CONSTRUCTION ENTI LEGEND o-6 SILT FENCE a TOPSOIL STOCKPILE Z�� C6 CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE $a CLEARING LIMITS CD GRAPHIC SCALE ID a 1 lnch = 10 fL i ° 1 s Know whars below. Call before you dig. NOTE: INLET PROTECTION SHOULD BE INSTALLED AT ALL EXISTING CATCH BASINS WITHIN 100 FEET DOWNGRADE OF THE SITE. Of z Iwo LLI C� I�zo a- r` � ��o 0 r7 u7 N cn H wD0 .. oOUz Z Cn W QXC) m X 0f C` X W ::) 0_ F i TESC PLAN sxo:r Na C-4 SEEDING NOTES 1, SEEDING MIXTURE SHALL BE GRASS SEED AND SHALL BE APPLIED AT A RATE OF ILB PER 10005QFT. 2. SEED BEDS PLANTED BETWEEN MAY 1 AND OCTOBER 31 WILL REQUIRE IRRIGATION AND OTHER MAINTENANCE AS NECESSARY TO FOSTER AND PROTECT ROOT STRUCTURE. 3. FOR SEED BEDS PLANTED BETWEEN OCTOBER 31 AND APRIL 30, ARMORING OF SEED BEDS WILL BE NECESSARY (E.G., GEOTEXTILES, JUTE MAT, CLEAR PLASTIC COVERING). 4. BEFORE SEEDING, INSTALL NEEDED SURFACE RUNOFF CONTROL MEASURES SUCH AS GRADIENT TERRACES, INTERCEPTOR DIKES, SWALES, LEVEL SPREADERS, AND SEDIMENT BASINS, 5. THE SEED BEDS SHALL BE FIRM WITH A FAIRLY FINE SURFACE, FOLLOWING SURFACE ROUGHENING. PERFORM ALL OPERATIONS ACROSS OR AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE SLOPE. 6. FERTILIZERS ARE TO BE USED ACCORDING TO SUPPLIERS RECOMMENDATIONS. AMOUNTS USED SHOULD BE MINIMIZED, ESPECIALLY ADJACENT TO WATER BODIES AND WETLANDS. MULCHING NOTES 1. MULCH MATERIALS USED SHALL BE STRAW AND SHALL BE APPLIED AT A RATE OF 100LBS PER 1000SQFT. 2. MULCHING SHALL BE APPLIED IN ALL AREAS WITH EXPOSED SLOPES GREATER THAN 2:1. 3. MULCHING SHALL BE USED IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEEDING OR IN AREAS WHICH CANNOT BE SEEDED BECAUSE OF THE SEASON. 4. ALL AREAS NEEDING MULCH SHALL BE COVERED BY NOVEMBER 1. BMP C121 The purpose of mulching soils is to provide immediate Ismporary protection from erosion. IAulch aim enhances plant esloblishmant by consl:rving moisture, halding terlllixer, seed, and topsuR in place, and modwaling soil Iemperulure9. There is an enermous variety of mulches that can be usad. Only the moot Common types are discussed In this section. Conditions of Use As a temporary corer measure, mulch should be Used: .On disturbed areas that require cover measurds far Ie Fs than 30 days •As a cover for seed during the wellBeason and during the hot Timmer months •During the wet cancan an slopes steeper than 3HAV with more Ihun 10 (set Of vertical relief 'Mulch may be applied at any time of the year and must be refreshed periodically. Design and Installation Specifications For mulch moterials, application rates. and miscif ca Dons, see table betow. Note: Thickness may be increased for disturbed areas in or near sensitiva cocax Or other oreos holy susceptible Ia erosion. Mulch Used within the ordinary high-water mark of surface .titers should be selected 10 minimize poten Hai ffotollon of organic matter. Composted organic materials have higher specific gravities (densities) than straw, wood, or chipped material. Maintenance Standards .Thethickness of the cover must be maintained -Any, areasthat experience erosion shall be re -mulched and/or protected with a net or blanket. If the erosion problem is drainage related, then the problem shall be fixed and the eroded area re -mulched. MULCH MATERIAL QUALITY STANDARD RATES / RE14ARKS APPLICATION craw Air-dried; fee Irchm A ve Prot pnwnen wml undesirable seed and Per I,000 If or adequate thickness. Hand -application generally 2-3 tons per acre. requlres gmaterthlcknessthan blown stmw.The coarse material thickness of straw may be reduced by half when used In conJunwon wlih seeding. In windy areas straw must be held In place by crimping, using a tacklfier, or covering with writing. Blown straw always has to be held In place with a mckleer as en light winds will blow It away. Straw, however, has several de0He that should he considered when selecting mulch materials. It often Intmduces and/or encourages the Propagation of weed species and It has no significant 1mg-term benefits. Straw should be used only If mulches with long -temp ben llts are unavailable locally. It should also not be used within the ordinary high-waterelevathm of surface waters (due to flotation) y ramu B v row n d Bung ppmx, x-x Os a e apple with ydmmuimer. a notbe factors per 1,000 star used without seed and tatldner unless the 1.500 - 2,aoB Ibs appllcaaan rate Is at leas[ doubled. Fibers longer per acre. than about 0.75 to 1-Inch dog hydmmulrh equipment. Fibers should be kept to less than 0.75 Inch. ampax Ho vlrJbta warxr,x ouu mic can. p r rcrrvn cmt n - oy ,Mull, and during handling. Must be approximately. 100 Increasing thickness to 3 Inches. Exrdlent multi Compost purchased from supplier tons for protecting final grades until landscaping with Sond Waste Handling per acre because It can be directly seeded or Idled Into sell Permit (und- exempt). (approximately as an amendment Composted mulch has a 900 lbs per yard) coarser size gradation than compost It is more stable and practical to use In wet areas and during rainy weather conditions. Chippedvan94.9 mum P ws is a cos ec-O nay to dtu. 51. ,,voral labor, endear% thickness. from clearing and grubbing, and It ellminatm the Vegetation from Pores to 6Inches In problems associated with burning. Generally, It length for Mature, should not be used on slopes above approx. 10 vil4atlen, one Ir4grlatkrg percent because of Its tendency to be transported properties, by runoff. It Is not recommended within 200 feet of surface waters. If seeding Is expetxed shortly after much, the deatrnposltion of the chipped veBemtion may He up nutrients important to gmas establishment. b v s e w cr mink; appmx. is male s o op or mq9 Based during handling. Must be Ida tons per acre as fuel.• ]t Is usable a material lor5tablllzed Muld, purchased from a su ppller IzPprox. 600 lb,. Cans"ttlon Entrances (BMP C105) and as a with a Solid Waste por cubic yard). mulch. Th. use of mulct uhlmately Improves the Handling Permit or one organic matter In the sal. Special cauUm Is empt from solid waste advised regarding the sourer and composition of regulations. woad -based mulches. Its reparation typically does not provide any weed seed central, se evidence of resldual vegetation In Its composition or known Inclusion of weed planer seeds should be 'no' and amwnted (gr mi.M001. BCALE: NTS 4 STORMWATER NOTES 1. ALL WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNTY STANDARDS AND THE MOST CURRENT COPY OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE, AND MUNICIPAL CON57RUCTION (WSDOT / APWA) AND AS AMENDED BY THE COUNTY OR STATE. 2. TEMPORARY EROSION/WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES SHALL BE REQUIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PIERCE COUNTY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL AND THE DEP ". OF ECOLOGY'S CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER GENERAL PERMIT. SHOULD THE TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES AS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING NOT PROVE ADEQUATE TO CONTROL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION, THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ADDITIONAL FACILITIES AS NECESSARY TO PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTIES, SENSITIVE AREAS, NATURAL WATER COURSES, AND/OR STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS. 3. CALL THE UNDERGROUND LOCATE LINE 1-000-424-5555 A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATIONS. 4. THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO APPROVED PLANS ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY. ANY SIGNIFICANT DEVIATION FROM THE APPROVED PLANS WILL REQUIRE WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE COUNTY. 5. A COPY OF THE APPROVED STORMWATER PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOB SITE WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION 15 IN PROGRESS. 6. ALL EROSION CONTROL AND STORMWATER FACILITIES SHALL BE REGULARLY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED BY THE DESIGNATED CERTIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL LEAD (CESCL) DURING CONSTRUCTION. 7. 1T SHALL BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN STREET USE AND OTHER RELATED OR REQUIRED PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THE MUNICIPALITY'S RIGHT OF WAY. IT SHALL ALSO BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED PERMITS PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ABIDE BY ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL AND SAFETY WHEN WORKING IN THE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY. B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE PROJECT ENGINEER IN THE EVENT OR DISCOVERY OF POOR SOILS, STANDING GROUNDWATER, OR SEVERE DISCREPANCIES FROM SOIL LOG DESCRIPTIONS AS NOTED ON THE PLANS. 9. FOR PUBLIC SYSTEMS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL FOR INSPECTION 48 HOURS PRIORTO COVERING ANY DRAINAGE STRUCTURE. 10. ALL DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, SUCH AS CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES, NOT LOCATED WITHIN A TRAVELED ROADWAY OR SIDEWALK, SHALL HAVE SOLID LOCKING LIDS. ALL DRAINAGE STRUCTURES ASSOCIATED WITH A PERMANENT RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITY SHALL HAVE SOLID LOCKING LIDS. PLASTIC COVERING PURPOSE PLASTIC COVERING PROVIDES IMMEDIATE, SHORT-TERM EROSION PROTECTION TO SLOPES AND DISTURBED AREAS. CONDITIONS OF USE PLASTIC COVERING MAY BE USED ON DISTURBED AREAS THAT REQUIRE COVER MEASURES FOR LESS THAN 30 DAYS, EXCEPT AS STATED BELOW. PLASTIC IS PARTICULARLY USEFUL FOR PROTECTING CUT AND FILL SLOPES AND STOCKPILES. NOTE: THE RELATIVELY RAPID BREAKDOWN OF MOST POLYETHYLENE SHEETING MAKES IT UNSUITABLE FOR LONG-TERM (GREATER THAN 6 MONTHS) APPLICATIONS. CLEAR PLASTIC SHEETING CAN BE USED OVER NEWLY -SEEDED AREAS TO CREATE A GREENHOUSE EFFECT AND ENCOURAGE GRASS GROWTH IF THE HYDROSEED WAS INSTALLED TOO LATE IN THE SEASON TO ESTABLISH 7S PERCENT GRASS COVER, OR IF THE WET SEASON STARTED EARLIER THAN NORMAL CLEAR PLASTIC SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR THIS PURPOSE DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS BECAUSE THE RESULTING HIGH TEMPERATURES CAN KILL THE GRASS. DUE TO RAPID RUNOFF CAUSED BY PLASTIC SHEETING, THIS METHOD SHALL NOT BE USED UPSLOPE OF AREAS THAT MIGHT BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED BY CONCENTRATED RUNOFF. SUCH AREAS INCLUDE STEEP AND/OR UNSTABLE SLOPES. WHILE PLASTIC IS INEXPENSIVE TO PURCHASE, THE ADDED COST OF INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE, REMOVAL, AND DISPOSAL MAKE THIS AN EXPENSIVE MATERIAL, UP TO $1.50 TO $2 PER SQUARE YARD. WHENEVER PLASTIC IS USED TO PROTECT SLOPES, WATER COLLECTION MEASURES MUST BE INSTALLED AT THE BASE OF THE SLOPE. THESE MEASURES INCLUDE PLASTIC -COVERED BERMS, CHANNELS, AND PIPES USED TO COVEY CLEAN RAINWATER AWAY FROM BARE SOIL AND DISTURBED AREAS. AT NO TIME 1S CLEAN RUNOFF FROM A PLASTIC COVERED SLOPE TO BE MIXED WITH DIRTY RUNOFF FROM A PROJECT. SILT FENCE NOTES 1. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE PURCHASED IN A CONTINUOUS ROLL AND CUT TO THE LENGTH OF THE BARRIER TO AVOID USE OF JOINTS. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, FILTER CLOTH SHALL BE SPLICED TOGETHER ONLY AT A SUPPORT POST, WITH A MINIMUM 6" OVERLAP, AND SECURELY FASTENED ON BOTH ENDS TO POST. 2. POSTS SHALL BE A MAXIMUM OF W APART AND DRIVEN SECURELY INTO THE GROUND (MINIMUM OF 18"). 3. A TRENCH SHALL BE EXCAVATED APPROXIMATELY B" WIDE AND 12" DEEP ALONG THE LINE OF POSTS AND UPSLOPE FROM THE BARRIER. THI5 TRENCH SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITH WASHED GRAVEL. 4. WHEN STANDARD STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC IS USED, A WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE SHALL BE FASTENED SECURELY TO THE UPSLOPE SIDE OF THE POSTS USING HEAVY DUTY WIRE STAPLES AT LEAST 1" LONG, TIE WIRES OR HOG RINGS. THE WIRE SHALL EXTEND INTO THE TRENCH A MINIMUM OF 4" AND SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 24- ABOVE THE ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE. 5. THE STANDARD STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE STAPLED OR WIRED TO THE FENCE, AND 20" OF THE FABRIC SHALL BE EXTENDED INTO THE TRENCH. THE FABRIC SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 24" ABOVE THE ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE. FILTER FABRIC SHALL NOT BE STAPLED TO EXISTING TREES. 6. WHEN EXTRA STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC AND CLOSER POST SPACING IS USED, THE WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE MAY BE ELIMINATED. IN SUCH A CASE, THE FILTER FABRIC IS STAPLED OR WIRED DIRECTLY TO THE POST WITH ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF ABOVE NOTES APPLYING. 7. FILTER FABRIC FENCES SHALL NOT BE REMOVED BEFORE THE UPSLOPE AREA HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. B. FILTER FABRIC FENCES SHALL BE INSPECTED IMMEDIATELY AFTER EACH RAINFALL AND AT LEAST DAILY DURING PROLONGED RAINFALL. ANY REQUIRED REPAIRS SHALL BE MADE IMMEDIATELY. 9, SILT FENCES WILL BE INSTALLED PARALLEL TO ANY SLOPE CONTOURS. 10. CONTRIBUTING LENGTH TO FENCE WILL NOT BE GREATER THAN 100'. 11. DO NOT INSTALL BELOW AN OUTLET PIPE OR WEIR. 12. INSTALL DOWNSLOPE OF EXPOSED AREAS. 13. DO NOT DRIVE OVER OR FILL OVER SILT FENCES. FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL IN CONTINUOUS ROLLS USE STAPLES OR WIRE RINGS TO ATTACH FABRIC TO WIRE WIRE MESH SUPPORT 6" FENCE FOR FILTER MIN, FABRIC II I I 1 NONWOVEN 2' II FILTER FABRIC_ MIN, it I ,� F l.a;y, ,.;:r ,/-�;%. r•:r MIN. 8"X12" f tl FRENCH •- I I BACKFILL TRENCH 1VITH 6' MAX. _ 3/4"-3• WASHED GRAVEL MIN. 1 AND ON BOTH SIDES OF j U FILTER FENCE FABRIC L z'X2"X5' WORD POSTS, STANDARD, OR BETTER LINE FILTER MATERIAL IN 8"X12" TRENCH AND LEAVE MIN. 2" EXPOSED SILT FENCE r` SCALE: NTS STOCKPILING SOIL NOTES 1. STOCKPILES SHALL BE STABILIZED (WITH PLASTIC COVERING OR OTHER APPROVED DEVICE) DAILY BETWEEN NOVEMBER 1 AND MARCH 31. 2 IN ANY SEASON SEDIMENT LEACHING FROM PILES MUST BE PREVENTED TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES: 1, APPROVAL OF THIS TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (TESC) PLAN DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AND APPROVAL OF PERMANENT ROAD OR DRAINAGE DESIGN (E.G. SIZE AND LOCATION OF ROADS, PIPES, RESTRICTORS, CHANNELS RETENTION FACILITIES, UTILITIES, ETC-) 2. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS AND THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, REPLACEMENT, AfID UPGRADING OF THESE ESC FACILITIES 15 THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANTICONTRACTOR UNTIL ALL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED AND APPROVED AND VEGETATION/LANDSCAPING IS ESTABLISHED. 3. THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CLEARING LIMITS SHOWN ON THE THIS PLAN SHALL BE CLEARLY FLAGGED IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, NO DISTURBANCE BEYO NO THE OLEARI NG LIMITS SHALL BE PERMITTED, THE FUIGGI NG SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE APPLI CANT/CONTRACTOR FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. 4. THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL CLEARING AND GRADING ACTIVITIES, AND IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT AND SEDIMENT LADEN WATER DO NOT ENTER THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM, ROADWAYS, OR VIOLATE APPLICABLE WATER STANDARDS. 5. THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, THESE ESC FACILITIES SHALL BE UPGRADED AS NEEDED FOR UNEXPECTED STORM EVENTS AND TO ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT AND SEDIMENT LADEN WATER DO NOT LEAVE THE SITE. 6. THE TESC FACILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY BY THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR AND MAINTAINED AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THEIR CONTINUED FUNCTIONING. 7. ANY AREAS OF EXPOSED SOILS, INCLUDING ROADWAY EMBANKMENTS, THAT WILL NOT BE DISTURBED FOR TWO DAYS DURING THE WET SEASON OR SEVEN DAY DURING THE DRY SEASON SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY STABILIZED WITH THE APPROVED TESC METHODS (E.G. SEEDING, MULCHING, PLASTIC COVERING, ETC.) 8. THE ESC FACILITIES ON INACTIVE SITES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED A MINIMUM OF ONCE A MONTH OR WITHIN 48 HOURS FOLLOWING A STORM EVENT. 9. AT NO TIME SHALL MORE THAN ONE (1) FOOT OF SEDIMENT BE ALLOWED TO ACCUMULATE WITHIN A TRAPPED CJATCFI BASIN. ALL CATCH BASINS AND CONVEYANCE LINES SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO PAVING. THE CLEANING OPERATION SHALL NOT FLUSH SEDIMENT -LADEN WATER INTO THE DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM. 10. STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AND ROADS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTAINED FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. ADDITIONAL MEASURES, SUCH AS WASH PADS, MAY BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE NOTES 1. MATERIAL SHALL BE 4" TO B" QUARRY SPALLS (4" TO 6" FOR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS) AND MAY BE TOP DRESSED WITH 1" TO 3' ROCK. 2. THE ROCK PAD SHALL BE AT LEAST 12" THICK(6" MIN, FOR RESIDENTIAL SFR LOTS) AND 50 LONG (20 FEET FOR SITES WITH LESS THAN 1 ACRE OF DISTURBED SOIQ. WIDTH SHALL OETHE FULL LENGTH OF THE VEHICLE INGRESS AHO EGRESS AREA. SMALLER PADS MAY BE APPROVED FOR SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL, AND SMALL COMMERCIAL SITES. 3. ADDITIONAL ROCK SHALL BE ADDED PERIODICALLY TO MAINTAIN PROPER FUNCTION OF THE PAD. 4. IF THE PAD DOES NOT ADEQUATELY REMOVE THE MUD FROM THE VEHICLE WHEELS, THE WHEELS THE VEHICLE SHALL BE HOSED OFF BEFORE THE VEHICLE ENTERS A PAVED STREET. THE WASHING SHALL BE DONE ON AN AREA COVERED WITH CRUSHED ROCK AND WASH WATER SHALL DRAIN TO A SEDIMENT RETENTION FACILITY OR THROUGH A SILT FENCE E%ISn tG ROAD ,T! OTHER USES FOR PLASTIC INCLUDE: INSTALL DRIVEWAY CULVERT • TEMPORARY DITCH LINER 3. TOPSOIL SHALL NOT BE PLACED WHILE IN A FROZEN OR MUDDY CONDITION, WHEN IF THERE IS A ROADSIDE • POND LINER IN TEMPORARY SEDIMENT POND THE SUBGRADE IS EXCESSIVELY WET, OR WHEN CONDITIONS EXIST THAT MAY BE DITCH PRESENT • LINER FOR BERMED TEMPORARY FUEL STORAGE AREA IF PLASTIC IS NOT REACTIVE TO OTHERWISE DETRIMENTAL TO PROPER GRADING OR PROPOSED SODDING OR THE TYPE OF FUEL BEING STORED SEEDING. • EMERGENCY SLOPE PROTECTION DURING HEAVY RAINS TEMPORARY DRAINPIPE (-ELEPHANT TRUNK-) USED TO DIRECT WATER. 4. PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED GRADES ON THE AREAS TO BE TOP SOILED SHALL BE DESIGN AND INSTALLATION SPECIFICATIONS MAINTAINED ACCORDING TO THE APPROVED PLAN. PLASTIC SLOPE COVER MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: • RUN PLASTIC UP AND DOWN SLOPE, NOT ACROSS SLOPE • PLASTIC MAY BE INSTALLED PERPENDICULAR TO A SLOPE IF THE SLOPE LENGTH 15 RECYCLED TIRES/ SANDBAG LESS THAN 10 FEET WEIGHTS • MINIMUM OF B-INCH OVERLAP AT SEAMS • ON LONG OR WIDE SLOPES, OR SLOPES SUBJECT TO WIND, ALL SEAMS SHOULD BE ROPE/ SECURE TAPED • PLACE PLASTIC INTO A SMALL (12-INCH WIDE BY 6-INCH DEEP) SLOT TRENCH AT THE ; ,n o', TIMES AS A GRID TOP OFTHE SLOPE AND BACKFILL WITH SOILTO KEEP WATER FROM FLOWING UNDERNEATH PLACE SAND FILLED BURLAP OR GEOTEXTILE BAGS EVERY 3 TO 6 FEET ALONG SEAMS •' 6" MIN. DEPTH 4"-6" QUARRY SPALLS FOR SFR- LOTS GEOTEXTILE SEPARATION FABRIC CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE • AND POUND A WOODEN STAKE THROUGH EACH TO HOLD THEM IN PLACE 3 SCALE : HIS INSPECT PLASTIC FOR RIPS, TEARS, AND OPEN SEAMS REGULARLY AND REPAIR , IMMEDIATELY. THIS PREVENTS HIGH VELOCITY RUNOFF FROM CONTACTING BARE SOIL WHICH CAUSES EXTREME EROSION • SANDBAGS MAY BE LOWERED INTO PLACE TIED TO ROPES. HOWEVER, ALL SANDBAGS v MUST BE STAKED IN PLACE. • PLASTIC SHEETING SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 0.06 MILLIMETERS. TRENCH TO CONVEY WATER TO • IF EROSION AT THE TOE OF A SLOPE IS LIKELY, A GRAVEL BERM, RIPRAP, OR OTHER APPROVED DISPOSAL POINT SUITABLE PROTECTION SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE TOE OF THE SLOPE IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE VELOCITY OF RUNOFF. Know what's below. MAINTENANCE STANDARDS COVERING DETAIL • TORN SHEETS MUST BE REPLACED AND OPEN SEAMS REPAIRED • IF THE PLASTIC BEGINS TO DETERIORATE DUE TO ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION, IT MUST _PLASTIC NOTE: USE OLD TIRES, SAND BAGS OR SCALE: NIS 2 Call before you dig. BE COMPLETELY REMOVED AND REPLACED EQUIVALENT TO ANCHOR PLASTIC COVERING. WHEN THE PLASTIC 15 NO LONGER NEEDED, IT SHALL BE COMPLETELY REMOVED. u R t�5 m � Q Wu 29 Z I 0 W IkIf Z LL (J J O U ~ 0Q Z = O p Q O O N Z N O 0 Z N (n I"- ::) r LLI D O p0Uz QLLJ X U m X Of a. X LLJ D >2 5HEIFT ilk TESC DETAILS SHEET No. C-5 Maintenance and Source Control Manua! (App/Permit #: ) Single Family Residence xxx S 293rd Federal Way, Washington 98023 PN: 7202500070 January 11, 2017 By GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Hwy. E., Suite 16' Fife, Washington 98424-2649 Ph 253-896-1011 Fax 253-896-2633 (map of maintenance responsibility area) UrbanDesign Group.293rd.0a ndM January 11, 2017 Page 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION We are preparing this Maintenance and Source Control Manual in accordance with Appendix C of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (2009 KCSDM). The site is located at xxx 2931d Street in the Federal Way area of King County, Washington. The site consists of a single tax parcel (PN: 7202500070) that is currently undeveloped and vegetated with native vegetation across the site. Our understanding of the project is based on our review of King County iMap topographic information, the site plan provided by Urban Design Group, and our previous Geologic Hazard Assessment dated May 4, 2016. We understand that you propose to construct a two story single family residence in the upper, southern portion of the site. We anticipate that the proposed residence will have a daylight basement configuration and will be wood framed. The proposed residence will have a roof area of 2,695 square feet (sf), and the proposed driveway will encompass about 409 sf. The proposed development will result in 3,104 sf of hard surfaces being added to the site, 2,695 of which will be impervious. The site encompasses approximately 9,622 sf, 32.3 percent of which will be developed. The proposed drainage system was designed in accordance with Appendix C of the 2009 KCSDM. The proposed driveway should be constructed of pervious surfacing. As the soils encountered at the site were observed to be consistent with glacial till, we do not anticipate that full infiltration of the stormwater generated on the proposed driveway will be feasible. We recommend that an overflow perforated pipe be provided for the driveway. The overflow should be discharged via a perforated pipe connection to the existing stormwater system. The stormwater runoff generated on the proposed residence will be mitigated via a restricted building footprint. Per C.2.9.2 Restricted Footprint, for sites smaller than 22,000 sf, total impervious areas less than 4,000 sf qualify for a restricted footprint credit equal to the difference in square footage. Per this section, of the 2,695 sf of proposed impervious surface, 1,305 sf has been mitigated and 1,390 sf is still required to be mitigated. Per the 2009 KCSDM, mitigated surfaces may be discharged via a perforated pipe connection to the existing stormwater system. No other stormwater management method outlined in Appendix C is appropriate for the proposed single family residence. The remaining 1,390 sf of roof area will be managed via downspout connections through roof drain cleanouts to a dispersion pipe on the edge of the stream buffer. A 6-inch diameter corrugated PVC pipe will extend from the roof drain clean outs, daylight behind the home and extend down the surface of the slope to the edge of the stream buffer. The pipe will be anchored to the slope at the top and bottom of the pipe run. The proposed downspouts will be located along the eastern portion of the proposed residence. The total surface area being conveyed to the dispersion pipe will be approximately 1,390 sf or 0.03 acres. Based on the rational method to determine peak discharge and using the 100-year storm (Q-100) for the Tacoma vicinity, the peak flow from the total proposed impervious area of the unmitigated roof would be 0.9x3.65x0.03 = 0.1 cfs rounding up. A 6- inch line (Manning n=.025), flowing full with a minimum slope of 30 percent (worst case scenario) has a conveyance capacity of 1.59 cfs, which is sufficient to handle the stormwater from the roof area. The drainage system, including pipe sizes is shown on sheet C-2 of the accompanying abbreviated plans. Erosion control measures will be in place throughout the project. On a temporary basis, they will consist of silt fence installed along downhill sections of the project area. The site entrance will have a temporary construction entrance installed per the 2009 KCSDM. Permanent erosion control will consist of residential landscaping. U rbanDesign Group.293rd.Oa nd M January 11, 2017 Page 3 MAINTENANCE IMPORTANCE AND INTENT The importance of maintenance for the proper functioning of stormwater control facilities cannot be over -emphasized. A substantial portion of failures (clogging of filters, resuspension of sediments, loss of storage capacity, etc.) are due to inadequate maintenance. Stormwater BMP maintenance is essential to ensure that BMPs function as intended throughout their full life cycle. Additionally, proper maintenance of stormwater facilities on this site is paramount to maintaining the overall stability of the site's slopes. The fundamental goals of maintenance activities are to insure the entire flow conveyance system, including control and treatment, designed for this site continue to fully function. For this site these include: ■ Maintain ability of storm facility to attenuate flow rates • Maintain ability to safely convey design stormwater flows ■ Maintain ability to treat stormwater runoff quality • Preserve soil and plant health, as well as stormwater flow contact with plant and soil systems • Clearly identify systems so they can be protected • Keep maintenance costs low • Prevent large-scale or expensive stormwater system failures • Prevent water quality violations or damage to downstream properties The intent of this section and manual is to pass on to the responsible party(s) all the information critical to understand the design of the system, risks and considerations for proper use, suggestions for maintenance frequencies, and cost so that realistic budgets can be established. RESPONSIBLE PARTIES Once installed, the maintenance of the proposed stormwater structures and BMPs will be the sole responsibility of the property owner. During construction, the contractor shall exercise due care in preserving the system. FACILITIES REQUIRING MAINTENANCE The following list describes the stormwater structures and BMPs as well as the entity responsible for the maintenance responsibility for each structure and BMP: • Onsite amended soils and landscaping — property owner • Onsite stormwater tightlines— property owner • Onsite foundation drains — property owner • Onsite Pervious Pavement — property owner • Dispersion pipe at outfall— property owner MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS The parties responsible for maintenance must review and apply the maintenance requirements contained herein. These maintenance instructions outline conditions for determining if maintenance actions are required, as identified through inspection. However, they are not intended to be measures of the facility's required condition at all times between inspections. Exceedance of these conditions at any time between inspections or maintenance activity does not automatically constitute a violation of these standards. UrbanDesign Group.293rd.Oa ndM January 11, 2017 Page 4 However, based upon inspection observations, the inspection and maintenance presented in the checklists shall be adjusted to minimize the length of time that a facility is in a condition that requires a maintenance action. For facilities not owned and maintained by the county, a log of maintenance activity that indicates what actions were taken must be kept on site and be available for inspection by the county. See Appendix A for a detailed maintenance checklist for all stormwater structures and BMPs requiring maintenance. VEGETATION MAINTENANCE The maintenance of onsite vegetation will be the sole responsibility of the property owner. The effectiveness of many stormwater facilities depends on the proper maintenance of the vegetation that effects the facility. Residential landscaping maintenance will include but not be limited to: • Pruning and cleanup of landscaping trees to prevent organic debris from entering the permanent stormwater system • Pest and disease management o Irrigation of vegetation • Prevention of fertilizer and pesticides from entering the stormwater system POLLUTION SOURCE CONTROL Pollution source control will be the responsibility of the property owner. All pollution sources such as automobile washing, automobile maintenance, yard waste, and compost, application of pesticides / fertilizer, household hazardous material, pet waste, and onsite sewage systems should utilize the BMPs listed in Appendix C of the 2009 KCSDM in order to reduce contamination of stormwater runoff at its source. ANNUAL COST OF MAINTENANCE The annual cost of maintenance will be the responsibility of the property owner. It is anticipated that the annual cost of maintenance will be low due to the nature of the site being a single family residence. PROJECT ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION I hereby state that this drainage and erosion/sediment control plan for the proposed single family residence has been prepared 'by me or under my supervision and meets the standard of care and expertise which is usual and customary in this community for professional engineers. I understand that the City of Federal Way does not and will not assume liability for the sufficiency, suitability, or performance of drainage facilities prepared by me. U rbanDesignGroup.293rd.Oand M January 11, 2017 Page 5 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have need of additional information or services please call. Yours Very Truly, GeoResources, LLC Veronica R. Raub, EIT �slONAL �� /-14. 2di-1 Brad P. Biggerstaff, LEG Frank Fiedler IV, PE Principal Senior Engineer VRR:FF DoclD: UrbanDesignGroup.293rd.OandM Attachments: Appendix A - Maintenance Checklist Appendix B - Maintenance Covenant UrbanDesignGroup.293rd.OandM January 11, 2017 Page 6 APPENDIX A Maintenance Checklist 1119.2019 TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS FOR NON VEGETATED PERMEABLE PAVEMENT Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP (best management practice) called "permeable pavement.' which was installed to minimize the stormwater quantity and quality impacts of C-66 2009 5tr1ace Water Desim 1%1 ual — Appemft C C 2.6 PEs T_4JBLE PANTNE v'T some or all of the paved surfaces on your property. Permeable pavements reduce the amount of rainfall that becomes runoff by allowing water to seep through the pavement into a free -draining gravel or sand bed. where it can be infiltrated into the ground. The type(s) of permeable pavement used on your property is: ❑ porous concrete, O porous asphaltic concrete, 0 permeable pavers, ❑ modular grid pavement The area covered by permeable pavement as depicted by the flow control BMP site plan and design details must be maintained as permeable pavement and may not be changed without written approval either from the King County Water and Land Resources Division or through a future development permit from King County. Permeable pavements must be inspected after one major storm each year to make sure it is worsting properly. Prolonged ponding or standing water on the pavement surface is a sign that the system is defective and may need to be replaced. If this occurs, contact the pavement installer or the King County Water and Land Resources Division for further instructions. A typical permeable pavement system has a life expectancy of approximately 25-years. To help extend the useful life of the system, the surface of the permeable pavement should be kept clean and free of leaves, debris. and sediment through regular sweeping or vacuum sweeping. The owner is responsible for the repair of all ruts, deformation, ancVor broken paving units. D TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS FOR VEGETATED PERMEABLE PAVEMENT Your property contains a stormwater management flour control BI IP (best management practice) called "grassed modular grid pavement," which was installed to minimize the stormwater quantity and quality impacts of some or all of the paved surfaces on your property. Grassed modular grid pavement has the runoff characteristics of a lawn while providing the weight -bearing capacity of concrete pavement. The grassed surface not only minimizes runoff quantity. it helps to finer pollutants generating by vehicular use of the surface. The composition and area of grassed modular grid pavement as depicted by the flow control BRtP site plan and design details must be maintained and may not be changed without written approval either from the King County Water and Land Resources Division or through a future development permit from King County. Grassed modular grid pavement must be inspected after one major storm each year to make sure it is working properly. Prolonged ponding or standing water on the pavement surface is a sign that the system defective and may need to be replaced. If this occurs, contact the pavement installer or the King County Water and Land Resources Division for further instructions. The grassed surface of the pavement must be regularly mowed and maintained in a good condition. Bare spots must be replanted in the spring or fall. C 2 9 REDUCED IAIPER110US SURFACE CREDIT C.2.9.7 ?1IAINTEN.ANCE INSTRUCTIONS If a reduced imperious surface flow control BMP is proposed for a project, one or more of the following sets of maintenance and operation instructions, whichever are applicable, must be recorded in or as an attachment to the required declaration of covenant and grant of easement per Requiremont 3 of Section C,1.3,3 (p. C-13). The intent of these instructions is to explain to future property owners, the purpose of the BNIP and how it must be maintained and operated. These instructions are intended to be a minimunN DDES may require additional instructions based on site -specific conditions. Also, as the County gains more experience width the maintenance and operation of these BIMPs, fitture updates to the instruction will be posted on the King County'& Surface Manor Dw ign Almaral website, TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS FOR RESTRICTED FOOTPRINT Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP (best management practice) known as "restricted footprint.' the practice of restricting the amount of impervious surface that may be added to a property so as to minimize the stormwater runoff impacts caused by impervious surface. The total impervious surface on your property may not exceed square feet without written approval either from the King County Water and Land Resources Division or through a future development permit from King County. ❑ TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS FOR WHEEL STRIP DRIVEWAYS Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP (best management practice) called a "wheel strip driveway," which was installed to minimize or mitigate for the stormwater runoff Impacts of some or all of the impervious surfaces on your property, The placement and composition of the wheel strip driveway as depicted by the flow control BMP site plan and design details must be maintained and may not be changed without wrilton approval either from the King County Water and land Resources Division or through a future development permit from King County. ❑ TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS FOR MINIMUM DISTURBANCE FOUNDATIONS Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP (bast management practice) known as a'minimum disturbanco foundation.' which was installed to minimize or mitigate for the stormwater runoff impacts of some or all of the Impervious surfaces on your property, This moans that all or a portion of the finished living space in your house is elevated over a pervious surface through the use of piers or Pilo$, The pervious surface is intended to provide additional capacity to absorb and store the stormwater runoff from your roof and surrounding areas. The design of this system as depicted by the flow control BhIP site plan and design details must be maintained and may not be changed without written approval eithor from the King County %%later and Land Resources Division or through a future development permit from King County In addition, the pervious surface beneath the elevated portion of your house must not be used in manner that compacts the soil, ❑ TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS FOR OPEN GRID DECKING OVER PERVIOUS SURFACE Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BMP (bast management practice) called "open grid decking over pervious surface," which was installed to minimize or mitigate for the stormwater runoff impacts of some or all of the impervious surfaces on your property. The docking has evenly spaced openings that allow rain water to roach the uncomptiol" soil below, where it has an opportunity to soak Into the ground. The area and openings of the docking as depicted by the row control BMP &ilo plan and design dolaiis must be maintained and may not be changed without wrtten approval oither from the King County Water and Land Resources Division or through a future development permit from King County In addition, the pervious surface beneath the decking must not be used In manner that compacts the soil. 1029 Surkce Wamr Dmiln hlacual — Appendix C 1 9?wp C•17 C.2.11 PERFORATED PIPE CONNECTION O TEXT OF INSTRUCTIONS Your property contains a stormwater management flow control BhIP (best management practice) called a "perforated pipe connection," which was installed to reduce the stormwater runoff Impacts of some or all of the impervious surface on your property. A perforated pipe connection is a length of drainage conveyance pipe with hoes In the bottom, designed to "leak' runoff, conveyed by the pipe, Into a gravel filled trench where It can be soaked Into the surrounding soil. The connection is intended to provide opportunity for infiltration of any runoff that is being conveyed from an impervious surface (usually a roof) to a local drainage system such as a ditch or roadway pipe system. The size and composition of the perforated pipe connection as depicted by the flow control BMP site plan and design details must be maintained and may not be changed without wrinen approval either from the King County Water and Land Resources Division or through a future development permit from King County. The soil overtop of the perforated portion of the system must not be compacted or covered with impervious materials. FIGURE C.2.11.A PERFORATED PIPE CONNECTION FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE random fill r IS' min q•� 46 tyty ne n a ❑4a 4 Cl o- 4 r• a • y a•q•� ■ • a a �- 24' min —«I 11.044 ► s► PLAN VIEW OF ROOF NTS filter fsbric ---- 6" perf pipe t 1I�' - Jt+- washed rock slope --r to road drainage system 2' X 10' level trench wJperf pipe r 2024 Surf a Water Design hianual - Appeafu G 19 M C-81 No. 4 - Control Structure/Flow Restrictor Maintenance Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected Component When Maintenance is Performed General Trash and Debris Material exceeds 25% of sump depth or 1 Control stricture (Includes Sediment) foot below orifice plate. orifice is not blocked. All trash and debris removed. Structural Damage Structure is not securely attached to Structure securely manhole wall. attached to wall and outlet pipe_ Structure is not in upright position (allow up to 10% from plumb). Structure in correct position. Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight and shrnv signs of rust Connections to outlet pipe are water tight structure repaired or replaced and works as designed. Any holes —other than designed hots --in the Structure has no structure. holes other than designed holes. Cleanout Gate Damaged or Missing Cleanout gate is not watertight or is missing. Gate is watertight and works as designed. Gate cannot be moved up and down by one maintenance person. Gate rmaves up and do%vn easriy and is watertight Chainrrod leading to gate is missing or damaged. Chain is in place and works as designed. Gate is rusted over 50% of its surface area. Gate is repaired or replaced to met design standards. Orifice Plate Damaged or Missing Control device is not working property due to Plate is in place and missing, out of place, or bent orifice plate_ works as designed. Obstructions Any trash, da_bria, sediment, or vegetation Plate is free of all bbcktng the plate. obstructions and works as designed. OverBow Pipe Obstructions Any trash or debris blocking (of having the potential of blocidng) the overflow pipe. Pipe is free of all obstructions and works as designed. Manhole See'Ciased See Tlosed Detention Systems' (No. 3) See 'Closed Detenton Systems' (No. 3). Detention Systems' (No_ 3). Catch Basin See'Catch Basins' See *Catch Basins' (No. 5). See *Catch Basins - (No. 5). 1 (No. 5). Volume V— Runoff Treannent BAIP. —Augtu r 2012 4-96 UrbanDesignGroup.293rd.OandM January 11, 2017 Page 7 APPENDIX B Maintenance Covenant RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: DECLARATION OF COVENANT FOR MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION OF FLOW CONTROL BMPS Grantor: Grantee: King County Legal Description: Additional Legal(s) on: Assessor's Tax Parcel ID#: IN CONSIDERATION of the approved King County (check one of the following) ❑ residential building permit, ❑ commercial building permit, ❑ clearing and grading permit, ❑ subdivision permit, or ❑ short subdivision permit for Application No. relating to the real property ("Property") described above, the Grantor(s), the owner(s) in fee of that Property, hereby covenants(covenant) with King County, a political subdivision of the state of Washington, and its municipal successors in interest and assigns ("King County" and "the County", or "its municipal successor"), that he/she(they) will observe, consent to, and abide by the conditions and obligations set forth and described in Paragraphs 1 through 8 below with regard to the Property. Grantor(s) hereby grants(grant), covenants(covenant), and agrees(agree) as follows: 1. Grantor(s) or his/her(their) successors in interest and assigns ("Owners") shall retain, uphold, and protect the stormwater management devices, features, pathways, limits, and restrictions, known as flow control best management practices ("BMPs"), shown on the approved Flow Control BMP Site Plan for the Property attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. 2. The Owners shall at their own cost, operate, maintain, and keep in good repair, the Property's BMPs as described in the approved Design and Maintenance Details for each BMP attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit B. 3. King County shall provide at least 30 days written notice to the Owners that entry on the Property is planned for the inspection of the BMPs. After the 30 days, the Owners shall allow King County to enter for the sole purpose of inspecting the BMPs. In lieu of inspection by the County, the Owners may elect to engage a licensed civil engineer registered in the state of Washington who has expertise in drainage to inspect the BMPs and provide a written report describing their condition. If the engineer option is chosen, the Owners shall provide written notice to the Director of the Water and Land Resources Division or its municipal successor in interest ("WLR") within fifteen days of receiving the County's notice of inspection. Within 30 days of giving this notice, the Owners, or the engineer on behalf of the Owners, shall provide the engineer's report to WLR. If the report is not provided in a timely manner as specified above, the County may inspect the BMPs without further notice. 4. If King County determines from its inspection, or from an engineer's report provided in accordance with Paragraph 3, that maintenance, repair, restoration, and/or mitigation work is required for the BMPs, WLR shall notify the Owners of the specific maintenance, repair, restoration, and/or mitigation work (Work) required under Title 9 of the King County Code ("KCC"). WLR shall also set a reasonable deadline for completing the Work or providing an engineer's report that verifies completion of the Work. After the deadline has passed, the Owners shall allow the County access to re -inspect the BMPs unless an engineer's report has been provided verifying completion of the Work. If the work is not completed properly within the time frame set by WLR, King County may initiate an enforcement action. Failure to properly maintain the BMPs is a violation of KCC Chapter 9.04 and may subject the Owners to enforcement under the KCC, including fines and penalties. 5. Apart from performing routine landscape maintenance, the Owners are hereby required to obtain written approval from WLR before performing any alterations or modifications to the BMPs. 6. Any notice or approval required to be given by one party to the other under the provisions of this Declaration of Covenant shall be effective upon personal delivery to the other party, or after three (3) days from the date that the notice or approval is mailed with delivery confirmation to the current address on record with each Party. The parties shall notify each other of any change to their addresses. 7. This Declaration of Covenant is intended to promote the efficient and effective management of surface water drainage on the Property, and it shall inure to the benefit of all the citizens of King County and its municipal successors and assigns. This Declaration of Covenant shall run with the land and be binding upon Grantor(s), and Grantor's(s') successors in interest and assigns. 8. This Declaration of Covenant may be terminated by execution of a written agreement by the Owners and King County that is recorded by King County in its real property records. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Declaration of Covenant for the Maintenance and Inspection of Flow Control BMPs is executed this day of 120 GRANTOR, owner of the Property GRANTOR, owner of the Property STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF KING )ss. On this day personally appeared before me: to me known to be the individual(s) described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they signed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein stated. Given under my hand and official seal this day of 20 Printed name Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at My appointment expires DRAINAGE REPORT (App/Permit #: } Urban Design Group Single Family Residence xxx S 293rd Street King County, Washington PN:7202500070 For Mr. Nazary Ivanchuk c/o Urban Design Group 879 Rainier Avenue N, Suite A-200 Renton, Washington 98057 (206)838-8250 January 10, 2017 By GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Hwy. E., Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424-2649 Ph 253-896-1011 Fax 253-896-2633 Ph.253-896-1011 Fx.253-896-2633 Mr. Nazary Ivanchuk c/o Urban Design Group 879 Rainier Avenue N, Suite A-200 Renton, Washington 98057 (206) 838-8250 Attention: Mr. Alexey Ancheyev GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Hwy. E, Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424-2649 January 10, 2017 Stormwater Drainage and ESC Plan Proposed Single Family Residence xxx S 293rd Street Federal Way, Washington PN: 7202500070 Job: Urban DesignGroup.293rd.DR PROJECT DESCRIPTION This Stormwater Drainage Report has been prepared for the proposed single family residence to be constructed along South 293rd Street in Federal Way, Washington (PN: 7202500070). Applicable drainage requirements for the City of Federal Way are described in: m Appendix C: Small Project Drainage Review Requirements of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSDM) Our understanding of the project is based on our review of King County iMap topographic information, the site plan provided by Urban Design Group, and our previous Geologic Hazard Assessment dated May 4, 2016. We understand that you propose to construct a two story single family residence in the upper, southern portion of the site. We anticipate that the proposed residence will have a daylight basement configuration and will be wood framed. The proposed residence will have a roof area of 2,695 square feet (sf), and the proposed driveway will encompass about 409 sf. The proposed development will result in 3,104 sf of hard surfaces being added to the site, 2,695 of which will be impervious. The site encompasses approximately 9,622 sf, 32.3 percent of which will be developed. Per Appendix C: The site is a single family residence that will result in >2,000 sf of new and/or replaced impervious surface; The proposed project will be located predominately on till soils; and The proposed project will not add more than 5,000 square feet of new impervious surface. UrbanDesignGroup.293rd.DR January 11, 2017 Page 2 Therefore, this project is within the thresholds set forth in Appendix C of the 2009 KCSDM, and the requirements indicated therein will apply. EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject parcel is located in the Redondo area of Federal Way, Washington. The parcel is irregular in shape and generally measures 115 to 129 feet wide (north to south) by 91 to 150 feet deep (east to west) and encompasses approximately 0.22 acres. The parcel is bounded by South 2931d Street on the west, by existing residences on the north and south, and by a wooded, undeveloped slope to the east. The upland portion of the parcel, near the existing 293rd Street right of way, is flat to gently sloping. About 10 to 30 feet east of the road, the site slopes steepen to about 35 to 60 percent, with the steeper portion in the south-central portion of the slope. Slopes in the central portion of the site were observed to be steeper than 40 percent, and to have a vertical height about 10 to 12 feet. The area surrounding the seasonal stream in the eastern portion of the site slopes down at about 25 to 35 percent. Vegetation on the site consists of tall grasses, blackberries, and both native and invasive shrubs. Some scattered young deciduous trees and older fir trees are located along the north and east sides of the parcel. No springs or seepage was observed at the time of our site visit. A shallow drainage course / seasonal stream is generally located along the eastern property line. No evidence of erosion, soil movement, landslide activity or deep-seated slope instability was observed at the site or the adjacent areas at the time of our site visit. INFILTRATION RATE/SOILS REPORT The USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey for King County maps the soils as Alderwood and Kitsap soils (AkF). The Alderwood and Kitsap soils are derived from glacial till, that form on 25 to 70 percent slopes. These soils are listed as having a "moderate to severe" erosion hazard a severe building limitation for slopes. These soils are listed in hydrologic soils group B/C. The Geologic Map of the Poverty Bay 7.5-minute Quadrangle, Washington, Derek B. Booth, Howard H. Waldron, and Kathy G. Troost (2003) indicates the site underlain by coarse -grained older glacial deposits (Qpog,). These soils were generally deposited before the Vashon stade of the Fraser Glaciation, some 12,000 to 15,000 years ago. The glacial deposits consists of a heterogeneous mixture of clay, silt, sand and gravel that has been over ridden by the continental ice mass associated with the Vashon stade of Fraser glaciation. The glacial deposits are considered overconsolidated, are typically in a very dense condition, and exhibits high strength and low compressibility characteristics where undisturbed. Surficial soils are typically weathered to a loose to medium dense condition. No areas of landslides or mass wasting or noted on the map within the immediate vicinity of the site. Based on the SCS soils mapping and our experience in the area, onsite infiltration is not feasible due to the soil classifications and the presence of steep slopes in portions of the site. A Geologic Hazard Assessment dated May 4, 2016 was previously prepared for this parcel. SUB -BASIN DESCRIPTION The site is located within a subbasin that generally drains to the north, northeast, and northwest towards a seasonal stream located in the eastern portion of the site. The site receives some runoff from the parcels to the south, while the majority of the runoff is diverted away from the site by South 2931d Street. UrbanDesignGroup.293rd.DR January 11, 2017 Page 3 SMALL PROJECT DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project adds more than 2,000 sf and less than 5,000 sf of new impervious surface, and the total impervious surface is less than 10,000 sf; therefore, the Small Project Drainage Requirements apply per KCSDM Figure 1.1.2.A. Appendix C of the KCSDM defines a small lot to be <22,000 sf. Flow Control BMPs Full Dispersion is not feasible for this project. According to aerial imagery obtained from Google Earth (copyright 2015) and King County iMap, the subject parcel cannot achieve a 100' long flow path established between the residence and the stream in the eastern portion of the site. Full Infiltration is not feasible. A 50 foot setback cannot be met between the infiltration device and a steep slope hazard area. There is also no feasible location on the site that allows for an infiltration facility to be setback 15 feet from the proposed residence and 5 feet from a property line that is also outside of a steep slope hazard area. Limited infiltration is infeasible for the same reasons. Basic Dispersion is not feasible. There is no location onsite that a basic dispersion device could be located to achieve a flow path slope of 15% or less over 20 feet. Sheet flow dispersion of stormwater runoff generated by the proposed driveway is not feasible because there is not sufficient room for a 10 foot long flow path downslope from the driveway. Rain Gardens are not feasible. There is no location onsite that is 50 feet or more from a steep slope hazard area. Permeable Pavement is feasible for the proposed driveway for limited infiltration. An overflow connection to the perforated pipe storm connection shall be installed. Rainwater Harvesting and Vegetated Roof are not feasible. There is no location onsite that is 50 feet or more from a steep slope hazard area. Reduced Impervious Surface Credit: Restricted Footprint is feasible. The project proposes 3104 sf, 2695 sf of which is impervious. From the 4000 sf impervious surface threshold, 1305 sf of proposed impervious surface has been mitigated per the restricted foot print. This area can be discharged through a perforated pipe connection. This leaves 1390 sf of impervious unmitigated. Perforated Pipe Connection as illustrated in the 2009 King County Storm Water Manual C2.11 is feasible. The connection point for the front half of the roof and the overflow from the driveway will be at the west edge of the property. Erosion and Sediment Control Measures The following ESC Measures shall be met for the proposed project: 1. Mark Clearing Limits: Clearing will be limited to the existing tall grass and scattered shrubs and trees. The approximate clearing limits have been clearly shown on the abbreviated plan sheet C-4. 2. Minimize Sediment Tracked Offsite: A stabilized construction entrance has been clearly shown on the abbreviated plan sheet C-4 and will be located where the proposed driveway enters the site. Should sediment leave the site, all public roads affected should be thoroughly cleaned. 3. Control Sediment: A sediment control measure shall be implemented downstream of the project area. Sediment control measures should be installed prior to construction. Inlet protection should be installed in the first existing catch basins downgrade of the site and removed after all soils have been stabilized. A silt fence should be installed per the abbreviated plans, sheet C-4. UrbanDesignGroup.293rd.DR January 11, 2017 Page 4 4. Stabilize Exposed Soils: The provided ESC plan, sheet C-5, includes the notes for soil stabilization methods such as Mulching, Plastic Covering, and Seeding. 5. Control Runoff. This will be accomplished through the provided ESC plan. See the attached abbreviated plans, sheet C-4. 6. Control Dewaterin : No dewatering will be required on this project. 7. Control Other Pollutants: This is a single family residential project. It is expected that there will be limited opportunity for construction pollution to be present on site. Contractors will be required to follow standard procedures concerning site cleanup, material storage, and handling of typically construction pollutants. 8. Final Stabilization: Per KCSDM, "Prior to final construction approval, the project site shall be stabilized to prevent sediment -laden water from leaving the project site after project completion. All disturbed areas of the project site shall be vegetated or otherwise permanently stabilized. At a minimum, disturbed areas must be seeded and mulched to ensure that sufficient cover will develop shortly after final approval. Mulch without seeding is adequate for small areas to be landscaped before October 1. All temporary ESC measures shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary measures are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized onsite. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal of measures or vegetation shall be permanently stabilized with seeding or sodding." PROPOSED DRAINAGE DESCRIPTION The proposed drainage system was designed in accordance with Appendix C of the 2009 KCSDM. The proposed driveway should be constructed of pervious surfacing. As the soils encountered at the site were observed to be consistent with glacial till, we do not anticipate that full infiltration of the stormwater generated on the proposed driveway will be feasible. We recommend that an overflow perforated pipe be provided for the driveway. The overflow should be discharged via a perforated pipe connection to the existing stormwater system. The stormwater runoff generated on the proposed residence will be mitigated via a restricted building footprint. Per C.2.9.2 Restricted Footprint, for sites smaller than 22,000 sf, total impervious areas less than 4,000 sf qualify for a restricted footprint credit equal to the difference in square footage. Per this section, of the 2,695 sf of proposed impervious surface, 1,305 sf has been mitigated and 1,390 sf is still required to be mitigated. Per the 2009 KCSDM, mitigated surfaces may be discharged via a perforated pipe connection to the existing stormwater system. No other stormwater management method outlined in Appendix C is appropriate for the proposed single family residence. As such, we recommend the remaining 1,390 sf of roof area will be managed via downspout connections through roof drain cleanouts to two dispersion pipes located on the edge of the stream buffer. A 6-inch diameter corrugated HDPE pipe will extend from the roof drain clean outs, daylight behind the home and extend down the surface of the slope to the edge of the stream buffer. The pipe will be anchored to the slope at the top and bottom of the pipe run. The proposed downspouts will be located along the eastern portion of the proposed residence. The total surface area being conveyed to the dispersion pipe will be approximately 1,390 sf or 0.03 acres. Based on the rational method to determine peak discharge and using Urban DesignGroup.293rd.DR January 11, 2017 Page 5 the 100-year storm (Q-100) for the Tacoma vicinity, the peak flow from the total proposed impervious area of the unmitigated roof would be 0.9 x 3.65 x 0.03 = 0.1 cfs. A 6-inch corrugated HDPE line (Manning's n = 0.025), flowing full with a minimum slope of 30 percent has a conveyance capacity of 1.59 cfs, which is sufficient to handle the stormwater from the roof area. The drainage system, including pipe sizes, is shown on sheet C-2 of the accompanying abbreviated plans. Erosion control measures will be in place throughout the project. On a temporary basis, they will consist of silt fence installed along downhill sections of the project area. The site entrance will have a temporary construction entrance installed per the 2009 KCSDM. Permanent erosion control will consist of residential landscaping. UTILITIES It is the responsibility of the contractor to locate utilities prior to installing any stormwater systems. The One -Call Underground Utility Locate Center (1-800-424-5555 or 811) should be notified a minimum of 48-hours prior to digging on the site. COVENANTS, DEDICATIONS, EASEMENTS A maintenance covenant with be required to meet the Requirements of Appendix C KCSDM and must be recorded prior to the final construction approval for the proposed project. OTHER PERMITS OR CONDITIONS PLACED ON THE PROJECT In addition to this Drainage Report and Drainage Control Plan, that are required for the Site Development Permit, we anticipate other permits will be required by including but not limited to a building permit. PROJECT ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION I hereby state that this drainage and erosion/sediment control plan for the Urban Design Group Project has been prepared by me or under my supervision and meets the standard of care and expertise which is usual and customary in this community for professional engineers. I understand that the City of Federal Way does not and will not assume liability for the sufficiency, suitability, or performance of drainage facilities prepared by me. � � F UrbanDesignGroup.293rd.DR January 11, 2017 Page 6 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have need of additional information or services please call. Yours Very Truly, GeoResources, LLC Veronica R. Raub, EIT Staff Engineer in Training ov ' ' [ iaarmq�si � i I� • 2220 �2 $9d 0o� 0 50438 13RADLEY P. BIGGEASTAFF ��s��G1 sT�R� n �IONAL 1-16-ZOI, Brad P. Biggerstaff, LEG Frank Fiedler IV, PE Principal Senior Civil Engineer VRR:FF:vrr DoclD: Urban Design Group.293rd.DR Attachments: Drainage Control Plan Maintenance and Source Control Manual RESUSMIT7ED APR 11 2017 GeoResources, LLC Cim , fiDDEVR! �i. yygy 5007 Pacific Hwy. E, Suite 16 Ph.253-896-1011 C�MMUNI7Y OE►IE�dFh1E'r Fife Washington 9$424-2649 Fx.253-896-2633 g Mr, Nazary Ivanchuk c/o Urban Design Group 879 Rainier Avenue N, Suite A-200 Renton, Washington 98057 (206) 838-8250 Attention: Mr. Alexey Ancheyev April 7, 2017 Stormwater Drainage and ESC Plan Proposed Single Family Residence xxx S 29311 Street Federal Way, Washington PN: 7202500070 Job: Urban DesignGroup.293rd.DR PROJECT DESCRIPTION This Stormwater Drainage Report has been prepared for the proposed single family residence to be constructed along South 2931d Street in Federal Way, Washington (PN: 7202500070). Applicable drainage requirements for the City of Federal Way are described in: Appendix C: Small Project Drainage Review Requirements of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSDM) Our understanding of the project is based on our review of King County iMap topographic information, the site plan provided by Urban Design Group, and our previous Geologic Hazard Assessment dated May 4, 2016. We understand that you propose to construct a two story single family residence in the upper, southern portion of the site. We anticipate that the proposed residence will have a daylight basement configuration and will be wood framed. The proposed residence will have a roof area of 2,695 square feet (sf), and the proposed driveway will encompass about 409 sf. The proposed development will result in 3,104 sf of hard surfaces being added to the site, 2,695 of which will be impervious. The site encompasses approximately 9,622 sf, 32.3 percent of which will be developed. Per Appendix C: The site is a single family residence that will result in >2,000 sf of new and/or replaced impervious surface; The proposed project will be located predominately on till soils; and The proposed project will not add more than 5,000 square feet of new impervious surface. UrbanDesignGroup.293rd.DR_Rev1 April 7, 2017 Page 2 Therefore, this project is within the thresholds set forth in Appendix C of the 2009 KCSDM, and the requirements indicated therein will apply. EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject parcel is located in the Redondo area of Federal Way, Washington. The parcel is irregular in shape and generally measures 115 to 129 feet wide (north to south) by 91 to 150 feet deep (east to west) and encompasses approximately 0.22 acres. The parcel is bounded by South 293rd Street on the west, by existing residences on the north and south, and by a wooded, undeveloped slope to the east. The upland portion of the parcel, near the existing 293rd Street right of way, is flat to gently sloping. About 10 to 30 feet east of the road, the site slopes steepen to about 35 to 60 percent, with the steeper portion in the south-central portion of the slope. Slopes in the central portion of the site were observed to be steeper than 40 percent, and to have a vertical height about 10 to 12 feet. The area surrounding the seasonal stream in the eastern portion of the site slopes down at about 25 to 35 percent. Vegetation on the site consists of tall grasses, blackberries, and both native and invasive shrubs. Some scattered young deciduous trees and older fir trees are located along the north and east sides of the parcel. No springs or seepage was observed at the time of our site visit. A shallow drainage course I seasonal stream is generally located along the eastern property line. No evidence of erosion, soil movement, landslide activity or deep-seated slope instability was observed at the site or the adjacent areas at the time of our site visit. INFILTRATION RATEISOILS REPORT The USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey for King County maps the soils as Alderwood and Kitsap soils (AkF). The Alderwood and Kitsap soils are derived from glacial till, that form on 25 to 70 percent slopes. These soils are listed as having a "moderate to severe" erosion hazard a severe building limitation for slopes. These soils are listed in hydrologic soils group BIC. The Geologic Map of the Poverty Bay 7.5-minute Quadrangle, Washington, Derek B. Booth, Howard H. Waldron, and Kathy G. Troost (2003) indicates the site underlain by coarse -grained older glacial deposits (Qpogc). These soils were generally deposited before the Vashon stade of the Fraser Glaciation, some 12,000 to 15,000 years ago. The glacial deposits consists of a heterogeneous mixture of clay, silt, sand and gravel that has been over ridden by the continental ice mass associated with the Vashon stade of Fraser glaciation. The glacial deposits are considered overconsolidated, are typically in a very dense condition, and exhibits high strength and low compressibility characteristics where undisturbed. Surficial soils are typically weathered to a loose to medium dense condition. No areas of landslides or mass wasting or noted on the map within the immediate vicinity of the site. Based on the SCS soils mapping and our experience in the area, onsite infiltration is not feasible due to the soil classifications and the presence of steep slopes in portions of the site. A Geologic Hazard Assessment dated May 4, 2016 was previously prepared for this parcel. SUB -BASIN DESCRIPTION The site is located within a subbasin that generally drains to the north, northeast, and northwest towards a seasonal stream located in the eastern portion of the site. The site receives some runoff from the parcels to the south, while the majority of the runoff is diverted away from the site by South 2931d Street. Urban DesignGroup.293rd.DR_Rev1 April 7, 2017 Page 3 SMALL PROJECT DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project adds more than 2,000 sf and less than 5,000 sf of new impervious surface, and the total impervious surface is less than 10,000 sf; therefore, the Small Project Drainage Requirements apply per KCSDM Figure 1.1.2.A. Appendix C of the KCSDM defines a small lot to be <22,000 sf. Flow Control BMPs Full Dispersion is not feasible for this project. According to aerial imagery obtained from Google Earth (copyright 2015) and King County IMap, the subject parcel cannot achieve a 100' long flow path established between the residence and the stream in the eastern portion of the site. Full Infiltration is not feasible. A 50 foot setback cannot be met between the infiltration device and a steep slope hazard area. There is also no feasible location on the site that allows for an infiltration facility to be setback 15 feet from the proposed residence and 5 feet from a property line that is also outside of a steep slope hazard area. Limited infiltration is infeasible for the same reasons. Basic Dispersion is not feasible. There is no location onsite that a basic dispersion device could be located to achieve a flow path slope of 15% or less over 20 feet. Sheet flow dispersion of stormwater runoff generated by the proposed driveway is not feasible because there is not sufficient room for a 10 foot long flow path down slope from the driveway. Rain Gardens are not feasible. There is no location onsite that is 50 feet or more from a steep slope hazard area. Permeable Pavement is not feasible for the proposed driveway based on the proximity to a steep slope as defined in the report dated May 0, 2016 and the discovery of fill material previously placed. Rainwater Harvesting and Vegetated Roof are not feasible. There is no location onsite that is 50 feet or more from a steep slope hazard area. Reduced Impervious Surface Credit: Restricted Footprint is not feasible. The project proposes 3104 sf, 2695 sf of which is impervious. From the 4000 sf impervious surface threshold, 1305 sf of proposed impervious surface has been mitigated per the restricted foot print. This area can be discharged through a perforated pipe connection. However there is no city system available for discharge. Perforated Pipe Connection as illustrated in the 2009 King County Storm Water Manual C2.11 is not feasible. There is no city storm water system available for discharge. Erosion and Sediment Control Measures The following ESC Measures shall be met for the proposed project: 1. Mark Clearing Limits: Clearing will be limited to the existing tall grass and scattered shrubs and trees. The approximate clearing limits have been clearly shown on the abbreviated plan sheet C-4. 2. Minimize Sediment Tracked Cffsite: A stabilized construction entrance has been clearly shown on the abbreviated plan sheet C-4 and will be located where the proposed driveway enters the site. Should sediment leave the site, all public roads affected should be thoroughly cleaned. 3. Control Sediment: A sediment control measure shall be implemented downstream of the project area. Sediment control measures should be installed prior to construction. Inlet protection should be installed in the first existing catch basins downgrade of the site and removed after all soils have been stabilized. A silt fence should be installed per the abbreviated plans, sheet C-4. U rbanDesignGroup.293rd.DR_Rev1 April 7, 2017 Page 4 4. Stabilize Exposed Soils: The provided ESC plan, sheet C-5, includes the notes for soil stabilization methods such as Mulching, Plastic Covering, and Seeding. 5. Control Runoff: This will be accomplished through the provided ESC plan. See the attached abbreviated plans, sheet C-4. 6. Control ❑ewaterrn : No dewatering will be required on this project. 7. Control Other Pollutants: This is a single family residential project. It is expected that there will be limited opportunity for construction pollution to be present on site. Contractors will be required to follow standard procedures concerning site cleanup, material storage, and handling of typically construction pollutants. 8. Final Stabilization: Per KCSDM, "Prior to final construction approval, the project site shall be stabilized to prevent sediment -laden water from leaving the project site after project completion. All disturbed areas of the project site shall be vegetated or otherwise permanently stabilized. At a minimum, disturbed areas must be seeded and mulched to ensure that sufficient cover will develop shortly after final approval. Mulch without seeding is adequate for small areas to be landscaped before October 1. All temporary ESC measures shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary measures are no longer needed. Trapped sediment shall be removed or stabilized onsite. Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal of measures or vegetation shall be permanently stabilized with seeding or sodding." PROPOSED DRAINAGE DESCRIPTION The proposed drainage system was designed in accordance with Appendix C of the 2009 KCSDM. As no stormwater management method outlined in Appendix C is appropriate for the proposed single family residence, we recommend a detention tank for flow restriction be installed under the proposed driveway to manage the stormwater flows to be discharged to the edge of the stream buffer behind the proposed SFR. All roof drains should connect to this tank. Due to the soils encountered at the site, observed to be consistent with glacial till, and the presence of previously placed fill material we do not anticipate infiltration of the stormwater generated on the proposed driveway will be feasible. We recommend the driveway also be directed to the detention tank via a catch basin to retain sedimentation and then to two dispersion pipes located on the edge of the stream buffer. A 6-inch diameter corrugated HDPE pipe will extend from the detention tank, daylight behind the home and extend down the surface of the slope to the edge of the stream buffer. The pipe will be anchored to the slope at the top and bottom of the pipe run. The total surface area being conveyed to the dispersion pipe will be approximately 3,104 sf or 0.07 acres. Based on the rational method to determine peak discharge and using the 100-year storm (Q-100) for the Tacoma vicinity, the peak flow from the total proposed impervious area of the roof and driveway would be 0.9 x 3.65 x 0.07 = 0.23 cfs. A 6-inch corrugated HDPE line (Manning's n = 0.025), flowing full with a minimum slope of 30 percent has a conveyance capacity of 1.59 cfs, which is sufficient to handle the stormwater from the roof and driveway area. The flow rates to the dispersion area were determined using WWHM2012 and were designed to meet the predeveloped flow. The drainage system, including pipe sizes, is shown on sheet C-2 of the accompanying abbreviated plans. UrbanDesig nGroup.293rd. DR_Rev 1 April 7, 2017 Page 5 Erosion control measures will be in place throughout the project. On a temporary basis, they will consist of silt fence installed along downhill sections of the project area. The site entrance will have a temporary construction entrance installed per the 2009 KCSDM. Permanent erosion control will consist of residential landscaping. UTILITIES It is the responsibility of the contractor to locate utilities prior to installing any stormwater systems. The One -Call Underground Utility Locate Center (1-800-424-5555 or 811) should be notified a minimum of 48-hours prior to digging on the site. COVENANTS, DEDICATIONS, EASEMENTS A maintenance covenant with be required to meet the Requirements of Appendix C KCSDM and must be recorded prior to the final construction approval for the proposed project. OTHER PERMITS OR CONDITIONS PLACED ON THE PROJECT In addition to this Drainage Report and Drainage Control Plan, that are required for the Site Development Permit, we anticipate other permits will be required by including but not limited to a building permit. PROJECT ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION I hereby state that this drainage and erosion/sediment control plan for the Urban Design Group Project has been prepared by me or under my supervision and meets the standard of care and expertise which is usual and customary in this community for professional engineers. I understand that the City of Federal Way does not and will not assume liability for the sufficiency, suitability, or performance of drainage facilities prepared by me. Urban DesignGroup.293rd.DR_Rev1 April 7, 2017 Page 6 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have need of additional information or services please call. Yours Very Truly, GeoResources, LLC Veronica R. Raub, EIT Staff Engineer in Training I X/7 Brad P. Biggerstaff, LEG Principal VRR:FF:vrr DocID: Urban Design Group.293rd.DR Attachments: Drainage Control Plan Maintenance and Source Control Manual Frank Fiedler IV, PE Senior Civil Engineer WWHM2012 PROJECT RESUBMITTED APR 0 7 2017 rlMUN ryD2.Z PMYJ+rT General Model Information Project Name: 293rd Site Name: S293 Site Address: S 293rd Place City: Federal Way Report Date: 4/3/2017 Gage: Seatac Data Start: 1948/10/01 Data End: 2009/09/30 Timestep: 15 Minute Precip Scale: 1.00 Version Date: 2016/02/25 Version: 4.2.12 POC Thresholds Low Flow Threshold for POC1: 50 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC1: 50 Year 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:23 AM Page 2 Landuse Basin Data Predeveloped Land Use Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre C, Lawn, Steep 0.22 Pervious Total 0.22 Impervious Land Use acre Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 0.22 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:23 AM Page 3 Mitigated Land Use Basin 1 Bypass: No GroundWater: No Pervious Land Use acre C, Pasture, Steep 0.11 C, Lawn, Steep 0.04 Pervious Total 0.15 Impervious Land Use acre ROOF TOPS FLAT 0.06 DRIVEWAYS FLAT 0.01 Impervious Total 0.07 Basin Total 0.22 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Vault 1 Vault 1 Groundwater 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:23 AM Page 4 Routing Elements Predeveloped Routing 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:23 AM Page 5 Mitigated Routing Vault 1 Width: Length: Depth: Discharge Structure Riser Height: Riser Diameter: Notch Type: Notch Width: Notch Height: Orifice 1 Diameter: Element Flows To: Outlet 1 7.507245642196 ft. 7.507245642196 ft. 7 ft. 6 ft. 6 in. Rectangular 0.090 ft. 0.220 ft. 0.491 in. Elevation:0 ft_ Outlet 2 Vault Hydraulic Table Stage(feet) 0.0000 0.0778 0.1556 0.2333 0.3111 0.3889 0.4667 0.5444 0.6222 0.7000 0.7778 0.8556 0.9333 1.0111 1.0889 1.1667 1.2444 1.3222 1.4000 1.4778 1.5556 1.6333 1.7111 1.7889 1.8667 1.9444 2.0222 2.1000 2.1778 2.2556 2.3333 2.4111 2.4889 2.5667 2.6444 2.7222 2.8000 Area(ac.) 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Volume(ac-ft.) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 Discharge(cfs) 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 Infilt(cfs) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:23 AM Page 6 2.8778 0.001 0.003 0.011 0.000 2.9556 0.001 0.003 0.011 0.000 3.0333 0.001 0.003 0.011 0.000 3.1111 0.001 0.004 0.011 0.000 3.1889 0.001 0.004 0.011 0.000 3.2667 0.001 0.004 0.011 0.000 3.3444 0.001 0.004 0.012 0.000 3.4222 0.001 0.004 0.012 0.000 3.5000 0.001 0.004 0.012 0.000 3.5778 0.001 0.004 0.012 0.000 3.6556 0.001 0.004 0.012 0.000 3.7333 0.001 0.004 0.012 0.000 3.8111 0.001 0.004 0.012 0.000 3.8889 0.001 0.005 0.012 0.000 3.9667 0.001 0.005 0.013 0.000 4.0444 0.001 0.005 0.013 0.000 4.1222 0.001 0.005 0.013 0.000 4.2000 0.001 0.005 0.013 0.000 4.2778 0.001 0.005 0.013 0.000 4.3556 0.001 0.005 0.013 0.000 4.4333 0.001 0.005 0.013 0.000 4.5111 0.001 0.005 0.013 0.000 4.5889 0.001 0.005 0.014 0.000 4.6667 0.001 0.006 0.014 0.000 4.7444 0.001 0.006 0.014 0.000 4.8222 0.001 0.006 0.014 0.000 4.9000 0.001 0.006 0.014 0.000 4.9778 0.001 0.006 0.014 0.000 5.0556 0.001 0.006 0.014 0.000 5.1333 0.001 0.006 0.014 0.000 5.2111 0.001 0.006 0.014 0.000 5.2889 0.001 0.006 0.015 0.000 5.3667 0.001 0.006 0.015 0.000 5.4444 0.001 0.007 0.015 0.000 5.5222 0.001 0.007 0.015 0.000 5.6000 0.001 0.007 0.015 0.000 5.6778 0.001 0.007 0.015 0.000 5.7556 0.001 0.007 0.015 0.000 5.8333 0.001 0.007 0.019 0.000 5.9111 0.001 0.007 0.029 0.000 5.9889 0.001 0.007 0.043 0.000 6.0667 0.001 0.007 0.135 0.000 6.1444 0.001 0.007 0.301 0.000 6.2222 0.001 0.008 0.415 0.000 6.3000 0.001 0.008 0.477 0.000 6.3778 0.001 0.008 0.530 0.000 6.4556 0.001 0.008 0.577 0.000 6.5333 0.001 0.008 0.621 0.000 6.6111 0.001 0.008 0.662 0.000 6.6889 0.001 0.008 0.700 0.000 6.7667 0.001 0.008 0.736 0.000 6.8444 0.001 0.008 0.770 0.000 6.9222 0.001 0.009 0.803 0.000 7.0000 0.001 0.009 0.834 0.000 7.0778 0.001 0.009 0.864 0.000 7.1556 0.000 0.000 0.893 0.000 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:23 AM Page 7 Analysis Results POC 1 W U 0 J LL 10E-5 10E-4 10E-3 10E-2 1U 1uu Percent Tim- Exc-®ding + Predeveloped Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area: 0.22 Total Impervious Area: 0 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area: 0.15 Total Impervious Area: 0.07 ., Cumul�vePYab�i�4y 41 ool LL o aol .nl OS I 1 t f: Y. 37 S1 1p G 6' Y. 9B rA 995 x Mitigated Flow Frequency Method: Log Pearson Type III 17B Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.026527 5 year 0.044519 10 year 0.058017 25 year 0.076613 50 year 0.091468 100 year 0.107105 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.014392 5 year 0.023923 10 year 0.032441 25 year 0,04629 50 year 0,059254 100 year 0.074867 Annual Peaks Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Year Predeveloped Mitigated 1949 0.053 0.014 1950 0.051 0.013 1951 0.027 0.028 1952 0.013 0.011 1953 0.010 0.009 1954 0.021 0.010 1955 0.020 0.023 1956 0.028 0.013 1957 0.031 0.014 1958 0.018 0.013 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:23 AM Page 8 1959 0.015 0.010 1960 0.030 0.032 1961 0.020 0.012 1962 0.008 0.009 1963 0.026 0.011 1964 0.024 0.010 1965 0.034 0.012 1966 0.015 0.010 1967 0.052 0.015 1968 0.031 0.011 1969 0.033 0.013 1970 0.025 0.012 1971 0.030 0.011 1972 0.048 0.021 1973 0.011 0.011 1974 0.032 0.010 1975 0.035 0.015 1976 0.023 0.012 1977 0.021 0.008 1978 0.024 0.012 1979 0.010 0.009 1980 0.066 0.015 1981 0.022 0.011 1982 0.051 0.058 1983 0.031 0.013 1984 0.014 0.011 1985 0.021 0.011 1986 0.028 0.034 1987 0.025 0.032 1988 0.010 0.010 1989 0.008 0.008 1990 0.098 0.058 1991 0.068 0.037 1992 0.021 0.012 1993 0.012 0.011 1994 0.007 0.007 1995 0.017 0.013 1996 0.051 0.039 1997 0.029 0.032 1998 0.025 0.011 1999 0.075 0.019 2000 0.028 0.013 2001 0.011 0.008 2002 0.043 0.026 2003 0.044 0.010 2004 0.060 0.053 2005 0.026 0.015 2006 0.026 0.014 2007 0.090 0.046 2008 0.066 0.062 2009 0.037 0.024 Ranked Annual Peaks Ranked Annual Peaks for Predeveloped and Mitigated. POC #1 Rank Predeveloped Mitigated 1 0.0976 0.0623 2 0.0904 0.0578 3 0.0751 0.0576 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:57 AM Page 9 4 0.0678 0.0526 5 0.0660 0.0462 6 0.0655 0.0389 7 0.0596 0.0374 8 0.0530 0.0339 9 0.0519 0.0325 10 0.0514 0.0324 11 0.0511 0.0318 12 0.0508 0.0279 13 0.0483 0.0257 14 0.0442 0.0237 15 0.0425 0.0230 16 0.0371 0.0213 17 0.0350 0.0189 18 0.0341 0.0153 19 0.0330 0.0153 20 0.0316 0.0153 21 0.0314 0.0149 22 0.0313 0.0141 23 0.0308 0.0138 24 0.0305 0.0136 25 0.0296 0.0135 26 0.0294 0.0132 27 0.0284 0.0129 28 0.0283 0.0128 29 0.0282 0.0127 30 0.0273 0.0125 31 0.0259 0.0125 32 0.0258 0.0121 33 0.0256 0.0117 34 0.0251 0.0116 35 0.0250 0.0116 36 0.0249 0.0115 37 0.0241 0.0115 38 0.0238 0.0114 39 0.0231 0.0113 40 0.0221 0.0112 41 0.0211 0.0112 42 0.0209 0.0112 43 0.0208 0.0110 44 0.0205 0.0110 45 0.0201 0.0107 46 0.0198 0.0106 47 0.0185 0.0105 48 0.0174 0.0105 49 0.0152 0.0104 50 0.0150 0.0104 51 0.0145 0.0103 52 0.0128 0.0103 53 0.0116 0.0099 54 0.0108 0.0095 55 0.0107 0.0092 56 0.0099 0.0090 57 0.0096 0.0089 58 0.0096 0.0084 59 0.0080 0.0081 60 0.0077 0.0079 61 0.0071 0.0073 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:57 AM Page 10 Duration Flows The Facility PASSED Flow(cfs) Predev Mit Percentage Pass/Fail 0.0133 1999 1999 100 Pass 0.0141 1695 1524 89 Pass 0.0148 1461 1116 76 Pass 0.0156 1239 601 48 Pass 0.0164 1053 500 47 Pass 0.0172 866 461 53 Pass 0.0180 712 424 59 Pass 0.0188 572 381 66 Pass 0.0196 473 349 73 Pass 0.0204 406 316 77 Pass 0.0212 346 291 84 Pass 0.0220 301 266 88 Pass 0.0227 277 237 85 Pass 0.0235 246 210 85 Pass 0.0243 219 186 84 Pass 0.0251 191 169 88 Pass 0.0259 170 152 89 Pass 0.0267 151 142 94 Pass 0.0275 138 130 94 Pass 0.0283 117 122 104 Pass 0.0291 109 113 103 Pass 0.0299 98 105 107 Pass 0.0306 91 99 108 Pass 0.0314 83 91 109 Pass 0.0322 80 79 98 Pass 0.0330 75 74 98 Pass 0.0338 68 71 104 Pass 0.0346 67 65 97 Pass 0.0354 65 55 84 Pass 0.0362 62 52 83 Pass 0.0370 59 48 81 Pass 0.0378 56 45 80 Pass 0.0385 52 40 76 Pass 0.0393 51 36 70 Pass 0.0401 50 31 62 Pass 0.0409 48 27 56 Pass 0.0417 43 26 60 Pass 0.0425 41 26 63 Pass 0.0433 40 26 65 Pass 0.0441 39 25 64 Pass 0.0449 36 24 66 Pass 0.0457 35 21 60 Pass 0.0464 33 20 60 Pass 0.0472 32 19 59 Pass 0.0480 31 17 54 Pass 0.0488 28 15 53 Pass 0.0496 25 11 44 Pass 0.0504 25 11 44 Pass 0.0512 23 11 47 Pass 0.0520 19 9 47 Pass 0.0528 18 8 44 Pass 0.0536 16 6 37 Pass 0.0543 16 5 31 Pass 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:57 AM Page 12 0.0551 16 5 31 Pass 0.0559 16 5 31 Pass 0.0567 16 5 31 Pass 0.0575 16 4 25 Pass 0.0583 16 2 12 Pass 0.0591 16 1 6 Pass 0.0599 12 1 8 Pass 0.0607 12 1 8 Pass 0.0615 12 1 8 Pass 0.0622 12 1 8 Pass 0.0630 11 0 0 Pass 0.0638 11 0 0 Pass 0.0646 10 0 0 Pass 0.0654 9 0 0 Pass 0.0662 7 0 0 Pass 0.0670 7 0 0 Pass 0.0678 7 0 0 Pass 0.0686 5 0 0 Pass 0.0693 5 0 0 Pass 0.0701 5 0 0 Pass 0.0709 5 0 0 Pass 0.0717 5 0 0 Pass 0.0725 4 0 0 Pass 0.0733 4 0 0 Pass 0.0741 4 0 0 Pass 0.0749 4 0 0 Pass 0.0757 3 0 0 Pass 0.0765 3 0 0 Pass 0.0772 3 0 0 Pass 0.0780 2 0 0 Pass 0.0788 2 0 0 Pass 0.0796 2 0 0 Pass 0.0804 2 0 0 Pass 0.0812 2 0 0 Pass 0.0820 2 0 0 Pass 0.0828 2 0 0 Pass 0.0836 2 0 0 Pass 0.0844 2 0 0 Pass 0.0851 2 0 0 Pass 0.0859 2 0 0 Pass 0.0867 2 0 0 Pass 0.0875 2 0 0 Pass 0.0883 2 0 0 Pass 0.0891 2 0 0 Pass 0.0899 2 0 0 Pass 0.0907 1 0 0 Pass 0.0915 1 0 0 Pass 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:57 AM Page 13 Water Quality Water Quality BMP Flow and Volume for POC #1 On-line facility volume: 0 acre-feet On-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfs. Off-line facility target flow: 0 cfs. Adjusted for 15 min: 0 cfs. 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:57 AM Page 14 LID Report UD Technique Vault 1 130C Total Volume InfiiValed Compliance with LID standard 8% at 2-yrto 2-yr Used for TolalVolume Volume Treatment? tdeeds Through Treatment Facility (ac-l1) (act Infiltration Cumulative Percent Volume Volume Volume (aclt) Infiltration Inflnrated Credit 0 Percent Cammen Water Quality Treated too Treat U9b Credit Duration Analysis Result= Failed 293rd 4/3/2017 9:38:57 AM Page 15 Model Default Modifications Total of 0 changes have been made. PERLND Changes No PERLND changes have been made. IMPLND Changes No IMPLND changes have been made. 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 16 Appendix Predeveloped Schematic i asin 1 1 .22a 1 _ 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 17 Mitigated Schematic Basin 1 D.22ac I Vault 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 18 ,-1 Predeveloped UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1948 10 01 END RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> END FILES OPN SEQUENCE 2009 09 30 UNIT SYSTEM 1 < ----------- File Name----------------------- *** INGRP INDELT 00:15 PERLND 18 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<---------- Title ----------- >***THAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 1 Basin 1 MAX END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 2 30 9 <PLS ><------- Name ------- >NBLKS Unit -systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 18 C, Lawn, Steep 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 18 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT -INFO <PLS > ***************** Print -flags ***************************** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 18 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT -INFO 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 19 PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 18 0 4.5 0.03 400 0.15 0.5 0.996 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 18 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 18 0.1 0.15 0.25 6 0.3 0.25 END PWAT-PARM4 PWAT-STATEI <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 18 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 END PWAT-STATEI END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><------- Name ------- > Unit -systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** END ACTIVITY PRINT -INFO <ILS > ******** Print -flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* END PRINT -INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATEI <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS END IWAT-STATEI 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 20 END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <Name> # Basin 1*** PERLND 18 PERLND 18 ******Routing****** END SCHEMATIC <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** 0.22 COPY 501 12 0.22 COPY 501 13 NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** ><---> User T-series En 1 Metr LKFG *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** END ACTIVITY PRINT -INFO <PLS > ***************** Print -flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* END PRINT -INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC Al A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------ ><-------- ><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><-------- > <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC -ACTIONS END SPEC -ACTIONS FTABLES END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 21 WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 501 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS -LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS -LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS -LINK 12 MASS -LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.063333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS -LINK 13 END MASS -LINK END RUN 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 22 Mitigated UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1948 10 01 END 2009 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> < ----------- File Name ------------------------------ >*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 293rd.wdm MESSU 25 Mit293rd.MES 27 Mit293rd.L61 28 Mit293rd.L62 30 POC293rdl.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:15 PERLND 15 PERLND 18 IMPLND 4 IMPLND 5 RCHRES 1 COPY 1 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<---------- Title ----------- >***THAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 Vault 1 MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><------- Name ------- >NBLKS Unit -systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 15 C, Pasture, Steep 1 1 1 1 27 0 18 C, Lawn, Steep 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 15 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 23 PRINT -INFO <PLS > ***************** Print -flags ***************************** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 15 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 18 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT -INFO PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 15 0 4.5 0.06 400 0.15 0.5 0.996 18 0 4.5 0.03 400 0.15 0.5 0.996 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP 15 0 0 2 18 0 0 2 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR 15 0.15 0.25 0.3 18 0.1 0.15 0.25 END PWAT-PARM4 *** INFILD DEEPFR 2 0 2 0 INTFW IRC 6 0.3 6 0.3 BASETP AGWETP 0 0 0 0 *** LZETP *** 0.4 0.25 PWAT-STATEI <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 15 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 18 0 0 0 0 2.5 1 0 END PWAT-STATEI END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><------- Name ------- > 4 ROOF TOPS/FLAT 5 DRIVEWAYS/FLAT END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** Unit -systems Printer *** User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 1 1 1 27 0 1 1 1 27 0 ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT -INFO <ILS > ******** Print -flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT -INFO IWAT-PARM1 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 24 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** 4 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC 4 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 5 400 0.01 0.1 0.1 END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN 4 0 0 5 0 0 END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATEI <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS 4 0 0 5 0 0 END IWAT-STATEI END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** Basin 1*** PERLND 15 0.11 RCHRES 1 2 PERLND 15 0.11 RCHRES 1 3 PERLND 18 0.04 RCHRES 1 2 PERLND 18 0.04 RCHRES 1 3 IMPLND 4 0.06 RCHRES 1 5 IMPLND 5 0.01 RCHRES 1 5 ******Routing****** PERLND 15 0.11 COPY 1 12 PERLND 18 0.04 COPY 1 12 IMPLND 4 0.06 COPY 1 15 IMPLND 5 0.01 COPY 1 15 PERLND 15 0.11 COPY 1 13 PERLND 18 0.04 COPY 1 13 RCHRES 1 1 COPY 501 16 END SCHEMATIC NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** -><---> User T-series En 1 Metr LKFG *** ---- g in out *** 1 Vault 1 1 1 1 1 28 0 1 END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 25 a ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT -INFO <PLS > ***************** Print -flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT -INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC Al A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** 1 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><-------- ><-------- ><-------- ><-------- ><-------- > *** 1 1 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><-------- > <--- ><--- ><--- ><--- ><---> *** <--- ><---><--- ><--- ><---> 1 0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC -ACTIONS END SPEC -ACTIONS FTABLES FTABLE 1 92 4 Depth Area Volume Outflowl Velocity Travel Time*** (ft) (acres) (acre-ft) (cfs) (ft/sec) (Minutes)*** 0.000000 0.001294 0.000000 0.000000 0.077778 0.001294 0.000101 0.001825 0.155556 0.001294 0.000201 0.002580 0.233333 0.001294 0.000302 0.003160 0.311111 0.001294 0.000403 0.003649 0.388889 0.001294 0.000503 0.004080 0.466667 0.001294 0.000604 0.004469 0.544444 0.001294 0.000704 0.004827 0.622222 0.001294 0.000805 0.005161 0.700000 0.001294 0.000906 0.005474 0.777778 0.001294 0.001006 0.005770 0.855556 0.001294 0.001107 0.006051 0.933333 0.001294 0.001208 0.006320 1.011111 0.001294 0.001308 0.006578 1.088889 0.001294 0.001409 0.006827 1.166667 0.001294 0.001509 0.007066 1.244444 0.001294 0.001610 0.007298 1.322222 0.001294 0.001711 0.007523 1.400000 0.001294 0.001811 0.007741 1.477778 0.001294 0.001912 0.007953 1.555556 0.001294 0.002013 0.008160 1.633333 0.001294 0.002113 0.008361 1.711111 0.001294 0.002214 0.008558 1.788889 0.001294 0.002314 0.008750 1.866667 0.001294 0.002415 0.008938 1.944444 0.001294 0.002516 0.009123 2.022222 0.001294 0.002616 0.009303 2.100000 0.001294 0.002717 0.009481 2.177778 0.001294 0.002618 0.009654 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 26 2.255556 0.001294 0.002918 0.009825 2.333333 0.001294 0.003019 0.009993 2.411111 0.001294 0.003120 0.010159 2.488889 0.001294 0.003220 0.010321 2.566667 0.001294 0.003321 0.010481 2.644444 0.001294 0.003421 0.010639 2.722222 0.001294 0.003522 0.010794 2.800000 0.001294 0.003623 0.010947 2.877778 0.001294 0.003723 0.011098 2.955556 0.001294 0.003824 0.011247 3.033333 0.001294 0.003925 0.011394 3.111111 0.001294 0.004025 0.011539 3.188889 0.001294 0.004126 0.011683 3.266667 0.001294 0.004226 0.011824 3.344444 0.001294 0.004327 0.011964 3.422222 0.001294 0.004428 0.012103 3.500000 0.001294 0.004528 0.012239 3.577778 0.001294 0.004629 0.012375 3.655556 0.001294 0.004730 0.012508 3.733333 0.001294 0.004830 0.012641 3.811111 0.001294 0.004931 0.012772 3.888889 0.001294 0.005032 0.012901 3.966667 0.001294 0.005132 0.013030 4.044444 0.001294 0.005233 0.013157 4.122222 0.001294 0.005333 0.013283 4.200000 0.001294 0.005434 0.013407 4.277778 0.001294 0.005535 0.013531 4.355556 0.001294 0.005635 0.013653 4.433333 0.001294 0.005736 0.013775 4.511111 0.001294 0.005837 0.013895 4.588889 0.001294 0.005937 0.014014 4.666667 0.001294 0.006038 0.014133 4.744444 0.001294 0.006138 0.014250 4.822222 0.001294 0.006239 0.014366 4.900000 0.001294 0.006340 0.014482 4.977778 0.001294 0.006440 0.014596 5.055556 0.001294 0.006541 0.014710 5.133333 0.001294 0.006642 0.014822 5.211111 0.001294 0.006742 0.014934 5.288889 0.001294 0.006843 0.015045 5.366667 0.001294 0.006943 0.015156 5.444444 0.001294 0.007044 0.015265 5.522222 0.001294 0.007145 0.015374 5.600000 0.001294 0.007245 0.015482 5.677778 0.001294 0.007346 0.015589 5.755556 0.001294 0.007447 0.015695 5.833333 0.001294 0.007547 0.019468 5.911111 0.001294 0.007648 0.029820 5.988889 0.001294 0.007749 0.043544 6.066667 0.001294 0.007849 0.135901 6.144444 0.001294 0.007950 0.301791 6.222222 0.001294 0.008050 0.415160 6.300000 0.001294 0.008151 0.477392 6.377778 0.001294 0.008252 0.530181 6.455556 0.001294 0.008352 0.577772 6.533333 0.001294 0.008453 0.621454 6.611111 0.001294 0.008554 0.662057 6.688889 0.001294 0.008654 0.700153 6.766667 0.001294 0.008755 0.736159 6.844444 0.001294 0.008855 0.770384 6.922222 0.001294 0.008956 0.803069 7.000000 0.001294 0.009057 0.834407 7.077778 0.001294 0.009157 0.864551 END FTABLE 1 END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 27 a WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.76 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** RCHRES 1 HYDR RO 1 1 1 WDM 1000 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 1 HYDR STAGE 1 1 1 WDM 1001 STAG ENGL REPL COPY 1 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 701 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 48.4 WDM 801 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS -LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS -LINK 2 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS -LINK 2 MASS -LINK 3 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS -LINK 3 MASS -LINK 5 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS -LINK 5 MASS -LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS -LINK 12 MASS -LINK 13 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS -LINK 13 MASS -LINK 15 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS -LINK 15 MASS -LINK 16 RCHRES ROFLOW COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS -LINK 16 END MASS -LINK END RUN 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 28 Predeveloped HSPF Message File 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 29 Mitigated HSPF Message File 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 30 1 Disclaimer Legal Notice This program and accompanying documentation are provided 'as -is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by End Laser. Clear Creek Solutions Inc. and the governmental licensee or sublicensees disclaim all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business Information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions Inc. or their authorized representatives have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Software Copyright © by: Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 2005-2017; All Rights Reserved. Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 6200 Capitol Blvd. Ste F Olympia, WA. 98501 Toll Free 1(866)943-0304 Local (360)943-0304 www.clearcreeksolutions.com 293rd 4/3/2017 9:39:22 AM Page 31 CLEARING LIMITS 6 SOIL STOC C-6 CONSTRUCTION ENTF I LEGEND I - ae SILT FENCE 11 o- �z6 TOPSOIL STOCKPILE Z;��) CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE $a CLEARING LIMITS GRAPHIC SCALE iv + (IN FEET) 11-h - 10 R A PP ROVED CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 3LIC-WPJB,KS DEPARTMENT BY W DATE i � a d xnow whale's below. Call before you dig. NOTE: INLET PROTECTION SHOULD BE INSTALLED AT ALL EXISTING CATCH BASINS WITHIN 100 FEET DOWNGRADE OF THE SITE. -Pau YvIr- r f Y- z Iwo Ld (D Iitzo ILA=r 0 OQ f 0 r� In ZCV1.—O Ld :DO 00C-)Z zU'w0- Q X U m X Of [If XL�.I ::) m s�¢r ImF: TESC PLAN %UT NO. C-4 f "st 6e " StA��Zapk- too, dklt SEEDING NOTES 1. SEEDING MIXTURE SHALL BE GRASS SEED AND SHALL BE APPLIED AT A RATE OF ALB PER 1000SQFT. 2. SEED BEDS PLANTED BETWEEN MAY 1 AND OCTOBER 31 WILL REQUIRE IRRIGATION AND OTHER MAINTENANCE AS NECESSARY TO FOSTER AND PROTECT ROOT STRUCTURE. 3. FOR SEED BEDS PLANTED BETWEEN OCTOBER 31 AND APRIL 30, ARMORING OF SEED BEDS WILL BE NECESSARY (E.G., GEOTEXTILES, JUTE MAT, CLEAR PLASTIC COVERING). 4. BEFORE SEEDING, INSTALL NEEDED SURFACE RUNOFF CONTROL MEASURES SUCH AS GRADIENT TERRACES, INTERCEPTOR DIKES, SWALES, LEVEL SPREADERS, AND SEDIMENT BASINS. 5. THE SEED BEDS SHALL BE FIRM WITH A FAIRLY FINE SURFACE, FOLLOWING SURFACE ROUGHENING. PERFORM ALL OPERATIONS ACROSS OR AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE SLOPE. 6. FERTILIZERS ARE TO BE USED ACCORDING TO SUPPLIERS RECOMMENDATIONS. AMOUNTS USED SHOULD BE MINIMIZED, ESPECIALLY ADJACENT TO WATER BODIES AND WETLANDS. MULCHING NOTES 1. MULCH MATERIALS USED SHALL BE STRAW AND SHALL BE APPLIED AT A RATE OF 100LBS PER 1000SQFT. 2. MULCHING SHALL BE APPLIED IN ALL AREAS WITH EXPOSED SLOPES GREATER THAN 2:1. 3. MULCHING SHALL BE USED IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEEDING OR IN AREAS WHICH CANNOT BE SEEDED BECAUSE OF THE SEASON. 4. ALL AREAS NEEDING MULCH SHALL BE COVERED BY NOVEMBER 1. The purpose aT mulching Bolls is to provide Immedlate temporary protection from erosion. Mulch also enhances plant establishment by cpnserv7rtg moisture, holding fertilizer, seed, and topsoil In place, and moderating Boil tefnpgratures. There Is an enormous variety of mulches that can be used. Only the most common types are discussed In this section. Callditlan9 of UBP As 0 temporary cover measure, mtAch should be used' 60n dlLsturbsd areas that require corer ma00uree for less (hart 30 days 6Aa a cover for seed during the wet season and during the hot Summer months *During the wet mean On elopes steeper lhan 31-:IV with more than 10 feet of Vertical relief mulch may be applfod at any time of the your and must be refreshed periodically, Design and inetallo5on SpeclUcotions For mulch materials, application rates, and specifications, see table below. Note' IhTcknaee mey be increased for dleturbed areas In or near mrmitive oraaa or other oraos highly susceptible to erasion. Mulch used within the ordinary high -crater mark of surface waters should be selected to minimize potential flotation of organic matter. Composted organic materials have higher specific gravltles (densllies) than straw, wood, or chipped material. Maintenance Standards *The thickness of the cover must be maintained *Any areas that experience erosion shall be re -mulched and/or protected with a net or blanket. If the erosion probltsn Is drainage related, then the problem shall be fixed and the eroded area re -mulched. MULCH MATERIAL QUALITY STANDARD APPLICATION RATES / REMARKS Craw r-anefreemm undesirable seed and cot, as per Loeb Oa hra cR va PmttcpDu w a he^ adequate thickness. Hand-appllcatio generally Coarse material 7.0 tons pe, av¢ mqulms greater thickness than blown straw. The thickness of straw may be reduced by half when used In conjunction with seeding. In windy areas straw must be held In place by crimping, using a tacklfler, or covering with netting. Blown straw always has to be held in place with a tadtlBer as even light winds will blow It away. Straw, however, has several deficiencies that should be considered when selecting mulch materiels. It often Imhoduces andfor a -rages the propagation of weed species and It has no significant long-term benents. Straw should be used only If mulches with long-term benefits art ,liable locally. It should also not be used within the ordinary high-water elevation of surface waters (due to natation) yaromu en No Growth inhibnIng factors Approx. -s ossmil per 1,000 sf or be applied with hydramulcim, box n used without seed and tackInerunless the 1,500 - 2,000 lbs app0cation rate Is at least doubled. Fibers longer per sae. then about 0.75 to 1-Inch deg hydmmulrh aqulpment. Fibers should be kept W less than 0.75 Inch. om,post Mulch and p c •coax or st during handling Must be avHwt, approximately. 1D0 Mve -.1-1 can be cerained Increasing thickness to 3 Inches. Excellent mulch Compost purchased From supplier tons for protecting final grades until landscaping with Solid Waste Handling per am because It an be directly seeded or tilled Into soil Permit (unless exempt). (approximately as an amendment. Composted mulch has a 800 Ibs per yard) coarser size gradation than compare. It Is more stable and practical to use In wet areas and during rainy weather mndltions. n,pp site veRge sW 014-11 several Inches. Gradations thickness. Iris is a cost-e ¢Rive way to a,spose at aeons from clearing and grubbing, and It eliminates the Vegetation from fines to 6Inthes In problems associated with burning. Generally, It length for texture, should nN"of4d as Wy a0ove 4;Onxt- 10 variation, and Interlocking percent because of Its tendency to be transported properties, by runoff. It Is not r=-eihded within 200 feet of surface waters. II 5 sing is expected shortly after mulch, the decomposition of the chipped vegetation may tie up nutrients Important to grass establishment. oFduw tone.; .pprox. nn nht - tan ea og ar Ogg. Based during handling. Must be IDO tons per Svc fuel: Il Is usable as a mate•I tfo+SmIeNUM Mulch purchased from a supplier (approx. 800 los. Construction Entrances (BMP C105) and as a with a Solid Waste per Cubic yard). mulch. The use of mulch ultimately Improves the ndling Pcrml[nr one s organic matter In the soil. Special caution Is pt wast fmm soldvlsed ex emid e aregarding the source and composition of regulations. woad -based mulches. Its reparation typically does not provide any weed seed control, se evidence of residual vegetation In Its composition or known Inclusion of weed plants or seeds should be monitored and prevented (or minlmlzed). MULCH OPTIONS 1 4 SCALE: NTS STORMWATER NOTES SILT FENCE NOTES 1. ALL WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNTY STANDARDS 1. FILTER FABR IC SnwLL BE PURCHASED IN A CONTINUOUS ROLL AND CUT TO THE LENGTH OF THE BARRIER TO AVOID USE OF JOJNTS. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, AND THE MOST CURRENT COPY OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FILTER CLOTH SHALL BE SPLICED TOGETHER ONLY AT AS U PPORT POST. WITH A FOR ROAD, BRIDGE, AND MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION (WSDOT / APWA) AND q5 AMENDED BY D MINIMUM 6. OVERLAP, AND SECURELY FASTENED ON BOTH ENDS TO POST. THE COUNTY STATE. 2. TEMPORARY EROSION/WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES SHALL BE REQVTRE➢ IN 2• POSTS SHALL BE A MAXIMUM OF 6' APART AND DRIVEN SECURELY INTO THE GROUND (MINIMUM OF 18"). ACCORDANCE WITH THE PIERCE COUNTY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL AND THE DEPT. OF ECOLOGY'S CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER GENERAL PERMIT. 3• A TRENCH SHALL BE EXCAVATED APPROXIMATELY 8" WIDE AND 12" DEEP ALONG THE SHOULD THE TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES AS SHOWN ON LINE OF POSTS AND FROM THE BARRIER. THIS TRENCH SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITH WAASHEDSHED G GRAVEL. THIS DRAWING NOT PROVE ADEQUATE TO CONTROL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION, THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ADDITIONAL FACILITIES AS NECESSARY TO 4. WHEN STANDARD STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC IS USED, A WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTIES, SENSITIVE AREAS, NATURAL WATER COURSES, AND/OR SHALL BE F"IIENED SECURELY TO THE UPSLOPE SIDE OF THE POSTS U51NG HEAVY STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS. DUTY WIRE STAPLES AT LEAST 1" LONG, TIE WIRES OR HOG RINGS. THE WIRE SHALL EXTEND INTO THE TRENCH A MINIMUM OF 4" AND SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE 3. CALL THE UNDERGROUND LOCATE LINE 1-800-424-5555 A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THAN 24" ABOVE THE ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE. ANY EXCAVATIONS. S. THE STANDARD STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE STAPLED OR WIRED TO THE 4. THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING TO APPROVED PLANS FENCE, AND OF THE FABRIC SHALL BEEINTO THE TRENCH. THE ON FILE WITH THE COUNTY. ANY SIGNIFICANT DEVIATION FROM THE APPROVED PLANS WILL FABRIC SHALLL N NOT EXTEND MORE THAN AAaOVBOVET THE ORIGINAL GROUND REQUIRE WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE COUNTY. S' SURFACE. FILTER FABRIC SHALL NOT BE STAPLED TO EXISTING TREES. 5. A COPY OF THE APPROVED STORMWATER PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOB SITE WHENEVER 6. WHEN EXTRA STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC AND CLOSER POST SPACING IS USED, THE CONSTRUCTION IS IN PROGRESS. WIRE MESH SUPPORT FENCE MAY BE ELIMINATED. IN SUCH A CASE, THE FILTER 6. ALL EROSION CONTROL AND STORMWATER FACILITIES SHALL BE REGULARLY INSPECTED AND FABRIC IS STAPLED OR WIRED DIRECTLY TO THE POST WITH ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF ABOVE NOTES APPLYING. MAINTAINED BY THE DESIGNATED CERTIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL LEAD (CESCL) DURING CONSTRUCTION. 7. FILTER FABRIC FENCES SHALL NOT BE REMOVED BEFORE THE UPSLOPE AREA HAS 7. IT SHALL BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN STREET USE AND BEEN PERMANENTLY STABILIZED. OTHER RELATED OR REQUIRED PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVTTY IN THE 8. FILTER FABRIC FENCES SHALL BE INSPECTED IMMEDIATELY AFTER EACH RAINFALL MUNICIPALITY'S RIGHT OF WAY. IT SHALL ALSO BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AND AT LEAST DAILY DURING PROLONGED RAINFALL. ANY REQUIRED REPAIRS CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED PERMITS PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. THE SHALL BE MADE IMMEDIATELY. CONTRACTOR SHALL ABIDE BY ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL AND SAFETY WHEN WORKING IN THE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY. 9. SILT FENCES WILL BE INSTALLED PARALLEL TO ANY SLOPE CONTOURS. S. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE PROJECT ENGINEER IN THE EVENT OR DISCOVERY OF 10. CONTRIBUTING LENGTH TO FENCE WILL NOT BE GREATER THAN 100'. POOR SOILS, STANDING GROUNDWATER, OR SEVERE DISCREPANCIES FROM SOIL LOG DESCRIPTIONS AS NOTED ON THE PLANS. 11, DO NOT INSTALL BELOW AN OUTLET PIPE OR WEIR. 9. FOR PUBLIC SYSTEMS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL FOR INSPECTION 48 HOURS PRIOR TO 12. INSTALL DOW NSLOPE OF EXPOSED AREAS. COVERING ANY DRAINAGE STRUCTURE. 10. ALL DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, SUCH AS CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES, NOT LOCATED WITHIN 13. DO NOT DRIVE OVER OR FILL OVER SILT FENCES. A TRAVELED ROADWAY OR SIDEWALK, SHALL HAVE SOLID LOCKING LIDS. ALL DRAINAGE STRUCTURES ASSOCIATED WITH A PERMANENT RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITY SHALL HAVE FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL IN SOLID LOCKING LIDS. CONTINUOUS ROLLS USE STAPLES OR PLASTIC COVERING WIRE RINGS TO ATTACH FABRIC TO WIRE PURPOSE WIRE MESH SUPPORT 6" FENCE FOR FILTER MIN. PLASTIC COVERING PROVIDES IMMEDIATE, SHORT-TERM EROSION PROTECTION TO SLOPES FABRIC AND DISTURBED AREAS. I _ NON WO VEN -L' 2' CONDITIONS OF USE """�_ i FILTER FABRIC-----____ II W iylry- PLASTIC COVERING MAY BE USED ON DISTURBED AREAS THAT REQUIRE COVER MEASURES I I "-' ) •T, . FOR LESS THAN 30 DAYS, EXCEPT AS STATED BELOW. 11 ----".-�"'...- -��- \ �. i y �.... _ PLASTIC IS PARTICULARLY USEFUL FOR PROTECTING CUT AND FILL SLOPES AND STOCKPILES. i (. ...., .. MINA 6"X12" "'I I - j S (' TRENCH NOTE: THE RELATIVELY RAPID BREAKDOWN OF MOST POLYETHYLENE SHEETING MAKES IT _ - _ _ R _ _ _ _ ^ _ _ _ UNSUITABLE FOR LONG-TERM (GREATER THAN 6 MONTHS) APPLICATIONS. ti BAC3- ILL 16" MIN. CLEAR PLASTIC SHEETING CAN 8E USED OVER NEWLY -SEEDED AREAS TO CREATE A IF THE HYDROSEED WAS INSTALLED I I 6 MAX' _ I) 3/4"-3" WASHED GRAVEL WASHED GRAVEL I I~ ) AND ON BOTH SIDES OF GREENHOUSE EFFECT AND ENCOURAGE GRASS GROWTH TOO LATE IN THE SEASON TO ESTABLISH 75 PERCENT GRASS COVER, OR 1F THE WET SEASON U FILTER FENCE FABRIC STARTED EARLIER THAN NORMAL CLEAR PLASTIC SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR TH15 PURPOSE DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS BECAUSE THE RESULTING HIGH TEMPERATURES CAN KILL THE 2"X2"XS' WOOD POSTS, GRASS. STANDARD, OR BETTER DUE TO RAPID RUNOFF CAUSED BY PLASTIC SHEETING, THIS METHOD SHALL NOT BE USED UPSLOPE OF AREAS THAT MIGHT BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED BY CONCENTRATED RUNOFF. SUCH LINE FILTER MATERIAL IN B'X12" AREAS INCLUDE STEEP AND/OR UNSTABLE SLOPES. TRENCH AND LEAVE MIN. 2" EXPOSED WHILE PLASTIC IS INEXPENSIVE TO PURCHASE, THE ADDED COST OF INSTALLATION, SILT FENCE MAINTENANCE, REMOVAL, AND DISPOSAL MAKE THIS AN EXPENSIVE MATERIAL, UP TO $1.50 1 TO $2 PER SQUARE YARD. SCALE : NTS WHENEVER PLASTIC IS USED TO PROTECT SLOPES, WATER COLLECTION MEASURES MUST BE STOCKPILING SOIL NOTES INSTALLED AT THE BASE OFTHE SLOPE. THESE MEASURES INCLUDE PLASTIC -COVERED BERMS, CHANNELS, AND PIPES USED TO COVEY CLEAN RAINWATER AWAY FROM BARE SOIL AND 1. STOCKPILES SHALL BE STABILIZED IWITH PLASTIC COVERING OR OTHER APPROVED DISTURBED AREAS. AT NO TIME IS CLEAN RUNOFF FROM A PLASTIC COVERED SLOPE TO BE DEVICE) DAILY BETWEEN NOVEMBER 1 AND MARCH 31. MIXED WITH DIRTY RUNOFF FROM A PROJECT. S MUST BE PREVENTED TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES: 1. APPROVAL OF THIS TC.MPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (TESL) PLAN DOES HOT CON STI LI11 AND APPROVAL OF PERMANENT ROAD OR DRAINAGE DESIGN (E.G. SIZE AND LOCATION OF ROADS, PIPES, RESTRICTORS, CHANNELS RETENTION FACILITIES, UTILITIES, ETC,) 2. THE IMPLEMENTATION EN OF THESE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS AND THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, REPLACEMENT, AND UPGRADING OF THESE E5C FACIL11 TES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR UNTIL ALLLETEO CONSTRUCTION IS COMFAND APPROVED AND VEGETATIONALANDSCAPING IS ESTABLISHED. 3. THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CLEARING LIMITS SHOWN ON THE INIS PLAN SHALL BE CLEARLY FLAGGED IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PER too, NO DISTURBIN DISTURBANCE BEYOND THE CLEARING LIMITS SHALL BE PERMITTED, THE FLAGGJ NG SHALL BE MA INTAI HEO BY THE APPLICANT/Cc NTRACTOR FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. 4. THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTTt11CTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL CLEARING AND GRAOTNG ACTIVTT IES, AND IN SUCH A MANNER AS -to ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT AND SEDIMENT LADEN WATER 00 NOT ENTER THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM, ROADWAYS, OR VIOLATE APPLICABLE WATER STANDARDS. �/ THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS. OU RI NG THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, THESE ESC FACILITIES SHALL BE UPGRADED AS NEEDED FOR UAEXPECTED STORM EVENTS AND TO ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT AND SEDIMENT LADEN WATER DO NOT LEAVE TI IE SITE. Y THE TESC FACILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY BY THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR AND MAINTAINED AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THEIR CONTINUED FUNCTIONING. 7. ANY AREAS OF EXPOSED SOILS, INCLUDING ROADWAY EMBANKMENTS, THAT WILL NOT Be DISTURBED FOR TWO DAYS DURING THE WET SEASON OR SEVEN DAY DURING THE DRY SEASON SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY STABILIZED WrTI I THE APPROVED TESC METHODS IE.G. SEEDING, MULCHING, PLASTIC COVERING, ETC.) S. THE ESC FACILITIES ON INACTIVE SITES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED A MINIMUM OF ONCE A MONTH OR WITHIN 48 HOURS FOLLOWING A STORM EVENT. 9. AT NO TIME SHALL MORE THAN ONE (1) ROOT OF SEDIMENT BE ALLOWED TO ACCUMULATE WITHIN A TRAPPED CATCH BASIN, ALL CATCH BASINS AND CONVEYANCE LINES SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO PAVING. THE CLEANING OPERATION SHALL N07 FLUSH SEDIMENT•LAOBN WATER INTO THE DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM. 10. STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AND ROADS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTAINED FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROTECT. ADDITIONAL MEASURES, SUCH AS WASH PADS, MAY BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE NOTES 1. MATERIAL SHALL BE 4" TO B" QUARRY SPALLS (4" TO 6" FOR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS) AND MAY BE TOP DRESSED WITH 1" TO 3" ROCK. 2. THE ROCK PAD SHALL BE AT LEAST 1a- YIi10H(6' MIN. FOR RESIDENTIAL SFR LOTS) AND 50' LONG (20 FEET FOR SITES WITH LESS THAN 1 ACRE OF DISTURBED SOIL). WIDTH SHALL BE THE FULL LENGTH OF THE VEHICLE INGRESS AND EGRESS AREA, SMALLER PADS MAY BE APPROVED FOR SINGLE FAMILY, PIES IOENTIAL. AND SMALL COMMERCIAL SITES. 3. ADDITIONAL ROCK SHALL BE ADDED PERIODICALLY TO MAINTAIN PROPER FUNCTION OF THE PAD. 4. IF THE PAD DOES NOT ADEQUATELY REMOVE THE MUD FROM THE VEHICLE WHEELS, THE WHEELS THE VEHICLE SHALL BE HOSED OFF BEFORE THE VEHICLE ENTERS A PAVED STREET- THE WASHING SHALL BE DONE ON AN AREA COVERED WITH CRUSHED ROCK AND WASH WATER SHALL DRAIN TO A SEDIMENT RETENTION FACILITY OR THROUGH A SILT FENCE. ExfsSl' ROAD 1 , ► 2. IN ANY SEASON, SEDIMENT LEACHING FROM PILE INSTALL DRIVEWAY CULVERT OTHER USES FOR PLASTIC INCLUDE: IF THERE IS A ROADSIDE • TEMPORARY DITCH LINER 3. TOPSOIL SHALL NOT BE PLACED WHILE IN A FROZEN OR MUDDY CONDITION, WHEN DITCH PRESENT • POND LINER IN TEMPORARY SEDIMENT POND THE 5UBGRADE IS EXCESSIVELY WET, OR WHEN CONDITIONS EXIST THAT MAY BE • LINER FOR BERMED TEMPORARY FUEL STORAGE AREA IF PLASTIC 15 NOT REACTIVE TO OTHERWISE DETRIMENTAL TO PROPER GRADING OR PROPOSED SODDING OR THE TYPE OF FUEL BEING STORED SEEDING. • EMERGENCY SLOPE PROTECTION DURING HEAVY RAINS TEMPORARY DRAINPIPE (-ELEPHANT TRUNK-) USED TO DIRECT WATER. 4. PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED GRADES ON THE AREAS TO BE TOP SOILED SHALL BE DESIGN AND INSTALLATION SPECIFICATIONS MAINTAINED ACCORDING TO THE APPROVED PLAN. PLASTIC SLOPE COVER MUST BE INSTALLED AS FOLLOWS: • RUN PLASTIC UP AND DOWN SLOPE, NOT ACROSS SLOPE • PLASTIC MAY BE INSTALLED PERPENDICULAR TO A SLOPE IF THE SLOPE LENGTH 15 � �1` RECYCLED TIRES/ SANDBAG LESS THAN 10 FEET WEIGHTS • MINIMUM OF B-INCH OVERLAP AT SEAMS 1 , • ON LONG OR WIDE SLOPES, OR SLOPES SUBJECT TO WIND, ALL SEAMS SHOULD BE >r{ ROPE/ SECURE TAPED f e>t TIRES AS A GRID • PLACE PLASTIC INTO A SMALL (12-INCH WIDE BY 6-INCH DEEP) SLOT TRENCH AT THE TOP OF THE SLOPE AND BACKFILL WITH SOIL TO KEEP WATER FROM FLOWING t*� UNDERNEATH 6" MIN. DEPTH 4"-6" QUARRY SPALLS FOR SFR LOTS GEOTEXTILE SEPARATION FABRIC • PLACE SAND FILLED BURLAP OR GEOTEXTILE BAGS EVERY 3 TO 6 FEET ALONG SEAMS III AND POUND A WOODEN STAKE THROUGH EACH TO HOLD THEM IN PLACE • INSPECT PLASTIC FOR RIPS, TEARS, AND OPEN SEAMS REGULARLY AND REPAIR , IMMEDIATELY. THIS PREVENTS HIGH VELOCITY RUNOFF FROM CONTACTING BARE SOIL WHICH CAUSES EXTREME EROSION 1 1` • SANDBAGS MAY BE LOWERED INTO PLACE TIED TO ROPES. HOWEVER, ALL SANDBAGS a MUST BE STAKED IN PLACE. • PLASTIC SHEETING SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 0.06 MILLIMETERS. TRENCH TO CONVEY WATER TO • IF EROSION AT THE TOE OF A SLOPE IS LIKELY, A GRAVEL BERM, RIPRAP, OR OTHER APPROVED DISPOSAL POINT SUITABLE PROTECTION SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE TOE OF THE SLOPE IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE VELOCITY OF RUNOFF. Know What's below. MAINTENANCE STANDARDS PLASTIC COVERING DETAIL • TORN SHEETS MUST BE REPLACED AND OPEN SEAMS REPAIRED 2 Call before you dig. • IF THE PLASTIC BEGINS TO DETERIORATE DUE TO ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION, IT MUST NOTE: USE OLD TIRES, SAND BAGS OR SCALE: NIS BE COMPLETELY REMOVED AND REPLACED EQUIVALENT TO ANCHOR PLASTIC COVERING. • WHEN THE PLASTIC IS NO LONGER NEEDED, IT SHALL BE COMPLETELY REMOVED. R= 25' MIN Sr6 . prS,'p O. r s�,p r• Pf� ��•M}N PROVIDE FULL WIDTH INGRESS/EGRESS AREA CRY OF .FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC W S DEPARTMENT BY DATE _ f�- or Z (LJ O w 0 I �ZO �Cn=r- (n CD ctf 0� 3: O U In In Z N O W O .. OOOZ Z (n Uj a_ Q X U M X Of X X W D a - SLEET TALE TESC DETAILS t4M NO. C-5 4"0 (MIN) PVC PERF ROOFDOWN5POUT.• FOOTING DRAIN. CONNECT CONNECT TO ROOF DRAIN 70 STORM DRAIN OR SYSTEM PER PLAN LOCATION DAYLIGHT TO LOWER GRADE. OF DS TO BE DETERMINED IN FIFI ❑_ PIPE TO BE BEDDED IN PEA GRAVEL OR WASHED ROCK FINISHED GRADE 6" (min) EACH WAY AND ROOF DRAIN SURROUNDED BY SYSTEM PER PLAN NON -WOVEN (Permeable) CINIVIECTM FILTER FABRIC STORM DRAIN. FOR BASEMENT OR RETAINING WALL, WASHED ROCK AND OR SYNTHETIC DRAIN MEMBRANE TO EXTEND FROM FOOTING DRAIN TILE TO WITHIN 12" OF FINISHED GRADE. REFER TO STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR FOUNDATION DETAILS ± I IFLOQR SLAB OR 1r CRAWL SPACEE PER ARCH DETAILS PERFORATIONS TO FACE • • •• I IT}, DOWN. NOTE: LOCATION CAN VARY • ' BUT IN NO CASE SHOULD " FOOTING DRAIN BE ABOVE mI_,14 CRAWL SPACE OR OTHER I _ INTERIOR ELEVATION. DRAIN TILE (PIPE) ROOF/FOOTING DRAIN �1 ' SCALE : NTS ROOF DOWRS41PREFERRED FITTED CAP FINISHED GRAVE ROOF DMN SYSTEM PER PLAN CONNECT TO STORM DRAIN. USE'PAIR' OF 11° USE "Y" FOR ELBOWS FOR END OF CONTINUATION UNIONS. LINE. go- SWEEP ALSO SUITABLE FOR END OF LINE. ROOF DRAIN CLEAN OUT (typical) 2 SCALE : NIS FUSED OR FLANGED CO""ECT1DN SPECIFIED IN PNOFILE/PLAN. g HOPsAMi/�E`Duu1E AND ttE DIMENSION RATiO AS PIPE. 'rpm 'r 2D x ttE DIAM. 1.5 x ROLE aAM. UM. 1.5 XHOLE O 0 0 DIAHETER ORILI• HOLES iN rROHT HALF Or TEL W HOLE oiANVER })' DIVIDED BY a TEE mAAIETER NO HOLES OPPOSITE PIPE [Ex-: a NCH TEE L INW r101" Ta INCH 'ME - a INK71 HOLES) DISPERSION PIPE DETAIL 3 SCALE : NIS TOP OF SLOPE 6" BUTT FUSED HOPE CORRUGATED PIPE SoR325(MM) TIE BARS TOGETHER WITH 60• FB EPDXY COATED REBAR SPACED ROOF DRAIN CLEANOUT GALV. FENCE WIRE 5a' 0 C. DRIVEN MIN 24' INTO GROUND REBAR ANCHOR AT TOPAND BOTTOM OF SLOPE EXISTING ANCHOR REBARANCHOR4'0.0 GRADE DISPERSION PIPE. PERFORATIONS UP LOCATED AT STREAM BUFFER EDGE ORRDINOARY NAL HI�WATER (OHWM) STORM OiUTFALL a SCALE : NIS OPTION 1 - AMEND EXISTING SOILS IN PLACE_ Landscape Areas: 1. Scarify Or till existing subgrade 4 - 6 Inches. (Do nol scarify or till wlthlo drip Ilne of existing trews to be retained). 2. Place and rototlll 3 Inches of composted material (10% organic content) Into 5 Inches of soil for a finished depth of 12 Inches (4-6 Inch scarification + 8 Inches compost/soil =12 Inches) of un-compacted soil. Rake and remove rocks larger than 2 Inches In diameter and mulch areas with 2 Inches of organic mulch. Lawn Areas: 1. Sca rify or UII existing subgrade 4-6 inches. (Do not scarify or till within drip line of existing trees to be retained). 2. Place and rototlll 2 Inches of composted material (5 % organic content) Into 6 Inches of soil for I finished depth of 12 Inches of un-compacted soil. Water or roll to compact soil 85 % of maximum. Rake to level. and remove surface woody debris and rocks larger than 1 Inch In diameter. OPTION 2 • IMPORT TOPSOIL MEETING ORGANIC NTENT STANDAR Landscape Areas: 1� Scarify or nil ex%Ung subgrade In two directions to 6 Inch depth. (Do nut scarify w+thin drlp line of existing trees to be retained). 2. Use imported lop soll mix containing 10 % organic matter (typically around 40% compost). Sall portion must be sand or sandy loam. Place 3 Inches of Imported top soil mb: on surface and till into 2 Inches of sandy soli. Place additional 3 Inches of imported topsoil mix on the surface. Rake smooth and remove surface rocks over 2Inches In diameter. Mulch landscape beds with 2 Inches of organic mulch. Lawn Areas: 1. Scarify or till existing subgrade In two directions to 6 Inch depth. (Do not scarify within drip line of existing trees to be retained). 2. Use Imported [op soil mix containing 5% organic matter (typically around 25% compost). Soil portion must be sand or sandy loam. Place 3 Inches of Imported topsoil mix on surface and till Into 2 Inches of sandy soil. Water or roll tgcompact soil to 85% maximum. Rake to level. and remove surface rocks larger than 1 Inch In diameter. AMENDED SOILS dri- S Iw,�y�•� � VY►IQ� • W � r PROVED CITY OF FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC DEPARTMENT BY DATE I 15. Know what's beIow. Call before you dfg. � Z L~L I O W CD I �Z O D_ V) = I- ln O In � >:N Z CV F__ O U3F-'D� LIJ Do . . 0 o U Z Z V) LIJ a- Q X U M X Elf E X LLJ 5 E- 153 if SHEET TIME: DRAINAGE DETAILS SHELT N0. C-3