Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
98-102890
J. S. ssociaf�s, ... RECEIVED BY ca rx s m ra r ,f1PDEVELQPMENTDEPARTMENT NOV 0 1 2004 Fall 2004 Monitoring of Heritage Woods Div. I & II Federal Way, Washington File No.: SUB98-0003 (98-102890-000-00-SU) Prepared for: Schneider Family Homes 6510 Southcenter Boulevard Suite #1 Tukwila, Washington 98155 (206) 248-2471 October 27, 2004 �1 Prepared by: Lance Erickson, Environmental Designer 35316 28th AVENUE SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 253-874-9588 / FAX 253-874-9579 Executive Summary The following is a brief summary of the information contained in the following report. It is intended to provide background information and our interpretation of the data contained within. It is my hope that this will clear up any confusion regarding the status of the Heritage Woods project. Wetland Hydrology J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. visited the Heritage Woods site on two occasions this past winter and early spring to verify the extent of hydrology within the Heritage Woods wetland mitigation areas. All wetland areas currently meet the wetland hydrology criteria and should continue to do so in the future. Wetland hydrology within Wetland Creation #5 was supplemented in November by installing a dispersion trench on the southern end of the mitigation area. During December 2003, Wetland #5 was saturated to the surface with a water table between 2 to 4 inches. Wetland Creation Areas #4 and #8 were inundated 1 to 2 inches. Wetland Creation "DEA-A" had rapid flow within the channel and saturation within 6 inches of the surface. In March 2004, Wetland #5 was saturated to the surface with a water table between 4 to 6 inches. Wetlands #4 and #8 had pockets of shallow inundation with saturation to the soil surface. Wetland "DEA-A" had rapid flow within the channel and saturation within 6 inches of the surface. Wetland Creation Area #4 Wetland Creation Area #4 was installed in the spring of 2003. Wetland creation area #4 was designed to address the short fall in mitigation area throughout the site. During the initial wetland mitigation installation and subsequent additional mitigation measures, problems arose with regards to the square footage of creation areas. Based upon the approved as built plans and the supplemental creation of Wetland "100", Wetland #4 creates the area required in the original approved wetland mitigation plan. Plant materials within Wetland #4 are thriving. Shallow inundation was present in December 2003 and March 2004. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of the mitigation area. Wetland Creation Area "DEA-A" The approved mitigation plan called for wetland creation area "DEA-A" to be 3,535 square feet in size. The approved as built plan shows the created area being 2,744 square feet. This is the reason for the wetland acreage requirements not being met. Shortfall in mitigation areas are included in the construction of wetland creation area "100", wetland creation area #4 and Wetland "D" enhancement. A native plant community dominated by red alder and salmonberry is developing. Invasive vegetation is minimal. Saturation within 6 inches of the surface was present in December 2003 and March 2004. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of the mitigation area. October 2004 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Wetland Creation Area #5 Supplemental hydrology was added to Wetland #5 during November 2003. Saturation to the soil surface with a water table at 4 to 6 inches was observed during December 2003 and March 2004 site visits. Planted material and volunteers have thrived with the addition of supplemental hydrology. The required wetland creation area is now met at Wetland #5. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of the mitigation area. Wetland Creation Area #7 At the time of initial mitigation installation only 95 square feet of the original 1,425 square feet of mitigation area was created. The chart reflects the amount of wetland area originally designed versus the actual created area as depicted on the approved as built drawings. The created area is as depicted on the as built drawings. A native plant community has developed and there is minimal invasive vegetation. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommended the approval of Wetland #7 during the fall of 2003. No monitoring of Wetland #7 was conducted this year. Wetland Creation Area #8 Wetland creation area #8 is developing a strong native plant community. Willows are currently 12 to 15 feet in height. Planted Sitka spruce and red -osier dogwood are thriving. A slough sedge dominated emergent plant community is developing. Shallow inundation was observed throughout the mitigation area during December 2003 and March 2004 site visits. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of the mitigation area. Wetland Creation Area "100" Wetland creation area "100" was designed to offset the short fall of wetland creation area. Wetland creation area "100' was partially constructed on a Lakehaven Utility District sewer easement. The area of wetland created on the sewer easement cannot be counted as mitigation area. This situation leads to the calculated area being less than the designed area, even though the wetland area has been created. Wetland creation area "100" was created adjacent to the on -site pond. The elevation of the bottom of the wetland is lower than the concrete outflow structure, which regulates the water levels within the pond. Shallow inundation was observed in Wetland creation area "100" during December 2003 and March 2004 site visits. J S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of the mitigation area. October 2004 ii J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 1.0 Introduction This report presents the results of the fall 2004 annual monitoring for the Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Plan. Photos of the mitigation and enhancement areas are attached. 2.0 Results 2.1 Wetland Creation Areas 2.1.1 Wetland Creation Area #4 Wetland #4 was installed in the spring of 2003. This is the second monitoring event for Wetland #4. Tree cover is 60% consisting of red alder, big -leaf maple, Sitka spruce and quaking aspen. Planted tree cover is 20% with existing over hang comprising the other 40%. One dead western hemlock is present in the mitigation area. Shrub cover is 50%, consisting of pacific ninebark, Nootka rose, willow and salmonberry. Supplemental planting of willow cuttings has produced many new shrubs. Ground cover is 95%, consisting of grasses and slough sedge. Invasive cover is less than 5%. Planted species are healthy and thriving. Periodic shallow inundation is present throughout the winter and spring months. Soils are a black (1OYR 2/1) sandy loam. Table 1 Performance Standards YIN Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos* Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 80% Survival rate>80% Yes 82% N/A Ferns >50% N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met Yes 0.063 acres * Visual observations of shallow inundation Dec. 2003 & Mar. 2004 Recommendations .I. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Wetland Creation Area #4 upon completion of the following recommendations. • Remove filter fence • Remove encroaching Himalayan blackberry 2.1.2 Wetland Creation Area "DEA-A" The wetland creation area is on track to meet performance standards. Tree cover is 80%. Red alder and willow, spaced approximately 6'x6', dominate the area. Planted western red cedars are present and thriving. Shrub cover is 60%, dominated by salmonberry and red -osier dogwood. Groundcover is 80%, dominated by creeping buttercup, grasses, herb-robert and soft rush. Invasive vegetation is 5%, consisting of Himalayan blackberry. Tansy ragwort is present along the service road to the west of Wetland "DEA-A". Soils are a black (10YR 2/1) sandy loam. Site observations during the December 2003 and March 2004 show saturation within 6 inches of the soil surface. A water channel and drainage patterns are present. A dense red alder/salmonberry plant community surrounds the plot. October 2004 1 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Table 2 Performance Standards YIN Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr -Pos* Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 80% Survival rate>80% No 70% Ferns >50% Yes 50% Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met Yes 0.063 acres * Visual observations of saturation within 6 inches of the soil surface Dec. 2003 & Mar. 2004. Recommendations J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Wetland Creation Area DEA-A upon the completion of the following recommendations. • Remove invasive Himalayan blackberry and tansy ragwort. 2.1.3 Wetland Creation Area #5 Supplemental hydrology was added to Wetland #5 in November 2003. During subsequent site visits during December and March, the soils were saturated to the surface with a water table between 4-6 inches. Willow, red alder and Sitka spruce have thrived due to the added hydrology. Tree cover is 80%, dominated by red alder, willow and Sitka spruce. Shrub cover is 40%, consisting of salmonberry, snowberry and Nootka rose. Groundcover is 70%, consisting of grasses and soft rush. Some sedge and common speedwell are present as groundcover. Table 3 Performance Standards YIN Criteria Wetland conditions exist No Hydr: Pos* I Soils: Pos Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining No 60% Survival rate>80% Yes 85% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met Yes 0 acres * Wetland hydrology was supplemented during Nov. 2003 through a level flow spreader. Visual observations of saturation to the soil surface during Dec. 2003 & Mar. 2004. Recommendations J S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Wetland Creation Area #5 upon completion of the following recommendations. • Remove Himalayan blackberry from mitigation area • Remove orange construction barrier fence from the northwest corner of the mitigation area October 2004 2 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 2.1.4 Wetland Creation Area #7 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. requested the approval of Wetland Creation Area #7 following the fall 2003 monitoring. Monitoring data was not collected during the 2004 monitoring event. The vegetation surrounding Wetland Creation Area #7 is dense and thriving with minimal invasives. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. again requests the approval of Wetland Creation Area #7. 2.1.5 Wetland Creation Area #8 Dense black cottonwood, red alder and willow dominate Wetland #8. Tree cover is 60%, dominated by Sitka spruce, red alder, willow and black cottonwood. Shrub cover is 50%, dominated by willow and red -osier dogwood. Groundcover is 65%, dominated by slough sedge, soft rush and unidentified grasses. Less than 5% invasive vegetation is present. Soils were a black (1 OYR 2/1) sandy loam. Pockets of shallow inundation were observed during site visits conducted during December 2003 and March 2004. Table 4 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos* Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 90% Survival rate>80% Yes 85% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met Yes 0.18 acres r Visual observations of soil saturation and shallow inundation Dec. 2003 & Mar. 2004. Recommendations J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Wetland Creation Area #8. a Remove Invasive plant material from mitigation area. 2.1.6 Wetland Creation Area "100" The wetland creation area is a success. The mitigation area was implemented in 2000. Performance standards were not provided on the Kuzinski planting plan. The mitigation area meets the performance standards as described in Appendix 11 of the del Moral mitigation plan. The mitigation area meets the five-year vegetative cover standard of 80%. Minimum survival rate for trees, shrubs, and herbs is greater than 80%, including planted individuals and volunteers. Woody plants have more than doubled in height. Ferns are well established. Plants show no sign of disease or abnormal growth. Watermarks and drift lines are present indicating inundation. Seasonal inundation has been observed throughout the past four seasons. Tree cover is 0%. The wetland area was designed as an emergent plant community. Planted Douglas fir were observed in the north and south buffer areas. Shrub cover is 35%. Large willow and red -osier dogwood are present on the perimeter of the wetland area. Groundcover is 90%. Sedges, soft rush and cattail dominate the bottom of the wetland. Invasive Scot's broom is present in the buffer areas. October 2004 3 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Table 5 Performance Standards YIN Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos* I Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Ve etation cover and self sustaining Yes 95% Survival rate>80% Yes 85% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive ve etation Yes 5% Wetland acreage requirements met Yes 0.088 acres * Watermarks and drift lines indicate wetland hydrology is present Recommendations J S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Wetland Creation Area 100 upon the completion of the following recommendations. • Remove invasive Himalayan blackberry and Scot' broom from the buffer area. 2.2 Buffer Enhancement Areas 2.2.1 Buffer Enhancement Area I Buffer Enhancement Area I is located adjacent to Military Road. Litter and debris are present in the enhancement area. Three years ago the volunteer red alder was thinned. Since that time the conifers planted as part of the enhancement have doubled in size. Tree cover is 40%, consisting of Douglas fir, volunteer red alder, big -leaf maple and cottonwood. Shrub cover is 10%, consisting of snowberry. Groundcover is 90%, dominated by unidentified grasses. Less than 10% invasive Scot's broom and Himalayan blackberry are present. Recommendations J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Buffer Enhancement Area I upon the completion of the following recommendations. Remove invasive Scot's broom and Himalayan blackberry from enhancement area • Remove trash from enhancement area • Thin red alder to 6'x6' spacing 2.2.2 Buffer Enhancement Area II Tree cover is 30%, consisting of black cottonwood, red alder, western hemlock, Douglas fir and western red cedar. Shrub cover is 45%, consisting of snowberry and wild rose. The black hawthorn installed in 2002 are thriving. Snowberry installed in 2002 is thriving. Salal and huckleberry are present near the existing large hemlock and Douglas fir. Groundcover is 95%, dominated by unidentified grasses, dandelion, and clover and trailing blackberry. Invasive cover is less than 5%, consisting of Himalayan blackberry and Scot's broom. October 2004 4 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Recommendations J S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Buffer Enhancement Area II upon the completion of the following recommendations. ■ Remove invasive Scot's broom and Himalayan blackberry from enhancement area • Remove trash from enhancement area 2.2.3 Buffer Enhancement Area III A Lakehaven Utility District Easement runs through the middle of the enhancement area. The easement area is a rock road surface approximately 15 to 20 feet in width. The roadway bisects the three plots. No plants were installed in the roadway. Performance standards do not apply to the sewer easement. The remainder of the enhancement area meets the performance standards as described in Appendix 11 of the del Moral mitigation plan. The as built was submitted in January 1997. After five years vegetative cover exceeds 80%. Minimum survival rate for trees, shrubs, and herbs is greater than 80%, including planted individuals and volunteers. Woody plants have more than doubled in height. Ferns are well established. Plants show no sign of disease or abnormal growth. Upon completion of maintenance, we recommend approval of Buffer Enhancement Area III. In the west plot, tree cover is 40%, consisting of western red cedar. Vegetative cover percentages included the area of the sewer easement roadway. Many volunteer red alder are present on the edges of the plot. Shrub cover is 20%, consisting of salmonberry, salmonberry and red elderberry. Groundcover is 80%, dominated by grasses and weeds. Greater than 5% invasive vegetation is present on north and south edges of the plot. No plantings were observed within the easement area. The access road through the plot, is primarily rocked. In the middle plot, tree cover is 25%, consisting of western red cedar, spruce and Douglas fir. Vegetative cover percentages included the area of the sewer easement roadway. Many volunteer red alder are present. Shrub cover is 20%, consisting of snowberry, snowberry and willow. Groundcover is 80%, dominated by grasses, unidentified weeds and horsetail. Greater than 5% invasive Himalayan blackberry is present. No plantings were observed within the easement area. The access road through the plot, is primarily rocked. In the east plot, tree cover is 35%, consisting of western red cedar, Douglas fir, willow, big -leaf maple and red alder. Vegetative cover percentages included the area of the sewer easement roadway. Volunteer cottonwood is present in the southeast corner. Volunteer red alder are present in the southwest corner. Shrub cover is 45%, consisting of salmonberry, snowberry, thimbleberry and red elderberry. Groundcover is 90%, dominated by grasses, horsetail, common speedwell and clover. No plantings were observed within the easement area. Greater than 5% invasive Himalayan and evergreen blackberry is present. October 2004 S J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Recommendations J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Buffer Enhancement Area III upon the completion of the following recommendations. • Remove invasive Himalayan blackberry from enhancement area ■ Remove trash from the enhancement area 2.2.4 Buffer Enhancement Area IV The buffer enhancement area is located on the Lakehaven Utility District easement. Species diversity is low due to dense volunteer red alder. Two 30' x 50' plots are located in buffer enhancement area IV. In the western plot, tree cover is 80%. Dense red alder and some big -leaf maple are present. Shrub cover was 25%, consisting of snowberry and salmonberry. Groundcover is 70%, consisting of grasses and western sword fern. Approximately 10% invasive Himalayan blackberry, Scot's broom and soft rush are present. In the eastern plot, tree cover is 80%, consisting of dense red alder and three Douglas fir. Shrub cover is 20%, consisting of snowberry, osoberry and salmonberry. Groundcover is 60%, consisting of grasses and western sword fern. Invasive vegetation is 25%, consisting of a large wall of Himalayan blackberry along the eastern edge of the enhancement area. Recommendations Since the enhancement area is located on the utility easement no further enhancement measures are recommended. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Buffer Enhancement Area IV in its current state. 2.2.5 Buffer Enhancement Area V Tree cover is 20%, consisting of big-leafmaple, Douglas fir and numerous red alders. Shrub cover is less than 10%, consisting of vine maple and snowberry. Groundcover is 85%, consisting of unidentified grasses, trailing blackberry and birdsfoot trefoil. Less than 5% invasive Scot's broom and Himalayan blackberry is present. Recommendations J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Buffer Enhancement Area V upon the completion of the following recommendations. • Remove invasive Himalayan blackberry and Scot's broom from the enhancement area Remove trash from the enhancement area 2.2.6 Detention Pond Buffer Restoration The enhancement area meets the performance standards as described in Appendix 11 of the del Moral mitigation plan. The as built was submitted in January 1997. After five years vegetative cover exceeds 80%. Minimum survival rate for trees, shrubs, and herbs is greater than 80%, including planted individuals and volunteers. Woody plants have more than doubled in height. Ferns are well established. Plants show no sign of disease or abnormal growth. Upon completion of maintenance, we recommend approval of the Detention Pond Buffer Restoration. October 2004 6 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. In the western plot, tree cover is 6.0%, consisting of Douglas fir, cottonwood and red alder. Shrub cover is 45%, consisting of snowberry and Nootka rose. Groundcover is 90% grasses. Less than 15% Himalayan blackberry and Scot's broom are present. To the north of the plot a dense patch of wild rose is present. In the east plot, tree cover is 65%, consisting of Douglas fir, big -leaf maple and red alder. Shrub cover is 45%, consisting of snowberry. Groundcover is 80%, dominated by grasses. Approximately 20% invasive Himalayan blackberry, Canadian thistle and Scot's broom are present. Recommendations J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Detention Pond Buffer Restoration Area upon the completion of the following recommendations. • Remove invasive Scot's broom and Himalayan blackberry from the enhancement area • Remove trash from the enhancement area 2.2.7 Slope Buffer Portions of the Slope Buffer enhancement area are located within the lots established by the Heritage Woods subdivision. Three 30' x 50' plots were located in the southern slope buffer. In the west plot, tree cover is 45%, consisting of spruce, Douglas fir, western red cedar and red alder. Shrub cover is 20%, consisting of vine maple and snowberry. Groundcover is 85%, dominated by unidentified grasses and clover. Some invasive Scot's broom is present. In the middle plot, tree cover is 45%, consisting of red alder, western red cedar, Douglas fir and spruce. Shrub cover is 20%, consisting of vine maple. Vine maples appear healthy. Groundcover is 95%, dominated by grasses and clover. Less than 5% invasive Scot's broom and Himalayan blackberry are present in the plot. In the east plot, tree cover is 45%, consisting of spruce, western red cedar and Douglas fir. Shrub cover is 20%, consisting of vine maple and snowberry. Groundcover was 95%, dominated by grasses and clover. Less than 5% invasive Scot's broom is present in the plot. Recommendations J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval of Slope Buffer Restoration Area upon the completion of the following recommendations. • Remove invasive Scot's broom and Himalayan blackberry from enhancement area • Remove trash from the enhancement area • Thin red alder to 6'x6' spacing October 2004 7 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 3.0 Landscape Screen The landscape screen located on the north edge of the bioswale is developing well. Conifers are 15 to 30 feet tall. Recommendations J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends approval.of Landscape Screen in its current condition. 4.0 Conclusions When J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. took over the task of monitoring the Heritage Woods site in 2000, many problems with the mitigation and enhancement areas existed. Many of the areas designed as mitigation were not created or created in a different size and shape. This led to a lack of wetland replacement area. Since that time the creation area issue has been resolved with the construction of Wetland #4. Hydrology issues have been resolved through supplemental hydrology measures. Mitigation areas are functioning and thriving as native wetland systems. Planted material has doubled to tripled in size. Trees and shrubs within the enhancement areas are thriving. Invasive vegetation is minimal in most of the mitigation and enhancement areas. The original approved mitigation plan did not take into account many of the site constraints that exist. Enhancement areas were designed on utility easements. Supplemental mitigation areas were created on the same utility easement. Performance standards are impossible to meet within the easement areas because no plant material can be installed in the easement area. Supplemental planting has occurred on the edges of the easement and these plantings are thriving. The Slope Buffer enhancement area was partial designed and created within the lots created by the Heritage Woods subdivision and could be cleared at the homeowner's discretion. The mitigation and enhancement areas are progressing well. Native plant communities are developing with minimal invasive vegetation present. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. recommends the approval of the Heritage Woods Mitigation and Enhancement areas. Prior to approval, we recommend a thorough maintenance visit to remove invasive plant materials; thin red alder in Buffer I and III and remove any trash in the mitigation and enhancement areas. The consulting biologist will be on -site during maintenance activities to supervise and ensure that maintenance is thoroughly and correctly completed. The City of Federal Way will be notified in writing upon completion of the maintenance activities. At that time we recommend release of the bond posted by Schneider Homes, Inc. If you have any questions regarding this report or the data presented, please contact us at 253-874-9588 or by email at bluejayjones@nventure.com. October 2004 8 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. �'S• �y�Y••�•' •1..:.-� -�i; -�•'ryM�.. ' � -T�i fir_ � ._ ,_ _ • Aw �� •�� .�, _ � T .[ erg: �, � �,� t. r►'�' -r jo,VFW - r dw r.tiY��' �,r_ _�,�.; �:f ,v„� iF � s1�`i- � fdf Jam¢, �--• �. - jag v, i. µ •.fir _...Y �._�'`- f�',;r .. � h f � � •� `- r� � _� - - . _��, � -: , >-.�-::.+: ;� ., •il� may, ' � �` =• �� ~�t� rv_ mac. -, -.T•- �• �' � � s":" : a .7 may. .rn - � � �•cy ^ A - . - - f �• � `~ � _ r • -; ,� / � -: .L�� .. �� � r 1 ' ice" • F - �.' - .. •� }~ � �y ''.� i it eA .: OF 10dr 1�rr+ �•�- �r � ��r. - r■ � ram. AM - Ilk � y � '' • _.lam �r - - �� �~ J � • h • � IL Vm jam- . r_ .�. cif �'�`�� "��-` ' �-. ���..�..�...- fEF • Y _,c _• • • ti - i r,1t-�l,��i�� � i _ i 'I.:Sry,��t�r f � iy�` •ia �' � F f fyif-• ' �. `-r r Ali Er Zi• '`� r A I - --- � .. _ � _ram '.X=�y'� •r :' .1, _�•�.Sa� ���"As • - i' __ - -. �_ �� tea... •- � - •�• _ .F � 4^.,_ ` ram, ��- „� �a-. •' S�' F ti � .- � .. f • ., ; _' a -Y y -.. '.5..le s ;}� i �n;� �• � � rw ' 410-11 ; . , •__ ■"mac, '�'.�„• qL • _ f . v r - .. �_---;`�: 3� -�:- ,�..�'.'Ty- �� '-'ffi�g....�_,a,�,' ;. ,• � I WE 1. . 1� •ti • • Point: SlopeBuffer/ "�• � - •rig rl' � ��.:y: r": s .r%•r r�� �,. s 3C':`c:.R:: `ram �; .• ti i,`+: , `,; yr• � - ~ RE�,CIVED BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT d � APR 0 7 2005 A D D L F S Q N 28 March 2005 En44ronmentd Sold Uon.S Mr. Jim Harris City of Federal Way 33325 Eighth Avenue South Post Office Box 9718 Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 Re: Review of Fall 2004 Heritage Woods Monitoring Report, Federal Way Washington Dear Mr. Harris: Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) is pleased to provide our review of the Fall 2004 Monitoring Report for the Heritage Woods mitigation project owned by Schneider Homes Inc. and located in Federal Way, Washington. The Monitoring Report was prepared by J.S. Jones and Associates Inc. and was dated 27 October 2004. Adolfson has in the past conducted site visits, and reviewed monitoring reports, mitigation plans, and other documents pertaining to this project. Our most recent review of the project was documented in a letter to the City dated July 21 2003. Recent Project History In our July 2003 letter, we recommended that information be provided to explain why the wetland acreage requirements have not been met, and how they will be met in the future at the following mitigation sites: + DEA-A, + Wetland Creation Area #7, and + Wetland Creation Area 100. Additionally, we recommended that the following areas be visited early in the growing season to observe the presence or absence of wetland hydrology: + Wetland Creation Area #7, • Wetland Creation Area #8, and + Wetland Creation Area "100". Finally, it was left that Adolfson would visit Wetland "D" Enhancement Area and Buffer Enhancement Area III, and Wetland Creation Area #4 in late summer to determine whether or not these areas could be released from the monitoring regime. ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 'T,( 206 789 9658 1— 206 789 9684 ac�o on�udo oro.�om Harris/Heritage Woods Letter 28 March 2005 Page 2 of 3 Monitoring Review In the current monitoring report, J.S. Jones has recommended approval of the entire mitigation site once recommended maintenance tasks are completed. The focus of Adolfson's site visits, therefore, was to determine whether or not Adolfson's previous recommendations had been met and whether or not final approval for the site by the City would be acceptable under Federal Way code. Adolfson conducted site visits in late summer 2003 and February 2005. Our on -site observations generally agreed with the information provided by J.S. Jones; and our recommendations and requests for additional information were satisfied in the monitoring report. Taking into consideration the varied history of mitigation planning and implementation on the site, plant communities in most areas are developing more or less according to the intent of the overall mitigation approach. Additionally, we were in agreement with the findings of J.S. Jones regarding those areas on the Heritage Woods site needing maintenance and noxious weed removal. During our February 2005 site visit, Adolfson observed the Wetland Creation Area #4 plant community to be developing according to the mitigation plan. A large percentage of the groundcover vegetation in this area consisted of lawn grasses; however the plants specified in the mitigation plan were thriving. This area has only been in the ground since 2003, and despite the presence of shallow inundation in December 2004(outside of the growing season) the site cannot yet be released from monitoring requirements until the five-year monitoring period is complete and grass removal is undertaken. Recommendations We recommend the following: • the non-native grass cover should be removed from Creation Area #4 and that monitoring of the water regime continue until the end of the required five-year monitoring period, or until the City is satisfied that the intent of the mitigation plans have been met. ■ the maintenance tasks recommended in the Fall 2004 Monitoring Report prepared by J.S. Jones should be implemented. • additionally, because the Heritage Woods mitigation site is neither fenced or physically identified or labeled as a wetland mitigation area, the potential for site degradation appears high. Schneider Homes provide some type of interpretive signs or and/or fencing to better define the mitigation area boundaries and provide information to potential visitors to the site. With the exception of Wetland Creation Area #4, we believe that as long as the recommended maintenance tasks are completed, the City would be justified in approving the mitigation plan as complete. Conclusions Based upon the information provided in the 2004 monitoring report as well as observations made by Adolfson during late summer 2004 and February 2005 site visits, we recommend that all areas except Creation Area #4 be released from further Harris/Heritage Woods Letter 28 March 2005 Page 3 of 3 monitoring requirements. The remainder of the mitigation area at Heritage Woods is considered established and complete. Please feel free to call me at (206) 789-9658 if you need clarification on any of this. I would be glad to answer any questions you might have. Sincerely, ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES,INC. Lizzie Zemke Senior Ecologist CT11 --TiR INSCO INSURANCE SERVICES, INC. In C�1C� Developers Surety anUndcnvri[i n Manager for: d Indemnity Company o o ap Indemnity Company of California COMM RECEivED gy 17780 Fitch, Suite 200, Irvine, California 92614 UNITY0tVFLQPM0Tr DEPARTMENT (800) 782-1546 FAX (800) 251-1955 AfU ro V www.InscoDico.com N® 4 200C REQUEST FOR SUDIVISION STATUS J CITY OF FEDERAL WAY P O BOX 9718 FEDERAL WAY WA 98063 Re: Subdivider: Original Bond Amount: Tract Number: Type of Work: Date: 10-28-2005 Bond Number: 521545S SCHNEIDER HOMES INC $ 32,000 BLD98-0208 WETLAND IMPROV & MONITORING/PLAT OF HERITAGE WOODS Please provide our company with the information requested below. Thank you for your assistance. Very Truly Yours, The INSCO/DICO Group 1 By: Service Department, Home Office Are the bonded improvements completed? N(YES ❑ NO If completed: Date of acceptance of work: Attach a copy of the formal bond release. If not completed: Dollar amount of work yet to be completed: $ Estimated completion date: Is the project on schedule? ❑ YES '❑ NO Has the bond been reduced? ❑ YES ❑ NO If yes, to what amount? $ (Please provide a copy of the official reduction.) Do you know of any unpaid bills for labor or materials, Stop Notices or Mechanics Liens? ❑ YES ❑ NO If yes, please give details: �JU�J Remarks / Comments: Signature JAIL," 9 O5 Title/Dept. � ►' ` � r � � r r � � S Date Print Name I Telephone No. FILE CITY OF ti. Federal Way May 16, 2005 Dennis Alfredson Schneider Homes Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd, Suite #1 Tukwila, WA 98155 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253)835-7000 www.ciiyoffederalway.com RE: File No's. 98-102890-000-00-SU and SUB92-0005; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND CONTINGENCY, MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE BOND — Bond Cash Deposit Release Dear Mr. Alfredson: Enclosed is a check for the amount of $2,100.72. This check is for the release of the cash deposits for the two following bonds for Heritage Woods. The first cash deposit release in the amount of $820.72 is for Bond No. 4474235, Wetland Creation and Buffer Enhancement Plan by del Moral and Associates Inc. The second cash deposit release in the amount of $1,280.00 is for Bond No. 521545S for the Heritage Woods Supplemental Wetland Creation and Contingency, monitoring and maintenance. If you have any further questions or need additional information, please contact me at 253-835-2641 or jim.harris@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, r Jim Harris Senior Planner 98-102890 Doc. I.D. 31674 FILF CITY OF Federal May 9, 2005 Dennis Alfredson CITY HALL Way 33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityolfederal wa y. com Schneider Homes Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd, Suite #1 Tukwila, WA 98155 RE: File No's. 98-102890-000-00-SU and SUB92-0005; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND CONTINGENCY, MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE BOND — Bond Release Dear Mr. Alfredson: Pursuant to my April 26, 2005 letter to you, please find enclosed the Full Release of Bond No. 447423S, for the Wetland Creation and Buffer Enhancement Plan by del Moral and Associates Inc., dated revised October 23, 1995. The bond amount is $20,518.00. The wetland monitoring has now been completed and accepted, except wetland creation area #4 as discussed in my April 26, 2005 letter, and your April 29, 2005 response. I have requested a check from the City Finance Department in the amount of $820.72 for the associated cash deposit. This check will be forwarded to you within a few weeks. We appreciate your continuing efforts on this project. If you have any further questions or need additional information, please contact me at 253-835-2641 orjim.hahis@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, im Harris Senior Planner enc: Exhibit B, Full Release of Bond 447423S 98-102890 Doc. I.D. 31568 FULL RELEASE OF BOND # 447423S The undersigned hereby acknowledges that the five (5) year 'contingency, monitoring and maintenance period has expired, that the work or improvements covered by the Agreement and Maintenance Bond for Heritage Woods Division 1, Permit No. SUB92-0005 have been completed to the City's satisfaction and that the City is not aware of any defect in workmanship or materials. Accordingly, the undersigned hereby releases the sum of Twenty Thousand Five Hundred Eighteen Dollars and No/100 Dollars ($20,518.00). DATED this�S �� day of M � CITY OF FEDERAL WAY By: rn Se is �la (Name, Title) FILE CITY OF 4s� Federal May 5, 2005 CITY HALL Way 33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253)835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Dennis Alfredson Schneider Homes Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd, Suite #1 Tukwila, WA 98155 RE: File No. 98-102890-000-00-SU; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND MONITORING - BOND RELEASE Dear Mr. Alfredson: Pursuant to my April 26, 2005 letter to you, please find enclosed the Full Release of Bond No. 521545S. I have also enclosed a copy of a Surety Company Status Inquiry from the Insco/Dico Group for Bond No. 521545S. I mailed the release directly to Insco/Dico. The wetland monitoring has now been completed and accepted, except wetland creation area #4 as discussed in my April 26, 2005 letter, and your April 29, 2005 response. We anticipate receipt of two copies of the Fall 2005 Monitoring Report for Wetland Creation Area #4. We appreciate your continuing efforts on this project. If you have any further questions or need additional information, please contact meat 253-835-2641 or jim.harris@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, Harris Senior Planner enc: Exhibit B, Full Release of Bond 521545S Surety Company Status Inquiry from the Insco/ Dico Group for Bond No. 521545S. 98-102890 Doc. I.D. 31532 EXHIBIT B FULL RELEASE OF BOND # 521545S The undersigned hereby acknowledges that the five (5) year supplemental wetland creation, mitigation, contingency, monitoring and maintenance period has expired, that the work or improvements covered by the Agreement and Maintenance Bond for Heritage Woods Plat, Permit No. SUB98-0003 have been completed to the City's satisfaction and that the City is not aware of any defect in workmanship or materials. Accordingly, the undersigned hereby releases the sum of Thirty Two Thousand Dollars and No/100 Dollars ($32,000.00). DATED this t~ day ofAl CITY OF FEDERAL WAY By: Grp• � rr" 144n r'U/- (Name, Title) 17780 Fitch, Irvine, CA 92614 (949) 263-3300 FAX (949) 252-1955 SURETY COMPANY SUBDIVISION STATUS INQUIRY 10-28-2004 CITY OF FEDERAL WAYRECEIVED BY DATE ()t�I�MUNITYDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT P O BOX 9718 521545S FEDERAL WAY WA 98063 I10V 0 5 2004 BOND NUMBER DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY COMPANY SUBDIVIDER I SCHNIE-IDER-HOMES-INC' DESCRIPTION OF WORK Tract: BLD98-0208 Type of Work: WETLAND IMPROV & MONITORING/PLAT OF HERITAGE WOODS Work to be Completed: Bond Amount: Effective Date: $ 32,000.00 1 $ 32,000.00 1-27-1999 Without prejudicing your rights or affecting our liability under our bond described above, we would appreciate such of the following information as is now available. Very TrulyYours, 1 0350 JM 38044 The INSCO/DICO Group By: rvi e DQ12artment. Home -Office 1. IF THE BONDED IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN COMPLEf O,,PPLEASE STATE: Approximate date of acceptance of work �, Q ) _ ATTACH copy of minutes, if possible. 2. IF THE BONDED IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT COMPLETED, PLEASE STATE: Approximate uncompleted portion of work: $ and or %. Anticipated date of completion 3. Are you aware of any unpaid bills for labor or material, stop notices, or mechanics liens? (check) YES ❑ NO ❑ If yes, please give details. 4. Remarks / Comments: Signature U Date Print Name •-S i nN\ Title/Dept. .-�P-A Lf `�nfr 60rr11.,1. I r ul -Jh� - 1 Telephone No. 95 3 US - 49?,2 (o Y! L COMMUNITY DEVEOPME TT DEPARTMENT I irnll schneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard • Suite #1 • Tukwila, WA 98188 • (206) 248-2471 • FAX (206) 242-4209 April 29, 2005 Jim Harris, Senior Planner City of Federal Way P. O. Box 9718 33525 8th Ave S Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Re: File 98-102890-000-00-SU; Heritage Woods Wetland Monitoring Dear Jim: By this letter, Schneider Homes, Inc. does promise and commit to two additional years of monitoring and reporting of wetland creation area #4; i.e., at least through the fall of 2006, and longer should performance not meet requirements at that time. Respectfully, P.E. Cc: Lance Erickson, J. S. Jones & Associates INC. & Construction www.schneiderhomes,com SC-HN-EI-245 P8 CITY OF � Federal Way April 26, 2005 Dennis Alfredson Schneider Homes Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd, Suite #1 Tukwila, WA 98155 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-97�8 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederal wa y. com RE: File No. 98-102890-000-00-SU; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND MONITORING Dear Mr. Alfredson: The City has reviewed the Fall 2004 Wetland Monitoring for Heritage Woods. The City hereby approves and completes the wetland monitoring for the project except as identified below. The wetland monitoring for wetland creation area #4 must continue for two additional years since the creation area was installed in the spring of 2003 as discussed in the J. S. Jones, October 2004 Wetland Monitoring Report. Federal Way City Code Section 22-1358 requires wetland mitigation monitoring for a minimum of five years. We anticipate the future monitoring of creation area #4 to be summarized in brief monitoring letters provided to the City in the Fall of 2005 and Fall of 2006. Upon written confirmation from Schneider Homes committing to two additional years of monitoring reporting of wetland creation area #4, the City will release the pending Wetland Improvement and Monitoring Bond number 521545S from The Insco/Dico Group. If you have any further questions or need additional information, please contact me at 253-835-2641 or jim.hams@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, 2)Harris Senior Planner enc: March 28, 2005, AAI Wetland Monitoring Report Review Letter c: Lance Erickson, J.S. Jones and Associates, Inc,. 35316 28a' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003 Lizzie Zemke, AAI 98-102890 Doc- I D 31433 CITY OF k Federal Way February 11, 2005 Ms. Lizzie Zemke Adolfson Associates 5309 Shilshole NW Seattle, WA 98107 CITY HALL FILE 33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederal wa y. com Re: File No. 98-102890-00-SU; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND MONITORING Fall 2004 Monitoring Report Review Dear Ms. Zemke: Enclosed is a copy of the Fall 2004 Monitoring of Heritage Woods Division I & II, dated October 27, 2004, from J.S. Jones and Associates Inc. Your firm will continue to review the monitoring reports for the Heritage Woods project, as we have contracted. The wetland report review budget established in the February 1, 1999 AAI letter (enclosed), did not extend out until 2005. However, using the previous monitoring budgets as a basis for determining the budget for this monitoring review, I am hereby authorizing a budget not to exceed $1,155.00 for review of this monitoring report. This budget will leave the City with a remaining monitoring budget to allow one additional year of monitoring review in 2005-2006 (if necessary). Also, enclosed is a February 8, 2005 letter, from J.S. Jones and Associates, responding to questions I asked Lance Erickson in a February 7, 2005 email (enclosed), after I reviewed the monitoring report and visited the site. Finally, a copy of the January 12, 2005, Wetland Mitigation Maintenance Letter and photos by J.S. Jones and Associates is also enclosed. Please review the enclosed revised Fall 2004 monitoring report and provide your written comments to me. Again, the AAI review is to not exceed a cost of $1,155.00. Please contact me at 253-835-2641 orjim.harris@cityoffederalway.com if you have any questions. Sincerely, �-Jirii Harris Senior Planner enc: Fall 2004 Monitoring Report by J.S. Jones and Associates January 12, 2005, Wetland Mitigation Maintenance Letter and Photos by J.S. Jones and Associates February 7, 2005, email from Jim Harris to bluejayjones@nventure.com February 8, 2005, Monitoring Report Summary by J.S. Jones and Associates February 1, 1999, Letter from AAI J. S. Jones a=nd AssociaEes, Inc. (:0MM[1lUlry1) VF'0 M 0EpAF TA4 ENr February 8, 2005 Mr. Jim Harris Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 RE: Heritage Woods Monitoring Reporting Summary City of Federal Way File No.: 98-102890-00-SU Dear Mr. Harris: Thank you for your comments regarding the Heritage Woods Monitoring Review. Please find the construction and monitoring information below for areas 4, 5, 7, 8, DEA- A, and 100. J S. Jones and Associates, Inc. took over monitoring the Heritage Woods Site in 2000. Originally, del Moral and Associates designed the wetland creation and buffer enhancement. A final Wetland Creation and Buffer enhancement plan was submitted to the City of Federal Way by del Moral in October 1995, As -Built documentation was submitted December 1996. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. has documentation of the following historical reporting at the Heritage Woods site. In Fall 1997, del Moral submitted a monitoring report. In 1998 Kucinski Consulting Services Inc. was contracted to monitor the site and they submitted a monitoring report in Fall 1998. No further information on historical reporting is available in J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. files. The original agreed upon performance standard requires 5 years of monitoring. Mitigation Areas 4, 5, 7, 8, and DEA Constructed: Fall1996 Del Moral Monitoring: Fall 1997 Kucinski Monitoring: Fall 1998, Spring 2000 J. S. Jones Monitored: Fall 2000, Spring 2001, Fall 2003, Fall 2004, No monitoring in 2002, as site wide contingency plans was being developed. 35316 28th AVENUE SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 253-874-9588 / FAX 253-874-9579 A Area 100 Constructed: 2000 J. S. Jones Monitored: Fall 2000, Spring 2001, Fall 2003, Fall 2004, No monitoring in 2002, as site wide contingency plans was being developed. Himalayan Blackberry and Scot's Broom Maintenance and Removal Removal of Himalayan blackberry should be scheduled in the spring and early fall of each year. Blackberry canes should be cut 3 inches above ground surface. Cut surfaces should be treated with a wiper application of glyphosate herbicide immediately after cutting. Removal of cut canes is not mandatory as they may provide some habitat for small mammals and bird species. However, if the quantity of cut canes is huge most of the canes should be removed and disposed of offsite. Scot's broom should be removed with a weed wrench that pulls the plant and its roots from the soil. Scot's broom removal should occur in the spring and summer prior to flower and seed formation. All pulled Scot's broom should be bagged and removed from site and disposed of in an appropriate off -site location. Alternately, Scot's broom can be cut 3 inches above ground surface and the cut surface treated with glyphosate herbicide applied with a swabber/wiper applicator. As stated above all Scot's broom maintenance should be conducted early spring and summer prior to flower production and seed set. If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact me at 253-874-9588 or by email at bluejayjones@nventure.com. Environmental Designer cc: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, Inc. Dan Richter, Schneider Homes, Inc. File Copy February 2005 2 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. J. S. a9 Ones &incl Associates, Inc. January 12, 2005 Mr. Jim Harris Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33325 8"' Avenue South Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 RE: Heritage Woods Final Wetland Mitigation Maintenance Fall 2004 City of Federal Way File No.: 98-102890-00-SU Dear Mr. Harris: Schneider Homes, Inc. has completed the final maintenance for the Heritage Woods mitigation area. Invasive plant materials, filter fence and debris were removed from the mitigation and enhancement areas. Plant materials were thinned as needed. Photos of the mitigation and enhancement areas following maintenance are attached. Upon approval of the final maintenance, Schneider Homes request final approval of the mitigation area and release of the mitigation bond. If you have any questions regarding the maintenance, please contact me at 253-874-9588 or by email at bluejayjones@nventure.com. Sincerely Lance Erickson Environmental Designer cc: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes Dan Richter, Schneider Homes 35316 28th AVENUE SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 253-874-9588 / FAX 253-874-9579 ' 1 • �`.�,�=I:.- ;1�. �,r.-.�--...,..�._ " .'—i' �,`•. a �� � . � .1 I—,�"_ie.•�I�iw7 ... _._SL�% .. —--• •- " -., 1. � L I�Tv t , � •Y _:tip - ^G � - .,,' n.�.:j � �ti - _ '.��� VL Vq It 4 - �. may... .....ir: � k-r. f� F'i:r. `.ti •r . _ AL 47— 610- CITY OF (206) 661-0 33530 1ST WAY SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003-6216210 April 20, 1999 Mr. Dennis Alfredson Schneider Homes 6510 Southcenter Blvd, Suite #1 Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Heritage Woods Division 2, Wetland Creation and Mitigation —File SUB98-0003 Dear Mr. Alfredson: Pursuant to your letter of March 11, 1999, due to the extremely wet winter and early spring conditions, the city agrees to defer construction of Heritage Woods wetland creation areas 100 and 200 as you requested. In order to minimize disruption to the existing wetlands and buffers, the excavation for these wetland creation areas must be conducted between June 1, 1999, and August 31, 1999. As identified in previous correspondence, the wetland creation work requires engineering plan review and approval by the city's Public Works Department as the drainage system is proposed to be altered. Please allow between four to eight weeks for review of engineering plans. Therefore, you should be submitting the engineering plans for city review now. Contact Jim Femling, Engineering Plans Reviewer, at (253) 661-4196 with questions about the engineering plan submittal requirements. Second, to ensure the potential success of the wetland and upland plantings, the planting associated with wetland creation areas 100 and 200 should occur during October 1999. The plantings and actions in the January 22, 1999, Supplemental Wetland Creation Plan by Kucinski must be completed by October 31, 1999. Also, as specified in the Kucinski report, an as -built plan will be completed within 45 days of planting (by December 15, 1999). The city will review the as -built upon submittal, and the monitoring will be re -initiated in the Fall of 1999, for both Phases I & II. The planting to be conducted in the Fall of 1999 also includes the plantings and corrections for the wetland mitigation deficiencies originally identified by the delMoral Spring 1997 report, which was submitted to the city in the Fall of 1997. The monitoring schedule in your March 11, 1999, letter is acceptable, provided the Fall 1999 monitoring report includes concurrent submittal of an as -built report and map. Mr. Dennis Alfredson April 20, 1999 Page 2 The city has been diligent in our efforts to review the information submitted regarding the wetland creation and mitigation. Schneider Homes must be committed to the construction and monitoring time frames for this project. The past pattern of deferring construction, planting, and monitoring is not acceptable. Unforseen circumstances do arise with complex projects such as this, however, project management and anticipation of potential problems will help to keep this project on track. Future requests to modify time frames and/or modify the approved plans must be submitted with sufficient time for the city to consider and respond. If you or your wetland biologist disagree with the construction, planting, or monitoring schedule identified above, or if you have any other questions, please contact me at (253) 661-4019. Sincerely, � III Harris Senior Planner c: Jim Femling, Engineering Plans Reviewer L:\PRMSYS\D000MEI,MSUB98 00.03\CD042099. DOC LonnIschneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard Suite #1 *Tukwila, WA 98188•(206) 248-2471 •FAX (206) 242-4209 March 11, 1999 Jim Harris, Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33530 1st Way S Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 Re: Heritage Woods Division II Wetland Mitigation Dear Mr. Harris: Our two most experienced earthwork construction men have looked at the wetland mitigation that is proposed at Heritage. They agree that it would be extremely difficult to do the work required to create the new wetlands 100 & 200 at this time. It is just too wet in the area of work. Consequently, it is now looking like the new created wetlands will not be done until this summer. It is understood that this means the monitoring schedule must be revised. I have taken the liberty of preparing a revised schedule, attempting to be consistent with that put together by Adolfson Associates. YEAR SPRING FALL 1999 Phases I & II 2000 Phases I & II Phases I & II 2001 Phases I & II 2002 Phases I & II 2003 Phases I & II 2004 Phase II only It is also understood that Adolfson's costs may be different because we are now six months deeper into the 'fuiure. Please advise, if so. I have riot forwarded a copy of this letter to Adolfson, pending your reply. Cc: Dave Nelson Gary Kucinski Respectfully, SC�DER I��7MES, INC. Dom, . s A11redson, P.E. RECEIVED BY Manager of Develop;a> & G�i sti l [ rl"`pART►� nT MAR 16 1999 SC-HN-EI-245 PS CffY OF z r 33530 1ST WAY SOUTH January 28, 1999 Mr. Dennis Alfredson, P.E. Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd, Suite #1 Tukwila, WA 98188 (206) 661-4000 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003-6210 VIA FAX (206) 242-4209 Re: HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION No. 2, FINAL PLAT — City File No. SUB98-0003 Dear Mr. Alfredson: As we have previously discussed, the Supplemental Wetland Creation Plan and remaining landscaping at the rear of Tracts H and J must be financially secured prior to the City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC) meeting on Monday, February 1, 1999. You stated that execution of the bonds can occur in one day. Attached are two original bond forms, one for implementing the Supplemental Wetland Creation and one for implementing the Tracts H and J Landscaping. Please complete both of the bond forms and return to me, including the required cash deposit identified on each bond form. Pursuant to SEPA condition number 4, and consistent with city policy, you are also required to pay for costs associated with city review of the wetland monitoring program. The Supplemental Wetland Creation Plan extends the wetland monitoring two years beyond the existing monitoring schedule, therefore, three more monitoring events are necessary. Attached is memo from Adolphson Associates Inc. (AAI), identifying the cost for reviewing the additional monitoring reports. By Monday February 1, 1998, please provide a check in the amount of $4,505.00 to cover review costs for the additional monitoring reports. Upon submittal of the above referenced bonds and cash, the Supplemental Wetland Creation Plan (revised January 22, 1999) will be approved. As identified in the City Council staff report, construction of the supplemental wetland creation must be completed by March 31, 1999, unless extended by the Director of Community Development Services. Prior to construction of the wetland creation, as specified in my letter of January 7, 1999, Public Works Department approval is required for modification of any of the existing storm drainage improvements. Contact Jim Femling, Engineering Plans Reviewer, at (253) 661-4196 regarding submittal requirements for the Public Works Review. Mr. Dennis Alfredson January 28, 1999 Page 2 The remainder of the landscaping in Tracts H and J must be completed by June 1, 1999, as identified in the City Council staff report and bond form. The city staff recommendation of project approval in the staff report is dependant upon your completion of the two bond forms and wetland monitoring review payment. I will provide you a copy of the staff report and agendas when copies are available. The Land Use/Transportation Committee meeting begins at 5:30 P.M. on Monday, February 1, 1999, and the City Council meeting begins at 7:00 P.M. Tuesday, February 2, 1999. Please call me immediately at (253) 661-4019 if you have any questions Sincerely, )Harris Senior Planner attachments c: Greg Fewins, Principal Planner Jim Femling, Public Works Engineering Plans Reviewer LAPRMSYS\DOCUMEN7\SUB98_00.03TD012899. DOC RECEIVED BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT JAN 19 1999 ►Supplemental Wetland Creation Plan for The Plat of "Heritage Woods" City of Federal Way, WA Prepared by Gary Kucinski Kucinski Consulting Services, Inc. (This Document is a Supplement to the "Final Wetland Creation & Buffer Enhancement Plan" as prepared by del Moral & Associates Revised October 23, 1995) January 12,1999 Revised January 18, 1999 INTRODUCTION: Wetland monitoring by KCS (Gary S. Kucinski) during October 1998 revealed that portions of constructed wetlands at the Heritage Woods subdivision have failed. The specific conditions are shown below. WETLAND IDENTIFICATION DESIGN AREA "AS- BUILT" AREA 12/9/96 CONSTRUCTED WETLAND AREA 12/22/98 12/22/98 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) vs DESIGN AREA #1 2,700 sq. ft. -0- -0- (2,700 sq. ft.) #DEA-"A" 3,525 sq. ft. 2,744 sq. ft. 1,335 sq. ft. (2,190 sq. ft) #4 7,750 sq. ft. Not -0- (7,750 sq. ft.) measured #5 3,000 sq. ft. 8,498 sq. ft. 1,138 sq. ft. (1,862 sq. ft.) #7 1,475 sq. ft. 95 sq. ft. 820 sq. ft. (655 sq. ft.) #8 4,375 sq. ft. 6,633 sq. ft. 7,908 sq. ft. 3,533 sq. ft. 22,825 sq. ft. 11,201 sq. ft. Total Surplus or (11,624 sg. fo (Deficit) As indicated by the above table, constructed wetland areas are 11,624 square feet less than called for on the original design. Two items are notable; 1. The difference between the 1996 "as -built" wetland areas and the 1998 constructed wetland areas can be explained largely by del Moral & Associates interpretation of "as -built" to mean the total area where plants were installed regardless of whether the subject area was confirmed as exhibiting wetland characteristics. 2. The overall project requirements were; Total wetland replacement area needed: Credit given for "natural" pond: 34,631 sq. ft. 01,806) sq. ft. Wetland area to be constructed: 22.825 sq. ft. As shown in the table, 22,825 sq ft of constructed wetland area is consistent with the sum of the Design Area column of the table. Based upon these findings, the City of Federal Way has determined that the 11,624 sq ft of wetland deficit must be corrected. A conceptual plan was prepared to correct the deficit. The plan was presented to Adolfson Associates for their general concurrence and comments. The consultant agreed with the general concept of the plan and offered several helpful suggestions. GOAL: The goal of our correction plan is to: 1. Supply sufficient water to wetland location Area #4 to insure that it becomes wetland as determined by application of the multi -parameter methodology (hydric soil, hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrologic regime). 2. Create 3,900 square feet of functioning wetland adjacent to the western side of the existing "natural" pond. Restore hydrology to the pre-existing wetland "D" so that it once again functions as a wetland. CORRECTION PLAN: The plan to correct the deficit condition at Heritage Woods consists of three parts: Supply additional water to wetland creation areas 44 (7,750 square feet) as contemplated by the del Moral contingency plan. 2. Excavate an area outside the western end of the "natural" pond (2,640 s.f.). This created wetland area is to be known as Wetland 100. The excavation will be in a similar fashion to that employed to create Wetland area #8 3. Excavate and widen along the southern bank of the pond. This created wetland is to be known as Wetland 200. Again, the excavation is to be made similar to created Wetland 8. Effective functioning of these three areas as wetlands would result in the following condition: Existing Wetland Deficit: (11,624) sq. ft. Area #4: 7,750 sq. ft. Wetland 100: 2,640 sq. ft. Wetland 200: 1,260 sq. ft. Net Wetland Surplus or (Deficit) 26 sq.ft. In addition, it appears that the existing wetland "D" has ceased to function as a wetland due to inadequate hydrology. Consequently, we are also proposing that hydrology be restored to wetland "D" by tapping an existing storm water catch basin and discharging that water along the upstream end of wetland "D" (see plan drawing). The speculation is that construction of storm water improvements in the area of wetland "D" has cut off its previous source of water, which resulted in a change from wetland conditions to upland conditions. The previous source of water for wetland "D" was probably surface runoff, which was captured in the depressional area and side slopes of this landscape feature CONSTRUCTION PLANS: The associated drawings provide details and specifications with regard to construction and implementation of this correction plan. • Wetland Creation Area #4 will be made effective by introduction of additional stormwater from catch basin #3. The feeder pipe will be perforated (slotted) and placed along the upper edge of Area #4. Blackberries that have invaded this area are to be removed. Minor grading to remove existing high ground will be necessary to facilitate water coverage. Facilitative vegetation (FAC), which populates this area, will remain. No additional planting is proposed. Natural colonization of species which are compatible with the revised water regime should occur. ■ Wetland "D" is to be restored by tapping in a similar fashion catch basin #2. Feeder pipe details and blackberry clearing are similar to the above specifications for Area #4. The tapping of these catch basins is described in del Moral's Contingency Plans on the original report. After blackberries and/or other undesirable species are removed from the pre-existing wetland "D" area, planting of other species will occur. Salmonberry in 3 to 5 plant clumps will be installed in a random pattern at approximately 7 feet on center. Western Red Cedar will be planted at approximately 30 feet on center. Red Osier Dogwood will be installed at approximately 20 foot centers. Alder and/or cottonwood and willows will be allowed to colonize as volunteers. Blackberries will continue to be removed until desirable species have gained dominance. ■ The newly constructed Wetlands 100 and 200, adjacent to the "natural pond" are intended to be an emergent wetland with a scrub -shrub component. Small -fruited bullrush and/or hard -stem bullrush will be planted in the shallow, meandering trenches (6" — 8" deep), which are to be excavated in the bottom of the wetland area. Sitka Sedge and/or Slough Sedge will be planted adjacent to the trenches. Willows and Red -Osier Dogwood will be planted in those parts of the constructed wetland nearest to the upland buffer. All species will be planted in masses, as is the typical pattern found in nature. Some invasion by red alders, willows and cottonwoods is expected. This will be tolerated, provided that naturally invading species do not become dominant (see the Contingency Plan). The pond fluctuates slowly in response to rainfall and runoff. Summer water levels may be lower than the level of Wetland 100 and 200 in late summer. The level of Wetland 100 and 200 will be such that the deepest part will be 18 inches below the high water level of the pond, which is similar to the depth of the pond. It will slope gradually to the high water level, at which point the surrounding uplands will act as a dam. It is anticipated that plantings will tolerate fluctuations within this range of variation, with emergent species planted lower and shrubs planted higher. Over time, the plants will expand or contract in response to the hydrology that develops, i.e. natural zonation. If the hydrology is found to be excessive during monitoring, remedial actions will be taken. The normal pond surface elevation during the wet season is 372.2 ft., while Wetland area 100 and 200 are at 371.7 ft. It is possible that surface water from the pond that contains suspended sediments could flow into these created wetlands and settle. In order to preclude this, a 12-inch high berm will be constructed between the pond and the wetland creation area. Only openings two feet long @ 20 feet on -center will be constructed to maintain hydrology. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: Performance standards are proposed to be the same as those contained in del Moral & Associates approved wetland mitigation plan (dated 10/23/95) found on page 19. MONITORING PROGRAM Monitoring of the newly created wetland area is proposed to be similar to the program described in the approved del Moral plan (pg. 19-21). However, a single data plot will be established at a representative point in the constructed area. Notes, photo(s), and observations will be based on this point although general observations may be made relative to the entire area. It is acknowledged that the spring 1998 monitoring report was not forthcoming. The monitoring period shall be extended by six months. CONTINGENCY PLAN: Wetland construction projects may fail due to inadequate hydrology, inappropriate soils invasion by weeds, competition from existing species, lack of soil fertility or a variety of other factors. Generally, invasions, competition and fertility problems pose the major threats to wetland restoration projects since hydrology has obviously existed previously. • If sufficient hydrology fails to develop in Area #4, adjustments can be made between the amount of water taken from Catch Basin No. 3 versus Catch Basin No. 4 (there appears to be ample water within the overall storm water system). This condition may be unlikely to occur, since the water taken from both catch basins is designed to saturate Area #4, albeit from different directions. • There is some concern that the new Wetland Creation Areas 100 and 200 may become densely populated by rapidly growing, opportunistic cottonwood and/or alder trees. This has occurred on the opposite side of the pond in Wetland Creation Area #8. While this may be the pattern of natural succession, which Mother Nature chooses to employ, it is not consistent with the intention of constructing an emergent wetland with a scrub -shrub component. The objective will be to enable planted species to gain dominance within the constructed wetland, thereby limiting the opportunity for volunteers to colonize the area. If cottonwood or alder invasion becomes substantial, they should be thinned manually to enable planted species to gain dominance. ■ It is possible that specified plant materials will not be available in sufficient numbers at the time required. The wetland biologist may suggest appropriate substitutions of native materials, but all plant material substitutions must be approved by the City of Federal Way prior to on -site delivery. Replacement species must have similar moisture requirements and fulfill the same general functional and structural role. ■ The landscape contractor must monitor the health of all newly introduced plant material quarterly for one year after the date of planting. Dead plants should be replaced as necessary during the appropriate season. • Nutrient depravation would be alleviated by suitable fertilizing as discussed under maintenance. + Should weeds become too dense, they should be controlled manually. Unchecked, weeds will reduce survival and growth rates of young plants. If plants die, they will be replaced by suitable individuals. If the mortality is sporadic, it is likely that the same species will be recommended. If it is general, then alternative species or habitat alteration will be required. ■ Should damage occur due to erosion, settling or other physical factors, this damage shall be repaired and the cause rectified. • If plants are growing poorly, or show deficiency symptoms during monitoring, additional slow -release fertilizer should be added as needed. ■ If sufficient hydrology fails to develop in the pre-existing Wetland "D" (judged to be an unlikely occurrence), the invert of the new diversion pipe at CB 4 will be lowered further. Note that water will not be diverted from Wetland F. Trickle irrigation may be installed. TIMING: Planting should occur in the wet season (i.e., February or March 1999) to maximize plant survival. If conditions necessitate that plants be installed when the soil is dry, then soil moisture sensors are specified on the drawing. Irrigation is required if indicated by inadequate soil moisture. BONDING REQUIREMENTS: The calculation of the estimated costs is found under separate cover. The City requires a bond 120% of estimated installation cost. MONITORING & SUPERVISION COSTS: The estimate for monitoring and supervision is contained under separate cover. SUMMARY: As part of the mitigation for unavoidable impacts to wetlands and buffers resulting from the development of Heritage Woods, a series of mitigation actions was undertaken. A total of 34,631 square feet of constructed wetlands was identified as mitigation. Of that amount, 11,806 square feet was credited for existence of the large open water "natural" pond. The resulting 22,825 square feet of constructed wetlands was distributed over six locations. As of October 1998, 11,201 square feet of constructed wetland was functioning. 11,624 square feet was not successful. This correction plan proposes to make up for the deficit by; • Assurance that creation area #4 functions effectively through the provision of additional water, • Construction of a new area adjacent to the western edge of the natural pond. • Restoration of Wetland "D" by re-establishing its water supply. The intent of this correction plan is to be simple and achievable. Construction plans, notes, timing, monitoring, performance standards and contingencies are all addressed. DATE 1�v y�e �'m pw`'�s ( ) vdETLAND CONSULTANT TASK AUTHORIZATION FORM 15 December 1998 CITY City of Federal Way 33530 First. Way South Federal Way, Washington 98003 CONSULTANT Adolfson Associates, Inc. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW Seattle, Washington 98107 PROJECT Heritage Woods Mitigation Wetland Delineation Verification PROJECT PROPONENT Schneider Homes, Inc. TASK AUTHORIZATION NO. 97103-80 CITY PLANNER Mr. Jim Harris / Mr. Greg Fewins TASK SCOPE [1] Conduct field review / confirmation of wetland delineation (1 @ 5 hrs, $210.00). [2] Prepare letter -report of findings (1 staff scientist @ 2 hrs, $84.00; 1 senior scientist @ 1 hr, 109.00). [3] Reimbursables (clerical, mileage, copies, etc, $50). TASK SCHEDULE All task elements to be completed and letter report submitted to City staff within two weeks of receipt of signed authorization to proceed. TASK COST Not to exceed $453.00 without a prior written amendment to this Task Authorization. DELIVERABLES Brief letter -report to the City. AUTHORIZATION Iz/��1 City of Federal Way Date /f p Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Steve ffingham, V.P. Operations) Date Adolfson Associates, Inc. MP 97027 -OL -Z fw� n„"I schneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard *Suite #1 ■Tukwila, WA 98188•(206) 248-2471.FAX (206) 242-4209 _20(p S(o 3SgS July 30, 1999 Mr. Jim Harris, Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33530 lst Way S Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 Re: Heritage Woods Wetlands Dear Mr. Harris: We are in the process of constructing mitigating measures as shown on the approved drawing "New Wetland Mitigation Plan" by Kucinski/Alfredson. As the drawing notes require, Gary Kucinski has been on site directing the placement of the slotted pipe intended to divert stormwater to Wetland Creation Area 4 & "existing" Wetland D. When the brush was cleared to install the pipe at Wetland D, it was noted that the grades do not match the contours as shown on drawing "Wetland Mitigation Plan" by Weisman Design Group, Jaeger Engineering, and del Moral & Associates. Consequently, the pipe required adjustment from the general layout shown on the drawing in order to be effective. In addition, Mr. Kucinski noted that a portion of what is shown on the original "Wetland Mitigation Plan" as Wetland D is not now, nor does it appear to have ever been, wetland. It appears the original mapping of the wetland borders (not necessarily the delineation itself) was in error by several feet. This judgment is based primarily on the lack of hydric soil, and is supported by the nature of the existing plant species and the ages of those plants. This would be consistent with the error in contours. Mr. Kucinski had alluded to his skepticism of the accuracy of the original delineation in his "Supplemental Wetland Creation Plan" on the first page, where he states: "The difference between the 1996 "as -built" wetland areas and the 1998 constructed wetland areas can be explained largely by del Moral & Associates interpretation of `as -built' to mean the total area where plants were installed regardless of whether the subject area was confirmed as exhibiting wetland characteristics. " r�►�R�rrry f)EVF_EOUP��Y AUG 3 1999 SC-HN-EI-245 P8 This issue was not pressed at the time of the report preparation because the City and Schneider were having so much difficulty finding agreement on the wetland issue in general. The feeling was that, even if it had never been a wetland, it could probably be made one by the introduction of this stormwater. However, on closer inspection with the brush cleared, it is apparent that the grade is sufficiently steep that it will not be possible to create a wetland where none existed. My concern is that at the end of the monitoring period we will not be able to come up with the square footage matching the "original" square footage. The area is question, if my understanding is correct, is not terribly large, but is probably significant. Therefore, it is my request that the City's wetland consultant, Adolfson & Associates, visit the site along with Gary Kucinski, to revisit the original delineation, and come to an agreement on what has and what has not been wetland. The border of wetland D will then be remeasured by our survey consultant. There is no reason to think that the original mapping is error -free or was done with any more expertise or accuracy than can be reproduced today. Your timely consideration will be appreciated. The re-evaluation must be completed prior to this fall when our landscape crew will go in to plant. Respectfully, SCHNEIDER HIES, INC. lfredson, P.E. of Development & Construction Cc: Gary Kucinski n„" I Schneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard *Suite #1 •Tukwila, WA 98188•(206) 248-2471 •FAX (206) 242-4209 July 30, 1999 Background of Existing Wetland D The following is all that is known and/or understood by Schneider Homes regarding the history of Wetland D. Parklane Ventures applied for a preliminary plat for Heritage Woods. A requirement of the City was to mitigate damages to wetlands on the Heritage Woods site, and to monitor the wetlands for five years. The wetlands at this site were originally delineated and mapped by David Evans & Associates. It is unclear whether DEA was working for the City or for Parklane, though we presume for Parklane. Schneider Homes did not receive a copy of this original report. We do not know who Parklane hired to install the mitigation measures. Parklane retained del Moral & Associates to perform the monitoring. The following pages containing reference to Wetland D are taken from the three del Moral reports that we have in our possession: Final Wetland Creation and Buffer Enhancement Plan October 1995 As -Built Documentation December 6, 1996 Autumn t997 Monitoring October 1997 SC-HN-EI-245 PB 41 ,F INTRODUCTION - PROJECT DESCRIPTION report provides the information to complete successfully a wetland mitigation proj- tage Woods. David Evans & Associates (henceforth DEA) prepared a wetland de- �d evaluation report (DEA 1992) that was accepted by the City of Federal Way. their regulatory analysis was not accepted, resulting in 0.36 acre of additional regu- [�and on the site. This report details mitigation actions to compensate for filling A & L, and for minor construction impacts to other wetlands and buffers of certain This report summarizes impacts resulting from filling Wetlands A and L, as well as minor ,impacts to Wetlands D & E and to buffers resulting from the construction of the drainage system proposed by ParkLane Ventures. The bulk of this report is a description of mitigation actions to replace lost wetland values and functions. This report also evaluates wetland classes found in those wetlands that will be impacted so as to determine the appropriate replacement ratios for each wetland. This report establishes the locations for the replacement wetlands and details the enhancements and wetland creation required to offset the unavoidable impacts of this project. All elements required by the MDNS are included. This report incorporates comments made by the City of Federal Way and its consultants up to October 13, 1995. Along with plans prepared by Jaeger Engineering and Weisman & Associates, it constitutes the Mitigation Plan. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF REPLACEMENT WETLANDS Locations and Sizes of Existing Wetlands The following wetlands occur on -site (Fig. 1). The nomenclature is that of DEA. WL-A is an isolated wetland consisting of 0.11 acre of mixed palustrine forested, scrub - shrub and emergent wetland. This wetland will be filled. The DEA report indicates an overstory of 95% red alder, a shrub layer of 40% hardhack, and an emergent zone of 25% slough sedge. Their marginal notes indicated that the wetland is 80% slough sedge, 70% red alder canopy and 10% hardhack. My observations in April, 1994, indicated that most of the red alder is in the upland (associated with species such as red elderberry and sword fern). For the wetland as a whole, my conservative estimate is that it is 20% forested, 20% scrub -shrub, and 60% emergent wetland. As a result, a weighted replacement ratio of 1.9 to 1 is calculated. In order to replace this 0.11 acre, therefore, 0.21 acre is required (Table 1). In -kind replacement of this wetland would require 0.066 acre of forested wetland, 0.044 acre of scrub -shrub wetland, and 0.099 acre of palustrine wetland (rounded to 0.100 acre). WL-C is 0.19 acres of a mixture of forested (red alder) and scrub=shi-ub- (salmonberry) wetland associated with a stream course, and will not be disturbed. WL-D occurs in two depressions and is connected to the pond. The description of this wetland by DEA is not detailed. It also includes some red cedar, salmonberry and red alder. A total of 0.005 acre of WL-D will be impacted by the drainage system. Replacement at a 2:1 ratio is appropriate. In addition, sewer line construction will temporarily impact 0.02 acre of WL D. It will be enhanced upon completion of construction as described below. as great as replaced wetlands and will cover larger areas. Wetlands will be accessible to the public via access roads and on foot. EXISTING CONDITIONS Soils, hydrology, vegetation and wildlife are described in the David Evans report (1992). Based on this report and my investigations, the following evaluations are summarized. Functions and Values of Existing Wetlands Wetland functions include, but are not limited to: water quality (e.g., sediment and pollu- tion) maintenance, achieved through biofiltration and detention; flood control, achieved by re- taining water and permitting infiltration rather than runoff; ground water recharge; surface water supply, achieved by helping to even the flow of water through the seasons; wildlife habitat, due to the high biotic production and variety of habitats; recreation; open space and education. Wetland A is an isolated depressional wetland that lacks open water and is not connected to any stream. Biofiltration functions are minimal since water entering this wetland is of good quality. It has no detention/retention function. It has moderate wildlife value, is of low produc- tivity, and does not serve any recreational or educational functions at present. WL-L is similar to WL-A, though somewhat larger. wetlands C ADJ E. and F are connected via surface flows to the Pond and then to WL J, which is off -site (DEA, 1992). They have moderate diversity and are dominated by red alder and salmonberry. Overall, their functions are moderate to low. Their ability to improve water quality (biofiltration) is moderate to low. Their flood detention and storage potential are low. Their ability to enhance groundwater is moderate. Their biological support (habitat) functions are low. Impact to Wetlands & Buffer The following long-term impacts have been identified: WL A will be filled and incorpo- rated into the plat. WL L will also be filled, with this area remaining in open space, according to information available at this time. The development may increase noise and light levels in the remaining wetlands, though the wetlands are at a lower elevation and concentrated in the northern portion of the project. Increased impervious surfaces can include higher peals and lower summer base flows and increased water contamination. The drainage plan, including detention ponds and biofiltration swales, will mitigate these potential impacts. This plan concerns itself with direct impacts due to the loss of WL-A_and.with the results _ of impacts to other wetlands and buffers from the storm drainage system. 9 DEA - AREA A (3,525 s.f.). A total of ten red cedars form the matrix for this site. Plants should be at least 3 ft tall to become established quickly. Fifteen Scouler's willows shall be planted in the upper portion of the created site. An additional 15 Pacific willows should be planted in the lower portion of the site. Plants should be grown in 1 gal. pots. Fifteen salmonberries shall be planted in the higher portions of the created zone. This material should either be larger bare -root plants, or in 1-gal. pots. Finally, twenty lady ferns should be scattered within the matrix of woody plants to provide diversity. One -gal plants are standard for this ap- plication. Though this fern is listed as facultative, it is usually found in forested wetlands, rather than in uplands. There is a total of 75 plants in this section, including an evergreen species, a deciduous tree -shrub, a deciduous shrub and a fern. Proximity to WL-E and the pond provides sources for additional colonists. Planting will be irregular, to fill in among existing vegetation. The average spacing of plants in this area is about 6 ft. AREA 5 (3,000 s.f.). This area will be planted with a mixture of 8 Pacific willow and 8 Piper's willow, at 3 ft intervals along the channel. Eight red twig dogwoods will be spaced in the creation area in depressions. A total of 20 salmonberry will be placed in more open areas and along small channels to fill in the creation area. 24 lady ferns will be planted in depressions in clusters of three. AREA 1 (3,000 s.f.). Interspersed among the existing vegetation will be 10 red -twig dogwoods, 20 salmonberry and 30 lady fern. Wetland Enhancement Site WL-D (870 s.f). The wetland will be enhanced after disturbance by the addition of 5 Pacific willows, 3 red cedars and 3 red -osier dogwoods. The 11 plants will be spaced at about 7 ft spacing to cover the disturbance but be at least 5 ft from the drain line. The permanent impact to this wetland fragment is mitigated elsewhere. I A section of WL-D will be traversed by a sewer maintenance road (see note on site plan). In order to minimize impacts to the wetland from heavy equipment, this road shall be constructed using quarry spalls for the crossing. A layer of geotextile filter fabric will be laid down and covered with a 12 inch thick layer of quarry spalls. This is to ensure the continuity of potential hydrologic surface flows through WL-D. Buffer Restoration Sites BUFFER I (2,610 s.f.). This buffer along Military Road requires an evergreen screen and a relatively dense understaxy. Near the property .line, 26 Douglas. fir..(UPL, Pseudotsuga menziesii) will be planted from 2 gaI or Iarger pots at 10 ft intervals. A staggered iow'of 26 ied cedars from 2 gal. pots shall be planted 6 to 8 feet inside the property line. Finally, 52 snowberry (FACU, Symphoricarpos albus) shall be planted among the conifers from 1 gal. pots. A total of 104 plants with a mean spacing of 5 ft results. 12 vi c3 L 0 w. t•, 4-. a y C4 0 cd I. U 'C3 C cG a� 3 0 -o a� 0 U •U U O~ u] 4-4 O cz 0 C4 C � T C 4� t4 C C m � O p o 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 0 04 0 0 0 O0 to to bo on on cts on as on i on is cc to J a c a m o 0 0- Q a a a ti O O O O O N O CD CDO CD O i O o0 0o O DD N CD CD CDO O 00 �o C O o N O o 0 o O O O O ram, O O N N O O O O kn N O O N O O O O O O o o o 0 0 oko N o O o rn ko Go N .r pp CDrt 00 �o CON O C4 ON O O O (ON kc DD sz 3 t3 3 ° 3 42 CU a, szo -. cz, to Ca .� 3 3 ,� •" .o H o.� Q 4, °o � o �, R 0 o ' . p 00 rz O a- ca p, o U -d •� v : o o � .d � a,� �, N ?, ►� N o a Q, C2 C� C� U �C 41' U V Enhancement Area D As planned and approved The DEA plan called for enhancement of 0.02 acre (870 s. of wetland, D� This will be accomplished in a disturbed portion of this wetland. Here, fast rflwm— g willows, red cedar and red -osier dogwood will be planted. No herbs are needed since they already occur. Table 8 summarizes the proposed and counted areas. I Table 8. Summary of installation for Enhancement area. I Species # Specified October 1995 # Counted November 1996 Red cedar 3 2 Pacific willows 5 0 Red -twig dogwood 3 0 Salmonberry 0 7 Lady fern 0 3 Total 11 12 As - Built The differences in plantings resulted from analysis in October of the actual conditions. Different species were proposed to match the site mare closely. The vegetation is quite dense and the opportunities for enhancement are more limited than they appeared last year. The vegetation was dense, but it appears that 2 red cedars, no willows or dogwoods, 7 salmonberries and 3 lady ferns were planted. Hydrolobic Discussion Wetland creation projects require coordination of appropriate plant materials, appropriate hydrology and appropriate soils. Under normal circumstances in this region, soils will develop hydric properties as higher organic content relatively quickly if the appropriate hydrology is maintained. The abilities of plant species to grow under various hydric regimes are relatively well known, though there is some variability in individual responses and genetic potential. Wetland hydrology is usually the most difficult parameter to predict, and is less readily manipulated. On the other hand, it is relatively easy to fine-tune the 10 .s-98 10:29 SITT & HILL EpN�G_ 253 474 0153 P_01 V Table 5. Summary of transect data. Transect I was 6 m long, Transect II was 10 m long, and transect III was 8 m long. Transect I Transect II Transect III Spring Autumn Spring Autumn Spring Autumn Species % Cover % Cover % Cover I % Cover I % Cover % Cover Slough sedge 7.1 ± 4.2 9.2±9.0 4.6 ± 3.5 7.3±4.0 4.8 ± 2.8 5.7±3.0 Recommendations: Continue monitoring shrubs for height and mortality. Discontinue monitoring for soil moisture and herb cover. The wetland appears to have become established, though a considerable portion of its success is due to natural invasion of willows and cotton- woods. Enhancement Area D This site was enhanced with 2 red cedars, 7 salmonberries and 2 lady ferns. They have grown so well that it is difficult to determine which were planted, and which are the natural spe- cies. No further monitoring is planned for this area, and no photos were taken. Recommendation: Discontinue monitoring. Buffer Area Results Detention Area The slopes of the detention pond are within the buffer of Wetland C, off -site. The deten- tion pond slopes are covered with grass, clover, dense snow berry, roses on the lower slopes, 4 ft Douglas fir, and a variety of desirable invaders, including black cottonwood. The lower slope as saLtnonberry in the former wetland creation area that is not now considered to be wetland. Other plants, inc uding some 7577 are surviving in this area anmay contribute to e buff- ering for adjacent vegetation. Plot A is documented by Photos 28 to 31, and the associated Douglas firs are shown in Photo 34. Plot B is documented by Photos 32 to 36. Table 6 summarizes the monitoring results. Table 6. Summary for Detention Pond buffers. Douglas firs are the middle row plants Spring Autumn Species N Height ± Spread N Height ± Spread s.d. s.d. Douglas fir (total) 27 59.9 ± 8.3 --- 19 70.3±14.7* ---- Snowberry—A 52 29.4 ±7.5 3.6 52 35.6±6.7* 14.1 Snowberry—B 28 27.1±6.8 3.1 26 35.5±5.7* 14.0* Nootka rose—B l 1 28.4±9.6 3.0 11 44.7±9.9* 15.5* SEP-10-99 FRI 09 54 AM SCHNEIDER HOMES FAX N0, 206 P42 DEV OPMENTp�PA"RIVY01 SEE n Ischneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcen ter Boulevards suite #1 •Tukwila. WA 98188•(206) 248-2471 aFAX (206) 242.4209 Memorandum 'Co: Gary Kucinski, Kucinski Consulting Services, Fax No. 253-474-0153 J im Harris, City of Fcdcral Way, Fax No. (253) 661-4129 Liz, AdoiFson Associates Fax No. (206) 789-9684 From: Dennis Alfredson, Y. Date: September 10, 1999 Re: Heritage Woods Div 11, Wetland D To conlinn my understanding of our on -site discussion regarding possible discrepancies between the original mapping of Wetland D and the actual conditions: The City will consider evidence that the original mapping was in error in specific locations. Consequcntty, Gary Kucinski will confirm the actual boundaries of what was at one time well and. I Ie is to assume at the st<►rt that the oti 'nal tna in is accurate, and delineate only those w-cas, if any, shown in the original mapping; as wetland and where t1le evidence clearly shows that the mapping was in error. I-lic evidence must be well documentcd, including detailed descriptions of soils and vegetation. [inc exampIc of acceptable evidence is the existence of big -leaf maples obviously older than five years- Another is steep grade, especially combined with lack ofhydric soils, and especially when combined with mature vegetation atypical of wetlands. Uzzie will then review and agree or disagree. The City will accept her decision. We will then have our surveying consultant map those areas, if any, which are agreed were not wetland, and redraw the original mapping. sc-14WEI.2a5 PR 09/10/99 FRI 09:54 [TX/RX NO 63781 CITY OF� �M L >r'7 i 33530 1 ST WAY SOUTH September 15, 1999 Mr. Dennis Alfredson Schneider Homes 6510 Southcenter Blvd, Suite #1 Tukwila, WA 98188 (253) 661-4000 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003-6210 Re: Heritage Woods Division 2, Wetland Creation and Mitigation —File SUB98-0003 Dear Mr. Alfredson: This letter is in response to your July 30, 1999, letter and September 10, 1999, memorandum regarding wetland "D" at Heritage Woods. In summary, you have requested the opportunity to re-evaluate the original wetland delineation boundary of wetland D of Heritage Woods. You suggest Mr. Kucinski (your wetland consultant) is skeptical of the accuracy of the original wetland delineation, which dates back to the early 1990's. Your concern with the boundary of wetland D is summarized in your July 30, 1999, letter which states; "My concern is that at the end of the monitoring period we will not be able to come up with the square footage matching the original square footage. The area in question, if my understanding is correct, is not terribly large, but is probably significant. " At our field meeting on September 7, 1999, you, Lizzie Zemke from Adolfson Associates Inc. (AAI), Gary Kucinski, and I discussed the possibility of re-evaluating the boundary of wetland D and the potential ramifications of this re-evaluation. It was generally agreed upon that there may have been an inaccuracy in the field survey of the wetland (due to the natural topography and mature vegetation we observed). The city agreed that you may have Mr. Kucinski re-evaluate the wetland boundary and provide historical information to document any inaccuracy of the original delineation. Due to the extensive project history in regards to wetlands, any proposal to re- establish or modify previously delineated wetlands must be extremely well documented and discussed in writing by Mr. Kucinski as it appears the hydrology of wetland D may have been altered during infrastructure construction for Heritage Woods. As I stated at the meeting, the city will thoroughly review and scrutinize this proposal to re-establish a wetland boundary which was initially prepared by a wetland specialist on behalf of the previous property owner and confirmed by the city's wetland consultants. Mr. Dennis Alfredson September 15, 1999 Page 2 Lizzie Zemke with AAI will review the delineation and provide a written recommendation to the city for our review and final decision. All costs incurred by AAI must be paid by Schneider Homes, with a deposit required prior to authorization. Schneider Homes will be billed for the site visit by AAI on September 7, 1999. If the city should agree there was an error in the original wetland boundary, and wetland D is not as depicted on the original wetland delineation and as -built drawing, then Schneider Homes would be obligated to maintain, enhance, and monitor the actual size and location (revised) of wetland D as discussed in the original approved wetland report. Please be sure not to confuse this discussion of the size and location of wetland D with Schneider Home's obligation to fulfill the wetland creation area of 25,003 square feet as identified on page 3 of the December 9, 1996, as -built wetland report by Roger delMoral.' I understand your concern on this matter was sparked while implementing the supplemental wetlanIcreation plan provisions contained in the Kucinski report, revised January 22, 1999. I will also take this opportunity to remind you to secure written approval from Lakehaven Utility District for the intrusions that appear to have been recently created by the excavation of wetland 100 into the sewer line easement. The excavation appears to intrude into Lakehaven's easement and exceeds the limits approved on the Kucinski plan sheet C-1, revised January 22, 1999. Regardless of the outcome of the wetland D issue addressed above, the wetland creation/ enhancement areas must be completed and planted this fall. We look forward to getting this issue resolved and getting the new wetland creation area as -built report this fall, following planting of all impacted areas. If you have any other questions, please contact me at (253) 661-4019. Sincerely, Ji arris Senior Planner ct Jim Femling, Engineering Plans Reviewer Lizzie Zemke, AAI L:\PR,IISYSOOCUVICNTSUB98_00 03\cd091399 doc I Please note the table on page 2 of the Kucinski Supplemental wetland creation plan incorrectly identifies the required wetland creation area of 22,825 square feet, and must be corrected in future as -built and monitoring reports. Kucinski RECEIVED IBY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Consultin 4 Project Planning g JAN 2 8 2000 a Environmental Analysis • Wetlands Delineation Services i 0 Permits & Licenses Gig Harbor, WA Gary Kucinski, Principal ° 2901 South 401h Street (253) 474-6488 Tacoma, WA 98409 Fax (253) 474-0153 A revisit to Wetland "D" at Heritage Woods Division II Introduction The Heritage Woods Development is currently owned by Schneider Homes, Inc. Schneider Homes is completing construction of all houses and has also assumed responsibility for the successful installation of all required improvements such as streets, sidewalks, utilities and wetland impact mitigation features. It is our understanding that the original developer of the Heritage Woods project was Parklane Ventures. The consulting firm of David Evans and Associates was hired (presumably by Parklane Ventures) to delineate wetlands on the site. We believe that this original delineation occurred in 1992. 1 have not seen a copy of the delineation report. During the process of developing the property, some wetland areas were adversely impacted. To compensate for these wetland impacts, the consulting firm of del Moral and Associates was retained to prepare a wetland mitigation plan. Del Moral and Associates was also hired to perform initial monitoring of the mitigation work. The information made available to us with regard to Wetland "D" is not detailed. We understand that it occurred in two topographic depressions and that there was a connection from the wetland to the large, open water storm detention pond located on the property. Prevalent vegetation included red cedar, salmonberry and red alder. It appears that approximately 218 square feet of Wetland "D" was permanently impacted (filled) and another 871 square feet were temporarily impacted. Mitigation (i.e., compensation) was to consist of enhancing 870 square feet of a disturbed portion of Wetland "D" and creating 436 square feet of new wetland. Kucinski Consulting Services (KCS), Gary Kucinski, was requested to assume monitoring of the mitigation features in the fall of 1998. Our first report was submitted in October of that year. As a result of that report, KCS was asked to prepare a "Supplemental Wetland Creation Plan" to correct some of the shortcomings of the original mitigation work. As part of the mitigation planning process, I suggested that "a portion of what is shown on the original 'Wetland Mitigation Plan' as Wetland "D" is not now, nor does it appear to ever have been, wetland." Reason for Revisiting Wetland "D" In a letter dated July 30t", 1999 from Dennis Alfredson, P.E., Manager of Development and Construction for Schneider Homes to Jim Harris, Senior Planner for the City of Federal Way, Mr. Alfredson states his concern. The concern is that at the end of the required five year monitoring period, Schneider Homes will be unable to demonstrate that it has successfully created the total amount of wetland to match the required square footage as called for in the original Wetland Mitigation Plan. If, however, there was an error in mapping Wetland "D" and consequently an error in calculating the area of wetland impact, then the amount of wetland square footage required to be created should be reduced by the mapping error. If this sounds confusing, then let me try to explain it another way. Wetland "D" apparently was originally mapped as containing 9,583 square feet. Calculations showed that 218 square feet of the wetland would be permanently impacted (filled) and another 871 square feet would be temporarily impacted (assumed reversible impacts). The Final Wetland Mitigation Plan (del Moral and Associates, 1995) indicated that 436 square feet of wetland (2:1 ratio), i.e., 2 x 218 = 436 would need to be created in order to compensate for the 218 square feet of wetland permanently impacted. The temporary impacts would be compensated for by enhancing a degraded portion of Wetland "D". If we assume that Wetland "D" was mapped partially in error, then perhaps the permanently impacted portion of Wetland "D" was much smaller than 218 square feet. If so, then the required area of wetland creation (436 square feet) would also be smaller. As a partial aside to the foregoing, one of the goals of the Supplemental Wetland Creation Plan (KCS, 1998) is to "restore hydrology to the pre-existing Wetland 'D" so that it once again functions as a wetland." Although this goal does not affect the calculation of required wetland creation, it nevertheless would be frustrating to attempt to restore hydrology to those parts of Wetland "D" which were never wetlands in the beginning. Results and Discussion At the request of Dennis Alfredson, (see his memorandum to Jim Harris dated September 10th, 1999), KCS delineated the boundary of Wetland "D" as that wetland was thought to have existed in 1992 when David Evans and Associates performed their original delineation. The results of that effort are shown on the enclosed drawing. Our delineation was performed in compliance with the methodology and procedures specified in the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #96-94, March 1997). The Washington State Manual is a revised version of the Department of Army, Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1 (the 1987 Manual). The 1987 Manual is the standard wetland delineation manual used by federal agencies. These referenced manuals set forth methodology wherein wetlands are determined by the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology (the multi -parameter) methodology). Our field work was accomplished on September 30'h, 1999. The attached data sheets describe our findings. Sample points were established at seven locations in order to identify the perimeter of Wetland "D". The wetland appears to have occurred in two small topographic depressions that were connected through surface hydrology by a narrow corridor. The information supplied by David Evans and Associates indicates that the wetland has a hydraulic connection to the primary storm water pond located downstream of Wetland "D". This was not clearly evident to me. However, I have continued to show the connection based primarily on visual observation of topography. Wetland "D", as "recreated" by me, is substantially smaller than the area originally mapped as wetland. This appears to be the case primarily because I believe that the linear connection between the two topographic depressions is narrower than the original mapped wetland. Wetland "D" Calculated size per 1992 David Evans and Associates Delineation - 9,583 square feet. Calculated size per 1999 KCS "Re-creation" of 1992 delineation - 5,369 square feet. Based on the re-creation of the 1992 delineation, it appears that the size of Wetland "D" was calculated larger than the actual wetland boundaries would dictate. It is my understanding that the City of Federal Way will request that their wetland consultant, Adolfson Associates, Inc. review this report and provide comments with regard to agreement or disagreement with my findings. Adjustment to wetland impact calculations and wetland creation requirements (if any) can then be made. Please refer to the enclosed drawing and the attached data sheets for detailed information regarding our findings. DATA FORM I (Revised) Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corns Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: �j�/�. �� Gimps Date: � 300Pcf Applicantlowner:�ffit/E/,pC/? ir9�� _ ,�JG • County: 1 Investigators : r� () G7•� / cr..�s/� Stare: GrJ•� �� S11/R: Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? y no Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? es Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? y n Plot ID: Explanation of at ical or problem area: (cr VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vin Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator % /✓ SD c e HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC / ev Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing in PhysiologicaUreproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Wetland plant database Morphological adaptations Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Technical Literature Other (explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROL GY Is it the growing season? yes no Water Marks: yes no Sediment Deposits: yes no on Based on: soil temp (record temp'_) Drift Lines: yes no Drainage Patterns: ye no other (explain) ��j Dept. of inundation: inches Oxidized Root (live roots Local Soil Survey: yes no Channels <12 in. es no Depth to free water in pit: inches ��� FAC Neutral: yesr Water-stained Leaves ye no Depth to saturated soil: inches Check all that apply & explain below: Other (explain): Stream, Lake or gage data: / Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? yes��9�' f Rationale for decision/Remarks: SOILS S�— Map Unit Name PyG.�gp� (Series & Phase) T Profile Description Depth Horizon (inches) Drainage Class Grp Field observations confirm Yes Nv's map ep d type? Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, (Munsell moist) (Munsell moist) size & contrast structure, etc. s Hydric Soil icators: (check all that apply) Histosol Matrix chroma 5 2 with mottles Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Concretions Sulfidic Odor High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils educing Conditions Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chr a (=1) matrix Other (ex lain in remarks) Hydric soils present? y no . Rationale for decision/Remarks:j� p�q,✓/G . %/�GS /S v.� c��' �� r ��c �r�.'ssreW� o�✓' iiic� ca�.s�.—ism ��� .�►y�r'� 00 Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? ye no Hydric soils present? } no Is the sampling point yes no Wetland hydrology resent? ye no within a wetland? Rationale/Rernarks: NOTES: Drawing of soil profile match description) Revised 4/97 DATA FORM f(Revised) Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Weiland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: Applicant/owner:�,'/A/E/,pC`/-, e- S .�.•��G . Investigator(s): Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? } Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? es Is the area a potential Problem Area? ! ye Explanation of atypical or Problem area: ;zr, e-4.h VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = no ;V=vi Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: Date: County: I AA 7 State: S/T/R: Community ID: TransectID: Plot ID: Stratum % cover i Indicator % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing in Physiological/reproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Wetland plant database Morphological adaptations Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Technical Literature Other (ex lain) Hyionale for vegetation present? yes no 7Ge Rationale for decision/Remarks: Jti HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? aes no Water Marks: yes Based on: soil temp (record temp') on Drift Lines: yes other Dept. of inundation: inches Oxidized Root (live r /�Q Depth to free water in pit: inches /►/� �i Channels <12 in. ves FAC Neutral: yes Depth to saturated soil: inches Check all that apply & explain below: Other (explain): Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial hotoara hs: Other: Wetland h} drolo present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: Sediment Deposits: ) Drainage Patterns: y Local Soil Survey: y Water -stained Leaves Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Profile Description Depth Horizon (inches) _le Matrix color I Mottle colors I Mottle abundance (Munsell (Munsell size & contrast moist) moist) AW-Ale- :�y� llr /�/ .yyd Drainage Class ,-40 AIZ7 Field observations confirm es No mapped type? Texture, concretions, structure, etc. Sys,,, y AZ Drawing of soil profile (match description) Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) Histosol ✓Matrix chroma <_ 2 with mottles Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Concretions Sulfidic Odor High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Reducing Conditions Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma (=l atrix Other (explain in remarks) Hydric sails present? yes n .I�or Rationale for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes n Hydric soils present? yes n Is the sampling point yes Wetland hydrology resent? yes n within a wetland? [� _ Ra'tionale/Remarks: NOTES: Revised 4/97 -7 — DATA FORM I (Devised) Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: 0��!r5oP/7507e;Zt Date: 3I Applicandowner:�ffit/�/,pC/� �f�s ,,,lc . County: � 1,44 �'i , S tate:/. -Investigator(s): �� % C����� / S/T/R: Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? y no Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? es Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? ye n Plot ID: Fac lanation of atypical or roblem VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = Dominant Plant Species Stratum 9c cover Indicator ��,01.-PX6, HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC AS= 4::FP0r Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing in areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Morphological adaptations Technical Literature Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes Z;r Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? }e no Based on: soil temp (record temp ) other (ex lain}� � Dept. of inundation: inches ;V=vi Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover I Indicator PhysiologicaUreproductive adaptations Wetland plant database Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Other (explain) Depth to free water in pit: inches Aall�lG Depth to saturated soil: inches Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial hotoara hs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? yes r Rationale for decision/Remarks: Water Marks: yes Sediment Deposits: yes na on Drift Lines: yes n Drainage Patterns: yes ❑ Oxidized Root (live roots Local Soil Survey: yes o Channels <12 in. es n FAC Neutral: yes a Water -stained Leaves w- nv Other (explain): SOILS Sia Map Unit Name �w�/t/G�/G0217 (Series & Phase) T S�— Drainage Class �LfGt/O Field observations confirm Yes No mapped type? Profile Description f Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil (inches) (Munsell (Munsell size & contrast structure, etc. profile moist) moist) (match description) I Hydric dicators: (check all that apply) I?Histosol Matrix chroma < 2 with mottles Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Concretions Sulfidic Odor High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Conditions Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List 7eeducing leyed or Low-Chr (=1) matrix Other (explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? My no Rationale for decisionlRemar 7:96 `o�� fjf`O p��i�isr/Gr,✓y/ Gv��l9i✓� ��� . Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes n Hydric soils present? es Is the sampling point yes tic, Wetland hydrology resent? es no within a wetland? Rationale/Remarks: - - NOTES Revised 4/97 DATA FORM 1 (Revised) Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Cogs Wetland Delineatiori Manual) '. Project/Site: Date: � 34 /47 �;' Applicant/owner:�,e/A/,,--/,pC/,' �►fG . County: Investitrator(s]: G7.grr ` e�,�lS/� State: SJI.IR: / Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ye no Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? es Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? ye n Explanation of atypical or problem area: :!� Plot ID: VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vin Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator S 30 EGG HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC 4�1 Q Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing in Physiological/reproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation y Wetland plant database Morphological adaptations Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Technical Literature Other (explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? yes no Based on: soil temp (record temp ) other (ex lain Dept. of inundation: inches Depth to free water in pit: Depth to saturated soil: _ Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or cage data: Aerial hotoara hs: Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decision/Remarks: inches -111�ve inches yes Other Water Marks: yes on Drift Lines: yes Oxidized Root (live I Channels <12 in. yes FAC Neutral: yes Other (explain): Sediment Deposits: yes Drainage Patterns: Local Soil Survey: Water -stained Leaves SOILS /110��- y Map Unit Name _ (Series & Phase) sub S/p _ Drainage Class Field observations confirm e No _ s mapped type? ] Profile Description Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil (inches) (Munsell (Munsell size & contrast structure, etc. profile moist) moist) (thatch description.01 LL Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) Histosol Matrix chroma <_ 2 with mottles Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Concretions Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture'Regime Reducing Conditions High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma (- atrix Other (explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes n Hydric soils present? yes n Wetland hydrology resent? yes Is the sampling point yes no within a wetland? - RationalelRemarks: �l�p— �I 'e�' �AG,9 ���� J plc i� � 70�lrlgvll,1G ajv �'a..J . A�rq w�.✓ NOTES: Revised 4/97 • ` , ' DATA FORM I (Revised) Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Co s Wetland Delineation Manual) "* Project/Site: Applicantlowner:�ffit/�/,pC/�G,�r���r-,,�fC , County: ��N �� � State: S/T/R: Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ye no Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? es Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? }e n Explanation of atypical or problem area: �/� �,rf•- �- Plot ID: _Sp —S VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vin Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover Indicator �+� �nI G�■L !� ZD 7 HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC / _ 7Q Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing in PhysiologicaUreproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Wetland plant database Morphological adaptations Personal knowledge of regional Technical Literature plant communities Other (explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? }es no WaterE1,1aryes n Sediment Deposits: yes n❑ on Based on: soil temp (record temp' ) Drift yes o Drainage Patterns: yes no other (explain Dept. of inundation: inches Oxidized Root (live Too Local Soil Survey: es o Y Y �/ N��e Channels <12 in. es no Depth to free water in pit: inches FAC Neutral: yes o Water -stained Leaves yes a Depth to saturated soil: inches Check all that apply & explain below: Other (explain): Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial hotoQra hs:� ther: Wetland hydrology present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: 11� a.J� �?SrTlO.J Gv/i'/7/.✓ � �j SOILS Sp-� Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) T r� Drainage Class 1 t!! eg: rl' _ Field observations confirm Yes manned tvT)e? Profile Description Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil (inches) (Munsell (Munsell size & contrast structure, etc. profile moist) moist) (match description100, Hydric Sndicators: (check all that apply) VHistosol Matrix chroma <_ 2 with mottles Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Concretions Sulfidic Odor High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Reducing Conditions Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chr a (=1) matrix Other (ex lain in remarks). Hydric soils present? yes no Rationale for decisi6n1Remark . Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soils present? Wetland h droloa resent? e no no Is the sampling point ye no y no within a wetland? Rationale/Remarks: NOTES: Revised 4/97 uf. 1 DATA FORM f (Revised) Routine Wetland Detennination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Cos Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: f�W179« ps ApplicanUowner��.::�fit/�/,pC/z Investieator(s): Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? )' Is the site significantly disturbed (atypica;situation)? es Is the area a potential Problem Area?Ex lanation of at ical or problem area:� VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = Dominant Plant Species Stratum 90 cover Indicator !i ! .so ;tee ve HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC �a=4075p Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Date: County: X State:./ S/T/R: no Community ID: TransectID: n Plot ID: r; V = vin Dominant Plant Species Stratum % cover I Indicator Visual observation of plant species growing in PhysiologicaUreproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Wetland plant database Morphological adaptations Personal knowledge of regional plant communities ✓ Technical Literature Other (explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes n Rationale for decision/Remarks: M/ 141-4 AV: 74 HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? es no Water Marks: yes no Sediment Deposits: yes no 141 Based on Dept. of inundation: soil temp (record tem j . other (explain)i►�1 Depth to free water in pit: Depth to saturated soil: Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gage data: y Aerial hotoera hs: _ Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decision/Remarks: _ r` •-cam inches inches AlallQ inches yes Other: 1% on Drift Lines: yes no Oxidized Root (live I Channels_:12 in. yes FAC Neutral: yes Other (explain): Drainage Patterns: yes I Local Soil Survey: yes, Water -stained Leaves SOILS Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Taxonomy (su Profile Description Drainage ClassGf%� Field observations confirm 62. No mapped type? Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, (inches) (Munsell (Munsell size & contrast structure, etc. moist) moist) ifyf Y/-f N�1 ��✓�i r Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) Histosol Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma (=j). atri Hydric soils present? yes Rationale for decision/Remarks: 60,.ioP:!r Wetland Determination (circle) Drawing of soil profile (match description] Matrix chroma <_ 2 with mottles Mg or Fe Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List ff' Other (exr)lain in remarks) i Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes Hydric soils present? yes Is the sampling point Wetland hydrology resent? yes within a wetland? Rationale(Remarks: NOTES: yes no Revised 4/97 } DATA FORM I (Revised) Routine Wetland Determination (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Co s Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: Date: 34 P F Applicantlowner:�,fit/�/,pC/2 �f�s ,,.IG . Covnry: X"ir/ r State: Gt�.904 Investieator(s): r� /� cr..J�/i j SIT/R: Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ye no Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? es n Transect ID - Is the area a potential Problem Area? ye n � Plot ID: Explanation of atypical or rob]em area: VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V = vin Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum 9c cover Indicator Dominant Plant Snecies Stratum % cover Indicator �9�o,•i 1/ r HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: /� % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC _�Y l Check all indicators that apply & explain below: Visual observation of plant species growing Z' in Physiological/reproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Wetland plant database Morphological adaptations Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Technical Literature Other texnlain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes uo Rationale for decision/Remarks:G d.J �0CY/e P� �'/4�5 �J3/ .R� c Crs"i► etr...� HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? yes , no Based on: soil temp (record temp other (ex2lain���&! fe'•JFe"- Dept. of inundation: inches Depth to free water in pit: inches " " `�11140 Depth to saturated soil: inches Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gage data: Aerial phologgraphs: Wetland hydrology present? yes Rationale for decision/Remarks: Other no Water Marks: yes Sediment Deposits: yes n on Drift Lines: yes n Drainage Patterns6;v no Oxidized Root (live ro?not) Local Soil Survey: yes n❑ Channels <12 in. es FAC Neutral: yes no Water -stained Leaves ye no Other (explain): SOILS ��— Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Taxono V Drainage Class Field observations confirm Ye No maDued tvne? ����• a� Profile Description Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil (inches) (Munsell (Munsell size & contrast structure, etc. profile moist) moist) (match description} "oar xw Aov �/,�� /.�,•� I Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) Histosol Matrix chroma 5 2 with mottles Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Concretions Sulfidic Odor High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture'Regime Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Reducina Conditions fisted on National/Local Hydric Soils List Other Gleyed or Low-Chroma (=1) matrix (explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? ye no Hydric soils present? e no Is the sampling point yes no Wetland hydrology resent? no within a wetland? Rationale/Remarks: COTES: e err l•��j �ja�c� fs � � Zpa4','/ .•►�"��I!l.J`'T�Re�ised 4/97 l ■ WON 11 September 2001 Evwironmen.G"a,( .SofuCions Mr. Jim Harris City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services 33530 First Way South Federal Way, Washington 98003-6210 COMMUNrry � VF-LOPMDENBT DEPARTMENT SEP 2 0 2001 RE: Heritage Woods: Changing to an Overall Wetland Enhancement Approach Dear Mr. Harris: Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) is pleased to present the following guidance regarding changes in the Heritage Woods wetland mitigation approach. Several years ago the City of Federal Way approved a proposal for a residential development on the Heritage Woods site. This proposal included creating wetlands in order to mitigate the loss of wetlands that would be eliminated during the development of the site. The Heritage Woods housing development has been completed and most of the houses are now occupied. Due to a number of factors, the attempts at wetland creation on this site have been, to varying degrees, unsuccessful. As you described in your letter to me dated 13 July 2001, the City is considering changing the action plan for this project to an overall wetland area enhancement program rather than pursuing further attempts at wetland creation on the site. In light of the past failures associated with wetland mitigation on this site, Adolfson agrees that changing the overall action plan is appropriate. At your request we are providing the City with the following guidance in order to provide direction to the applicant: It is most important at this point in the project that the new proposal must provide some measurable ecological benefit. Also, years have passed since the original wetland losses were incurred, and more time will pass before this next phase of mitigation is implemented. Therefore it is imperative that whatever is proposed must be successful as well as ecologically valuable. In response to your question regarding whether or not the Washington State Department of Ecology's wetland functions assessment program document would be an appropriate tool to use as a guideline for determining enhancement objectives, we believe that document could be helpful and should be suggested to the applicant. However, the primary wetlands that should be evaluated under the Ecology methodology have already been eliminated from the Heritage Woods site. We suggest that in order to develop appropriate enhancement objectives the consultant look beyond the immediate project area to determine what types of wetlands and wetland functions have been degraded or eliminated in the past in the project vicinity. Then with this information the consultant would look on site to determine how some of the lost features might be replaced or approximated at the on site wetlands. For example if the consultant were to determine ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 'Jet 206 789 9658 1.K 206 789 9684 ado on�cufa`fsan.�o ry Federal Way/Harris letter 11 September 2001 Page 2 of 2 that relatively few forested wetlands remain in Federal Way, development of a forested component in the wetlands on the Heritage Woods site could be proposed. Or if it were determined that flood storage is a wetland function that is generally lacking in Federal Way, then a proposal to improve the flood storage function of the wetlands on the Heritage Woods site could be proposed. The following is a list of items that we believe should be considered by the applicant's consultant: ■ In order to determine the size of the enhancement area, the consultant will need to calculate the current wetland creation deficit —the amount of wetland that has actually been created subtracted from the amount of wetland that was supposed to have been created. The deficit amount will need to be doubled in order to arrive at the amount of wetland that needs to be enhanced per the updated FWCC. ■ An educational/interpretive element should be included in the enhancement proposal. ■ The applicant should propose more than one concept so the City can pick the more appropriate proposal. ■ The applicant/consultant should review the entire project history in order to avoid past mistakes. • Once a concept has been developed, it will be important for the consultant to develop a set of parameters that evaluated both by the applicant's consultant as well as by the City, can be easily measured so that the success or failure of the project can be • A monitoring schedule will need to be developed for the entire mitigation project since the existing monitoring schedule is currently off track. We very much appreciate the opportunity to assist the City with this project. Please feel free to call Andy Castelle or me at (206) 789-9658 if you have questions about what we have provided. Sincerely, ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. l �O� Lizzie Zemke Senior Ecologist 2 CITY OF CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Mr. Jeff Jones November 2, 2001 J.S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 3408 52"d Place NE F1 Lo E Tacoma, WA 98422 Re: File No 98-102890-SU; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND ENHANCEMENT Dear Mr. Jones: This letter is a follow-up to your October 10, 2001, letter and a phone conversation we had on October 26, 2001, regarding wetland enhancement at Heritage Woods. In summary, as specified in my September 24, 2001, letter to Dennis Alfredson, the city has suggested and offered to move to a wetland enhancement program, due in part to the wetland creation area failures and the likelihood for better success with a wetland area enhancement program. Prior to my September 24, 2001 letter, I had discussed this wetland enhancement area concept with both Dennis Alfredson and yourself, and had received what I understood as favorable feedback to proceed with the enhancement concept. Therefore, I thought it was appropriate to provide you with some general parameters for wetland enhancement, rather than requesting you to develop an enhancement program without prior input from the city. My September 24, 2001, letter and enclosed September 11, 2001, Adolfson Associates Inc. (AAI) letter was intended to provide you with general direction and items you should consider in developing an enhancement program. Your October 10, 2001, letter identifies that, "Adolfson made several recommendations that are off base." For the record, I feel it is important to respond to the allegations contained in your October 10, 2001, correspondence. The following briefly responds to each of the several comments in your letter. First, you commented that AAI suggested preparation of a wetland functional assessment, which is unnecessary. Rather, AAI suggested that the Department of Ecology's wetland function assessment program, "...would be an appropriate tool to use as a guideline for determining enhancement objectives...." Again, AAI and city staff suggested using this program as a guideline for developing an enhancement plan rather than providing you without any direction, which may have resulted in additional city review and delay. Second, performance standards were requested as part of the enhancement program. You stated that performance standards are already included within the mitigation plan. I agree that the mitigation/creation area plan includes performance standards; however, an enhancement plan will likely have a different set of performance standards, since the intended goal is different than that of the mitigation/creation area plan. Third, the city suggested an educational/interpretive element be included in the enhancement plan. I agree with your comment that this was not an element of the original mitigation plan. However, recent site visits have indicated a need for this type of signage, due to the frequent use of the area by local inhabitants and pets. Given the circumstances identified in my September 24, 2001 letter, the city feels the educational/interpretive element is a justifiable request. Mr. Jeff Jones Page 2 November 2, 2001 Fourth, alternative enhancement area proposals were requested. The city and AAI's intent of this comment was for you to develop a menu of potential alternatives, that the city would be willing to discuss with you and mutually determine which potential program components would be the most important, ecologically beneficial, and likely to, succeed. Last, you identify time delays in city review of the prior plans and maintenance schedule, and request an expeditious review of future submittals. In response to this allegation, I agree that the city's review of the JS Jones and Associates, Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Plan submitted June 4, 2001, was delayed. However, this delay resulted in the city suggesting shifting to a more achievable wetland area enhancement plan. The plan review delay and city recommendation was due largely because the city's initial review of the June 4, 2001, plan revealed two serious flaws discussed below, which would result in the city requesting further plan revisions and analysis. First, the June 4, 2001, plan proposes new wetland creation area, but contains no analysis of hydrology (water budget) to support the created wetland. The majority of the past creation area failures at the site were due to lack of hydrology to support wetlands. The city would require detailed analysis of the hydrology prior to entertaining any further wetland creation area proposals. Second, in order to implement the new wetland creation area, existing mature (vegetative) wetland buffer would have to be removed (impacted) in order to construct more wetland creation area. The city is not supportive of further impacting existing mature vegetated buffer in order to construct wetland compensation area. Regarding your comments pertaining to creating wetland area atop an existing Lakehaven Utility District sanitary sewer line, I would simply refer you to the May 4, 2001, letter from Lance Erickson (J.S. Jones and Associates) to myself, regarding Lakehaven's concerns and objection to this concept. Further, the creation area in question was constructed without approval from either the city or Lakehaven Utility District. At this time, as we discussed on the phone on October 26, 2001, I expect you to be developing a wetland enhancement program for the city review. The comments and bullet points in AAFs September 11, 2001, letter should be considered as a guideline in assisting you to develop the enhancement area program. The city will require two to three weeks to review a wetland area enhancement plan once it is submitted in its entirety. Again, I encourage you to accept this offer from the city to shift from a wetland creation area program to an enhancement area plan, which is a much more achievable goal. If you have any specific questions regarding the wetland area enhancement plan, you may contact Lizzie Zemke directly at AAI. If you have any other questions, please call me at 253-661-4019. Sincerely, Ills Harris Senior Planner Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, Inc., 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Lizzie Zemke, AAI, 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98107 98-102890-00-SU Doc. I.D. 16916 J. S. i ones siad Associaites, llinc. October 10, 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RECEIVED BY UPMENT DEPARTMENT Mr. Jim Harris City of Federal Way 33530 1st Way South P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 RE: Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation, File No. 98-102890-00-SU Dear Jim: I apologize for the terse phone message I left you. I think you could see that I was disappointed with Adolfson's review. Adolfson made several recommendations that are off -base. First, they suggested that we prepare a functional assessment of on -site and off -site wetlands, in this area of Federal Way. A functional assessment study is unnecessary for design and implementation of contingency measures, which in this case are limited to vegetative enhancement. A functional assessment, of even a portion of Federal Way, will be costly and may be difficult to reach any agreement upon the conclusions. The new DOE methodology they suggested had not been published when initial planning for Heritage Woods mitigation occurred. The DOE methodology requires research, field data collection, mapping, aerial coverage, identification, classification, assessment and calculation of indices for each AU identified. Secondly, they suggested we develop performance standards. The approved mitigation already provides performance standards for wetlands and buffers. Thirdly, they recommend educational/interpretative elements. This would require access to the wetland enhancement area. Human activities would very likely cause harm to these wetlands. Education and interpretative signs were not included in prior mitigation plans. Fourthly, they would like alternative proposals for enhancement. Preparation of alternatives is time consuming and unnecessary for a small enhancement. We would prefer to fax or mail the proposed enhancement area to the city for approval. Lastly, the monitoring schedule and particularly maintenance activities have been delayed by lengthy Adolfson review times. We just waited two months for the last response from the city and Adolfson. A complete functional assessment study, alternative analysis and enhancement planning process, as recommended by Adolfson, will probably take six to eight months, all for an enhancement area of several thousand square feet. A more appropriate time frame would be one month for preparation and approval and implementation this November. We still do not understand why creating wetland on a utility easement is an incompatible use. Lakehaven has many utility easements through sensitive areas. Utilities are generally exempt from wetland regulations, provided wetlands and buffers are restored if disturbed. In the event that Lakehaven works in the area, they would have had to do restoration anyway 3408 52nd Place, N.E. TAC0MA,WASHINGT0N 98422 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 ,y.d because the easement is through wetland buffer. The created wetland on the utility easement is a success and well on it's way to developing a wetland plant community. Schneider Homes, Inc. would very much like to move forward with this mitigation project. They are ready to perform maintenance and implement a wetland enhancement project as soon as it is approved. Please let me how you want us to proceed. Very Truly, Jeffery S. Jones Certified Professional Wetland Scientist cc: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, Inc. Ken Peckham, Schneider Homes, Inc. CITY OF - - s ED V V CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 September 24, 2001 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Mr. Dennis Alfredson Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: File No. 98-102890-00-SU — HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND AREA ENHANCEMENT Dear Mr. Alfredson: Pursuant to our previous discussions, please find enclosed a September 11, 2001, letter from Lizzie Zemke of Adolfson Associates Inc. (AAI) regarding guidelines for preparation of an overall wetland area enhancement plan for Heritage Woods. Due to the extent of the creation area failures, the current deficit of wetland creation area, and the current and anticipated duration of the wetland creation and mitigation program, the city is supportive of changing the action plan toward an overall wetland area enhancement program rather than continuing on with further attempts with the wetland creation area based program. Therefore, given the following circumstances: past wetland creation area failures; exhaustion of all feasible on -site creation areas; documentation of some creation areas successes on -site; timing (duration of on -going wetland creation implementation); further attempts at wetland creation would impact (remove) existing vegetative buffer; feasibility of enhancement as success for mitigation and compensation of impacted wetland areas; and Schneider Homes' ongoing commitment to the project; transitioning to a wetland enhancement is appropriate. In this case, city staff feels that implementing an overall wetland area enhancement plan has much more opportunity for success and ecological benefit, rather than further pursuing construction of wetland creation areas that may not succeed. The applicable city code requirements in effect at the time of the Heritage Woods preliminary plat and wetland displacement approval required in -kind wetland creation (for wetland displacement) and did not allow wetland enhancement. The Federal Way City Code (FWCC) wetland regulation revisions adopted in November 1999 allows wetland enhancement as mitigation for wetland displacement (under certain circumstances). Although the Heritage Woods project is still subject to the code in effect at the time of project approval, staff feels given the circumstances identified above, use of the new wetland code regulations is justifiable for completing the project. Mr. Dennis Alfredson Page 2 September 24, 2001 Please review the enclosed September 11, 2001, AAI letter that contains wetland area enhancement guidelines and respond accordingly to the city with an overall wetland area enhancement plan. Please provide three copies of your draft plan for our review. We look forward to receipt of the plan so it can be reviewed and implemented this fall. Please review the enclosed guidelines from AAI and contact Lizzie Zemke or myself if you have any questions. Schneider Homes will be responsible for the cost of the city's wetland consultant reviewing the overall wetland area enhancement plan, as this action is in addition to anticipated wetland monitoring review of which has been funded by Schneider Homes. Please call me at 253 661-4019 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ]i Harris Senior Planner Enclosure C Jeff Jones, JS Jones Associates Inc., 3408 52nd Place NE, Tacoma, WA 98422 Lizzie Zemke, AAI, 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98107 98-102890-00-SU Doc ID. 16418 CITY OFF` CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 June 27, 2002 Ms. Lizzie Zemke Adolfson Associates 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW Seattle, WA 98107 Re: File #98-102890-00-SU; Heritage Woods Wetland Creation Dear Ms. Zemke: (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 FiL 6 Schneider Homes has provided an updated wetland creation plan as follow-up to our meeting on June 5, 2002, which I have enclosed. In addition, I have enclosed a June 14, 2002, J.S. Jones plan for Proposed Mitigation Area #4. This plan is intended to provide a baseline study of the proposed mitigation site and adjacent wetland to evaluate the selection of the additional mitigation for the current wetland shortage. Please review the provided documents and provide me your written comments. I will be out of the office July 1— 8, 2002. Once I return, please contact me at 253-661-4019 or jiiii.harrisocityofFederalway.com if you have any questions. Sincerely, m Harris Senior Planner enclosures Doc. I.D. 19527 J. S. cones azad �ssocia�es, Inc. June 14, 2002 RESUBMITTED Mr. Jim Harris J U N 1 9 2002 Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33520 First Way South P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 RE: Proposed Mitigation Area #4, Heritage Woods, File Number: 98-102890-SU Dear Mr. Harris: Purpose The following report provides a baseline study of the proposed mitigation site and adjacent wetland to evaluate the selection of the additional mitigation for the current wetland shortage. Mitination Area Chart Mitigation Area Del Moral designed Kucinski Designed Lakehaveu Easement As built as of Dee.2000 Area #1 2,700 sf 0 Area #4 7,750 sf 0 Area #5 3,000 sf 6,210 sf Area #7 1,475 sf 95 sf Area #8 4,375 sf 7,908 sf Area D.E.A. — A 3,525 sf 2,744 sf Wetland 100 3,820 Sf 361 sf 3,459 Sf Total 22,825 sf 3,820 sf 361 sf 20,416 sf 71 Total Designed Area: 26,645 sf Total As -built (Dec. 2000): 20,416 sf Total Wetland to be Mitigated: 22,825 sf Total Wetland Shortage: 2,409 sf Mitigation Area 4 (JSJ 2002): 2,750 sf Mitigation Area Description The proposed mitigation area is a nearly flat, triangular area located between Wetland "D" and the existing pond. The plant community is dominated by unidentified grasses and weeds. The soils are heavily compacted fill. 3408 52nd Place, N.E. TAC0MA,WASHINGT0N 98422 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Methodology Two sample locations were logged. Sample location 1 (SL-1) is located just inside the southern edge of Wetland "D". Sample location 2 (SL-2) is located near the mid -point of the proposed mitigation area (see attached sketch). The data was logged using the Routine Small Area Determination Methodology as described in Part IV, Section D of the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Corps of Engineers, 1987) (see attached data sheets). This determination is based on the presence of the three criteria for jurisdictional wetlands: hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation. Hydrophytic vegetation has developed specific adaptations in order to survive in saturated or inundated environments. The probability of species being found in wetland environments has been determined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands (Region 9) (US FWS, 1996) Hydric soils are defined as those soils that are "saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part" (NTCHS, 1987). They are either organic soils (peats and mucks), or mineral soils that are saturated long enough to produce soil properties associated with a reducing environment. The 1987 manual requires inundation, flooding, or saturation to the surface for at least 5% of the growing season to satisfy the hydrology requirements for jurisdictional wetlands. In Western Washington, wetland hydrology is typically present from December to May, and the growing season is normally from mid -February to mid -November, depending upon location and local climate. The growing season can either be defined by the number of frost -free days (temperatures above 28°F), or the period during which the soil temperature, at a depth of 19.7 inches, is above biological zero (41 °F). Soils USDA Soil conservation Service (SCS) mapped the soils on -site as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15% slopes (AgC)(see attached soil survey). Alderwood gravelly sandy loam typically has inclusions of Norma sandy loam. Norma sandy loam is present in Wetland "D". "In the representative profile, the surface layer is a black sandy loam about 10 inches thick. The subsoil is dark grayish -brown and dark -gray sandy loam and extends to a depth of 60 inches or more" (SCS, 1973). Norma sandy loam is classified as a "poorly" drained and is listed on the state hydric soils list. The soils in the proposed mitigation area are heavily compacted fill. At SL-1 the soils are a hydric Norma sandy loam. From 0 to 14 inches, the "A" horizon is a black (I OYR 2/1) sandy loam. From 14 to 18+ inches, the `B" horizon is a dark yellowish brown (1 OYR 4/4) sandy loam with yellowish brown (1 OYR 5/8) mottles. The soils are hydric because they are a one chroma matrix immediately below the "A" horizon or at ten inches, whichever is shallower (COE, 1987). 2 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. At SL-2 the soils are a non-hydric fill material. From 0 to 14+ inches the soil is a grayish brown (IOYR 5/2) fill material with prominent yellowish brown (IOYR 5/8) mottles. The mottling is maybe remnant of the fill material. The soil is heavily compacted below 4 inches. Hydrology At SL-1, the soils were saturated at the surface and are therefore positive for the hydrology criteria. No water table was present within 18 inches of the soil surface. Evidence of wetland hydrology, such as, watermarks, drainage patterns and matted vegetation are present. At SL-2, saturation is present from 0 to 4 inches. Below 4 inches, the soil is heavily compacted and dry, therefore the surface saturation is not due to a water table, but due to prior grading of the area. Surface hydrology perches on this heavily compacted layer. No water table was present within 14 inches of the soil surface. Vegetation At SL-1, the plant community is dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis, FAC+) and unidentified grasses (Gramineae). Grasses are assumed hydrophytic because most grasses in western Washington are wet tolerant. The plant community is hydrophytic because more than 50% of the dominants are FAC, FACW or OBL. At SL-2, the plant community is dominated by meadow buttercup (Ranunculus acris, FACW-), tall mannangrass (Glyceria elata, FACW+) and unknown weeds. The plant community is hydrophytic because more than 50% of the dominants are FAC, FACW or OBL. Suitability of the Proposed Mitigation Area The proposed mitigation area is 12 to 18 inches higher in elevation than Wetland "D". The soils are heavily compacted fill material. The plant community is dominated by weeds and FACW grasses. Evidence of wetland hydrology is present in Wetland "D" immediately adjacent to the proposed mitigation area. Surface hydrology was present in the southern portion of Wetland "D" during the June 10, 2002 site investigation. Wetland can be created in the proposed mitigation area by removing 18 to 24 inches of the existing fill material (see mitigation plans). The wetland hydrology present in Wetland "D" will extend into the proposed mitigation area. 12 inches of organic topsoil will be placed for the establishment of a hydrophytic plant community. Very T Environmental Designer cc: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, Inc. 3 �) J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 6PNI-P,4 0 Heritage Woods Proposed Mitigation Area Figure 2.0 Site Sketch 4 13. Jones and Associates, Inc. 7 Routine Wetland Determination Data Form (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project/Site: ems, i a t + . f' - Date: Applicant/Owner: - County: Investigator: [_ . < «y State: Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? le No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation) Yes � Transect ID: Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Explain: Sa le Loc.* f_ - etl. pi: VEGETATION Dominant Indicator Percent Basal Dominant Indicator Percent Stem Tree S ccics Status Cover Area Woody Vines Status Cover Count 2 10. 3. 11- 4. 12. Dominant Indicator Percent Stem Dominant Indicator Percent Shrub Sp Status Cover Count Herb Species Status Cover 6. 14. 7 15. 8 16, Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC: (Excluding FAC-) Basis for Decision: HYDROLOGY Wetland H droln Indicators: Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Primary Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Inundated Aerial Photographs Saturated in Upper 12 Inches Other Water marks _ Recorded Data Available: k Drift Lines Sediment Deposits _ x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Field Observations: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): Depth of Surface Water — '-_ _(i�t.) _ Oxidized Root Channels (upper 12") Water -Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water in Pit -- (in.) _ _ Local Soil Survey Data FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soil: ! (iii.I) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Basis for 'Decision:12, >. Jones and Associates, Inc. SOILS Map Unit Name Drainage Class: _r-- y !f (Series and Phase): �.,•, �ti�—.-,+� : r.+,4•. Do Field Observations Taxonomy (Subgroup),,�L.x `�;. t_l �,_�, .�,r, ► Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No Pofile Description: Depth Matrix. Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Structure (Inches) horizon {Munsel) Moist) (MunscIl Moist Abundance/contrast Concretions etc. L4 - I tµ Cyr 2 4 _.. �— • Cr Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Concretions Ilistosol _ high Organic Content in Surface layer _ Histic Hpipcdon in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ _ Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List >e Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 Chroma with Mottling Basis for Decision: I ,, WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Point in a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? es No Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Remarks: -(� E 'I toUv Cat s �;1 _ V L 'G` d * This data form is a combination of the original and amended 1987 Routine Wetland Determination data forms. J. 'Jones and Associates, Inc. Routine Wetland Determination Data Form (1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project/Site: L.tJ Date: Applicant/Owner: SCT County: IGG nn p, Investigator: ; State: 1 I '3 Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Q)L No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation) Yes t Transect ID: Is the area a potential problem area? Yes D No Plot ID: Explain: Sample c.: SZ _Z WetI( \/9=(_1=TAT1r)N Dominant Indicator Percent Basal Dominant Indicator Percent Stem Tree Species Status Cover Area Woody Vines Status Cover Count 1. 9. 2. 10. 3. it. 4. 12. Dominant Indicator Percent Stem Dominant Indicator Percent Shrub Species Status Cover Count Herb Species Status Cover 5. 6. 8, 16. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC: (Excluding FAC-) a. pQ' Basis for Decision: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks); Primary Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Inundated ^_ Aerial Photographs Saturated in Upper 12 Inches Other _ Water marks _ "lo Recorded Data Available: Drift Lines _ _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Field Observations: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): Depth of Surface Water — (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels (upper 12") _ Water -Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water in Pit (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soil: g:4 (in.} _ _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Basis for Decision: �fItl+ rl L Jones and Associates, Inc. SOILS Map Unit Name Drainage Class: 1 — (Series and Phase): d , Do Field Observations Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No Poiile Description: Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Structure (Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) MunseIl Moist Abundance/contrast Concretions etc. b - 14.► d Yr� ►� �, t. ,. �, Hydric Soil Indicators: Concretions _ Histosol High Organic Content in Surface layer Histic Epipedon in Sandy Soils Sulfdic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) 2 Chroma with Mottling Basis for Decision: —..r....- �,.. :i' 2.f4e :.' l p '�:.1.J1 �� i. i �Il.ea j"'Ir'•1��� I�4... ..�j�.:� 111 {r WETLAND DETERMINATION ' This data form is a combination of the original and amended 1987 Routine Wetland Determination data forms. are= 01W 1. V,-, 'it IC: CITY OF \NX August 9, 2002 CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Mr. Dennis Alfredson ° 0 Schneider Homes, Inc. F L E 6510 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 1 Tukwila, WA 98155 Re: File No. 98-102890-000-00-SU; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND CREATION PLAN Dear Mr. Alfredson: Please find enclosed an August 5, 2002, letter from Adolfson Associates Inc. (AAI), regarding review of the June 15, 2002, J.S. Jones Associates, Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Plan. Please have your wetland consultant revise the mitigation plan and address the three following comments summarized from the AAI review: 1) Provide some level of assurance that the hydrological conditions of Wetland D will be maintained; 2) Provide a list of wetland variables that will be measured as- part of the monitoring plan; and 3) Provide a buffer planting plan. Additional detail and discussion regarding the three above items is provided in the August 5, 2002, AAI letter. Please consult the AAI letter for further discussion on each of these three items. Upon completion of the revisions, please provide three sets of revised plans for our final review, along with the enclosed Resubmittal Information sheet. Please call me at 253-661-4019 if you have any questions. Sincerely, &-arri5 Senior Planner enclosure Doc. I. D. 19991 �*_ �00 ; ■"o , iAft A❑❑ t F S❑ N 5 August 2002 Ewironnk-atal Solaroas Mr. Jim Harris City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services 33530 First Way South Federal Way, Washington 98003-6210 RECEIVED 13Y COMMUNITY DEVELMv?ENT nr_ "r"" - AUG 0 7 2002 RE: Heritage Woods: Changing to an Overall Wetland Enhancement Approach, Federal Way, Washington Dear Mr. Harris: Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) is pleased to present the following review of the most recent documents provided in support of the Heritage Woods wetland mitigation project. Several years ago the City of Federal Way approved a proposal for a residential development on the Heritage Woods site. This proposal included creating wetlands in order to mitigate the loss of wetlands that would be eliminated during the development of the site. The Heritage Woods housing development has been completed and most of the houses are now occupied. Due to a number of factors, the attempts at wetland creation on this site have been, to varying degrees, unsuccessful. A meeting was held at Federal Way City Hall on June 5, 2002 to discuss the current wetland creation shortfalls and to develop a strategy for remedying the mitigation problems at the site. At the June 5, 2002 meeting, attended by you, representatives of Schneider Homes, Inc., J.S. Jones Associates (landscape architects for Schneider Homes), and myself, the idea of creating a new wetland in the triangle -shaped area located near the southeastern corner of the site between the existing pond and Wetland D was discussed. During the meeting it was agreed that Schneider Homes Inc. would provide the following information before the City could allow them to proceed with this proposal: • Proof that there will be water to support a wetland in this location; • Wetland delineation data sheets; • Documentation that the area is not already a wetland; and • An assurance that it would be possible to provide an adequate (in terms of City's code) buffer around the new wetland. Following the meeting I re -visited the site to examine the area proposed for wetland creation. During the site visit, I observed the presence of wetland vegetation and moist/saturated soils in the area proposed for wetland creation. Since the meeting with the City and site visit, J.S. Jones has submitted to the City a revised Wetland Mitigation Plan (J.S. Jones, 14 June 2002), and a letter report (J.S. Jones, 14 June 2002) containing a baseline study of conditions present on the proposed wetland creation site. We have reviewed these new documents and have the following comments: ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 7,( 206 789 9658 1.,- 206 789 9684 a io�fson�ac% an.�o ry ,-1 1 Federal Way/Harris letter 5 August 2002 Page 2 of 2 1) It does appear that a wetland could be created between the existing pond and Wetland D by implementing the approach described in the J.S. Jones letter report. Based upon the descriptions provided, the soils appear to meet the criteria for hydric soils and the vegetation appears to meet the hydrophytic vegetation criteria. And my observations of wet soil in early June indicate that wetland hydrology is likely present on the site. It is, therefore, not entirely clear from the letter report that the area is not already wetland. 2) It is, however, clear from the report, as well as from my own observations on the site, that it would be possible to create a wetland that provides more functions than the existing marginal wetland currently provides. Because the area proposed for wetland creation already exhibits wetland characteristics, we recommend that the City require the applicant to demonstrate a measurable improvement in wetland functions over those that currently exist at this location. The applicant will need to develop a monitoring plan that includes qualitative and/or quantitative variables that can be used to demonstrate an irlorease 11I wet -tams functions at the site. Such variables might include increased level of plant species diversity, increased structural diversity, greater ability to treat runoff, greater aesthetic value, and greater interpretive value. 3) The letter report does not include detailed hydrological data but instead relies on the fact that there is enough water in the area to support existing Wetland D and therefore assumes there is sufficient water to support a new wetland adjacent to Wetland D. The applicant may need to provide assurance that creation of the new wetland will not result in de -watering of Wetland D. 4) Finally, a more detailed description of proposed buffer plantings needs to be provided. The site plan shows plantings to be located beyond the proposed created wetland edge, however, these do not appear to be upland plants and these plantings are specified only along one of the two edges in need of buffer protection. In order for the City to approve the proposed mitigation plan, the applicant will need to provide a revised plan including, at a minimum, the following: (1) some level of assurance that the hydrologic conditions of Wetland D will be maintained; (2) provide a list of wetland variables that will be measured as part of the monitoring plan; and (3) provide a buffer planting plan. To ensure that the hydrologic conditions of Wetland D will be maintained, hydrologic studies may need to be conducted by the applicant. We very much appreciate the opportunity to assist the City with this proiect. Please feel free to call me at (206) 789-9658 if you have questions about what we have provided. Sincerely, ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. izzie Zemke Senior Ecologist cc: D. Frostholm J. S. Jones &3md Aamocia.ies, 113mc. August 28, 2002 Mr. Jim Harris R ES U ITT E P City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services AUG 3 0 2002 33530 First Way South Federal Way, Washington 98003-6210 RE: Heritage Woods, Wetland Mitigation Plan, File No. 98-102890-000-00-SU Dear Mr. Harris: This letter and the revised Wetland Mitigation Plan, dated 8/28/02, are intended to address Adolfson Associates, Inc. August 5, 2002 comments. Using the same numbered points as Aldolfson, our responses are as follows: The proposed area for wetland creation is marginally non -wetland. The upper soils profile is fill material. The matrix is a two to three chroma. Mottling is present on globs of gleyed material that are mixed into the fill material. Soils characteristics are reminant of the prior hydrology condition. Saturation at the soil surface is due to compaction and not from a perched water table. In June, only the upper four inches of the profile was saturated. The plant community that has developed is dominated by wetland indicator species. Tanzy ragwort, Himalayan blackberry, horsetail, dock and willow herb are currently present. Tanzy ragwort and horsetail are dominants. Horsetail and buttercup are frequently present when the soil surface is saturated. They are also typically present on compacted fill. 2. The Wetland Mitigation Plan includes quantitative and qualitative measures of wetland variables in Sections 6.0 Performance Standards and 7.0 Monitoring Methods. Presently, the mitigation area does not have trees or shrubs. The plans provide for an increase in species diversity and the development of vertical structure for the plant community. Maintenance of invasives will be performed biannually, or more frequently as needed, by the applicant until performance standards are met. Treatment of runoff, added capacity and intrepretative signage are not goals of this mitigation. The other approved Heritage Woods mitigation plans do not call for any water quality testing. The sources of hydrology to the proposed mitigation area are natural seepage springs in the forest, not a storm drainage system with pollutants. The R/D facility has a bioswale to provide water quality treatment. Water in the existing pond is directed through the R/D facility, which mediates outflows. Additional water retention capacity will not provide a significant benefit downstream. 3408 52nd Place, N.E. TAC0MA,WASHINGTON 98422 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. The proposed mitigation area is not part of an interpretative trail. There are no wetland signs in the sensitive area tract or at any other mitigation area. 3. The creation of the new wetland will not result in the de -watering of Wetland D. A year- round seepage spring supplies hydrology for Wetland D. Seepage at the lower side of Wetland D is currently diverted around the fill material in the proposed mitigation area by two swales on the uphill side of the fill. These swales were not intentionally constructed, but are the result of fill placement. The surface and subsurface flow through Wetland D is controlled by the slope, soils texture, soils profile, and existing surface drainage patterns in Wetland D. The break in slope at the proposed mitigation area will accumulate inflows and not drain Wetland D. The continuous inflow from seepage ensures that the wetland hydrology will be maintained in Wetland D. The hydrology of Wetland D will be monitored along with the hydrology of the created wetland, see the revised Wetland Mitigation Plan. It is too late to perform pre -construction hydrology monitoring of Wetland D, unless we wait another year to implement the proposed mitigation. 4. There are three buffer areas: 1) north, between the proposed mitigation and the existing pond; 2) east, between the gravel road and the proposed mitigation area; and 3) and west of the proposed mitigation area. Wetland D is south of the proposed mitigation area. Buffers to the north and west have existing forested plant communities restoration and enhancement plantings are not needed. The east buffer will be impacted to access and construct the wetland. The east buffer had a supplemental planting of shrubs and a few trees. The temporary buffer disturbance to construct the mitigation will be restored. Restoration plantings and additional buffer plantings have been added to the Mitigation Plan, as appropriate. Faciltative plant materials are just as likely to be found in wetlands as uplands. The indicator status of selected plant species are as follows: Rosa nutkana (FAC-), Rubus spectabilis (FAC+), Picea sitchensis (FAC) and Alnus rubra (FAC). These plant species are appropriate for use in buffers. We have found them to be very successful in buffer plantings. We would like to construct this mitigation area in September or October, before the weather pattern turns to rain. Your assistance in reviewing this mitigation plan is very much appreciated. Thank You, Jeffery S. Jones Certified Professional Wetland Scientist cc: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, Inc. 2 CITY OF CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 September 6, 2002 Ms. Lizzie Zemke Adolfson Associates 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW Seattle, WA 98107 Re: File #98-102890-00-SU; Heritage Woods Wetland Creation Dear Ms. Zemke: (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 FILE Schneider Homes has provided an updated wetland creation plan by JS Jones Associates, revised 8/28/02, and a JS Jones August 28, 2002, cover letter. This plan submittal is in response to your August 5, 2002, review comments, and my August 9, 2002, cover letter to Schneider Homes Please review the provided documents for compliance with your August 5, 2002, review comments and provide me your written comments. Contact me at 253-661-4019 or_jim.harris rr cityoffederalwv .corn if you have any questions. Sincerely, ainirris Senior Planner enc: Revised Wetland Mitigation Plan by JS Jones, revised August 28, 2002 JS Jones August 28, 2002, Cover Letter Letter from Jim Harris to Schneider Homes, August 9, 2002 Doc, I.D, 20288 ■ / COMMUNITY RECEIVED B LOPMENT DEPARTMENT aoa�Fsnew OCT 142002 10 October 2002 Environmental Sofa ons Mr. Jim Harris City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services Post Office Box 9718 33530 First Way South Federal Way, Washington 98003-6210 RE: Heritage Woods Revised Mitigation Plan Federal Way, Washington Dear Mr. Harris: Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) is pleased to present the following review of the most recent documents provided in support of the Heritage Woods wetland mitigation project located in the City of Federal Way, Washington. As you no doubt recall, J.S. Jones and Associates Inc. (J.S. Jones) and Schneider Homes Inc. have proposed the idea of creating a new wetland in a triangle -shaped area located near the southeastern corner of the Heritage Woods site between the existing pond and Wetland D. The City has agreed to this conceptually but has had some questions regarding the details of the proposal. Specifically, it was requested that the applicant provide a revised plan including, at a minimum: (1) some level of assurance that the hydrologic conditions of Wetland D will be maintained; (2) a list of wetland variables that will be measured as part of the monitoring plan; and (3) a buffer planting plan. To ensure that the hydrologic conditions of Wetland D would be maintained, it was suggested that hydrologic studies might need to be conducted by the applicant. Adolfson was asked to review a letter from J.S. Jones to the City of Federal Way, dated 28 August, 2002 and prepared in response to Adolfson's earlier (5 August 2002) comments on a revised mitigation plan prepared by J.S. Jones Inc. for the Heritage Woods project. The most recent letter from J.S. Jones (upon which 1 am now commenting) contained responses numbered to correspond to the questions I had raised in my 5 August letter. I will continue to use the same numbering convention in this letter. My comments are the following: 1) In my August 5 2002 letter I questioned whether the area proposed for mitigation in the form of wetland creation is actually a non -wetland area. The response provided by J.S. Jones convinces me further that the area is already a wetland. The wetland hydrology status (wetland versus non - wetland) of an area is not determined by where the water comes from or why the water persists, but rather how long during the growing season the water persists. The presence of saturated soils at this site in April, May, and continuing into June is direct evidence of wetland hydrology. Combined with the presence of hydric soil and hydrophytic vegetation, I believe that the area proposed for the mitigation wetland is currently a jurisdictional wetland. However, the modifications proposed by J.S. Jones are likely to improve the quality of this degraded wetland ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 71 206 789 9658 1- 206 789 9684 Federal Way/Harris letter 10 October 2002 Page 2 of 3 and can be accepted by the City as adequate mitigation for the wetland creation shortfall that we are attempting to correct. 2) In my 5 August letter I asked that the applicant provide measurable performance standards that could be used to demonstrate an increase in wetland functions. In their submittal to the City, J.S. Jones responded that trees and shrubs would be planted in the mitigation area, providing increased species diversity and increased structural diversity. Additionally, the revised mitigation plan includes specific target amounts of vegetative cover for the planted trees and shrubs. The increase in species and structural diversity and the target percent cover values are acceptable vegetation performance standards for the proposed wetland creation. A remaining problem regarding the issue of performance standards is the stated requirement in the most recently submitted mitigation plan that soils must be saturated to the surface for three consecutive months between December and April. In order for a site to be considered a jurisdictional wetland, soils on the site must be saturated to the surface for at least two weeks during the growing season (1997 Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual). The growing season in western Washington is typically recognized as occurring between March and November. Areas that exhibit saturated soils at times other than during the growing season may be, but are not necessarily, wetlands. In order to provide a meaningful measure of wetland creation success, it is necessary that the timing of the required soil saturation be changed to occur within the growing season. While it is possible that the soil in this created wetland area could be saturated for three consecutive months, such prolonged saturation at that particular time of year would not be necessary in order for the area to be considered a successful wetland creation project. Additionally the length of time required in the performance standard for continuous soil saturation should be reduced somewhat in order to avoid unnecessary chance of failure. The area could be continuously saturated for much less than three consecutive months during the growing season and still be a successful wetland. Therefore the 6.1. section in the mitigation plan should be changed such that the required period of saturation is shorter and occurs within the growing season. 3) In our 5 August comments on the J.S. Jones plan, we requested greater assurance that existing Wetland D would not be dewatered as a result of the creation of the new wetland area adjacent to it. J.S. Jones responded that the source of water (underground seepage and surface water) for Wetland D would not be altered by creating the new wetland. I still have some question regarding whether or not there will be sufficient water retention in the new wetland once the compacted fill material is removed from the area. As has been discussed in the past, one of the primary reasons for failure of past mitigation wetlands on the Heritage Woods site has been the lack of sufficient amounts of water. It should be noted that although the City strongly suggested otherwise, the applicant has chosen not to conduct on -site hydrologic studies to determine that sufficient water will be available for both Wetland D and the proposed new wetland. 4) Our final comment on the last J.S. Jones submittal pertained to buffers. The most recently submitted mitigation plan drawings do not depict any additional buffer plantings. My understanding of the current mitigation plan is that the upland buffer associated with the north edge of Wetland D will be reduced by more than half in some places due to the creation of the K Federal Way/Harris letter 10 October 2002 Page 3 of 3 new wetland. And that once the new wetland is in place the buffer associated with the north edge of it will consist of pond rather than native upland vegetation. The pond will provide some buffering capacity but lacks some of the features provided by a buffer of upland vegetation. I suggest that all remaining areas of upland located between the existing pond and the proposed mitigation wetland be enhanced by dense plantings of native woody upland vegetation. Summary In order for the city to approve the revised Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Plan, I recommend the following items be addressed on revised plans to be submitted t the city for final review and approval: 1. The required timing and duration of soil saturation in the created wetland should be changed to occur for at least two weeks during the growing season. 2. All remaining areas of upland located between the existing pond and the proposed mitigation wetland shall be enhanced by dense plantings of native woody upland vegetation. A revised plan sheet depicting these plantings should be provided. We very much appreciate the opportunity to assist the City with this project. Please feel free to call me at (206) 789-9658 if you have questions about what we have provided. Sincerely, ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. $40"Al Lizzie Zemke Senior Ecologist cc: D. Frostholm CITY OFfAC.- CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 October 16, 2002 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 �L Mr. Dennis Alfredson Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 1 Tukwila, WA 98155 Re: File No. 98-102890-000-00-SU; iIERITAGE WOODS WETLAND CREATION PLAN Dear Mr. Alfredson: Please find enclosed an October 10, 2002, letter from Adolfson Associates Inc. (AAI), regarding review of the August 28, 2002, J.S. Jones Associates Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Plan. Please have your wetland consultant revise the mitigation plan and address the two comments summarized on page two of the October 10, 2002, AAI review. Upon completion of the revisions, provide three revised copies of the plan for the City's final review and approval along with the enclosed Resubmittal Information sheet. I do not anticipate sending the revision out for additional review by AAI, provided the final revisions are made in accordance with the AAI recommendations. I anticipate an approximately three working day turn -around for review and final approval of your revised plan upon submittal. Please call me at 253-661-4019 if you have any questions. Sincerely, 6Ji. Harris Senior Planner enclosure Doc. I D. 20692 J. S. cones &imd Associa.ies, 13mc. November 8, 2002 Mr. Jim Harris City of Federal Way RESUBMITTED NOV 0 0 2002 Department of Community Development Services 33530 First Way South Federal Way, Washington 98003-6210 RE: Heritage Woods, Wetland Mitigation Plan File No.: 98-102890-000-00-SU Dear Mr. Harris: In response to the October 10, 2002 letter from Adolfson Associates, Inc., J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc., has revised the Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Plan. Changes to the text page were made and plants were added to the northwestern 80 feet of buffer area between the proposed mitigation and the existing pond. The area is currently vegetated with red alder, salmonberry and red -osier dogwood. Enhancement plantings of salmonberry, red - osier dogwood and Sitka spruce are proposed. The northeastern edge of the buffer is densely vegetated with salmonberry, snowberry and red alder. No enhancement is proposed in the northeastern edge of the buffer. Photos of the buffer area are attached for your convenience. If you have any questions regarding these revisions, please contact me at 253-942-7131. Very T y, Lance Erickson Environmental Designer cc: Dennis Alfredson, P.E., Schneider Homes, Inc. 3408 52nd Place, N.E. T A C 0MA,WASHINGTON 98422 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 T - WOO N I ww_ L'= t 4 Y �• X CITY OFF CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 November 18, 2002 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Mr. Dennis Alfredson Schneider Homes, Inc. L 6510 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 1 Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: File No. 98-102890-00-SU; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN Dear Mr. Alfredson: The Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Plan by S.S. Jones and Associates Inc. (revised 11/8/02) is hereby approved. In summary, this mitigation plan is for construction of a new 2,750 Square foot wetland creation area (new mitigation area #4) to replace t:he current shortfall in wetland mitigation area at Heritage Woods. The two changes requested in the October 10, 2002, Adolfson Associates Inc. (AAI review have been added to the previously reviewed wetland mitigation plan, We anticipate the new wetland mitigation area will be constructed this fall. Please call me 4$ hours in advance of initiating construction of the mitigation plan. Following completion of the wetland mitigation construction and planting, please provide me two copies of the wetland mitigation area as -built plan. Since the current wetland mitigation plan was not budgeted in conjunction with wetland monitoring, the City will require Schneider Homes to reimburse the City for review costs resulting from Adolfson Associates review of the wetland mitigation plan, including the following: meeting with City staff and AAI staff on June 5, 2002; August 5, 2002, AAI review letter; and October 10, 2002, AAI review letter. The Fall 2002 monitoring report by J.S. Jones is currently being reviewed by AAI, and a written response to the monitoring report will be provided shortly. Please contact me at 253 661-4019 or 'im.harri ci offederalwa .com if you have any further questions. Sincerely, aaal6ley rris Senior Planner enc: Approved Plan c: Lance Erickson, JS Jones, 3408 52"d Place NE, Tacoma, WA 98422 (w/enclosure) Lizzie Zemke, AAI, 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98107 (w/enclosure) Doe. I.D. 21023 J. S. cones 4&3ma Asaociafes, 1 3mc. April 21, 2003 Mr. Jim Harris Senior Planner APR Z 4 2 City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services 33530 First Way South Federal Way, Washington 98003-6210 RE: Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Area #4 City of Federal Way File No.: 98-102890-00-SU Dear Mr. Harris: Schneider Homes, Inc., has completed the amendment of the soil for Mitigation Area #4. Organic compost was added to the mitigation area and mixed thoroughly with a rototiller. J S. Jones and Associates, Inc., inspected the mitigation area and it is our opinion that the amended soil meets the standards specified in the approved planting plan. The final redlined drawings along with photos of the mitigation area are attached. If you have any questions regarding the soil amendment, plantings or construction of the mitigation area, please contact meat (253) 942-7131 or by e-mail at btu ja 'ones d,nventure.com. Very Tr ly, Lance Erickson Environmental Designer cc: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, Inc. Dan Richter, Schneider Homes, Inc. File Copy 3408 52nd Place, N.E. TAC0MA,WASHINGT0N 98422 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 ,•• • - - ,�s t �7 � r' iS'� :• }�; . � .� ram' �~ .e :rr AV, m S: Tfl� OL A07 Aet 44 21 July 2003 Mr. Jim Harris City of Federal Way 33520 First Way South Post Office Box 9718 A D 0 4 F S 0 N Environmental Solarions Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 COMMUNITY RECEIVED E3y r ��PARTr,nFNr JUL 2 2 2003 Re: Review of Revised Fall 2002 Heritage Woods Monitoring Report, Federal Way Washington Dear Mr. Harris: Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) is pleased to provide our review of the revised Fall 2002 Monitoring Report for the Heritage Woods mitigation project owned by Schneider Homes Inc. and located in Federal Way, Washington. The Monitoring Report was prepared by J.S. Jones and Associates Inc. and was dated 15 January 2003. In addition to a review of the revised Fall 2002 report, this letter includes a review of a 1-page letter provided to the City by J.S. Jones regarding Heritage Woods Mitigation Area #4. The revised Fall 2002 Monitoring Report was prepared in response to an e-mail message (attached) containing comments and guidance prepared by Adolfson and sent to J.S. Jones in Nov 2002. Our comments on the revised Fall 2002 Monitoring Report are listed below, and follow the format used in the J.S. Jones Monitoring Report. Adolfson assumed that the items listed as recommendations in the revised Monitoring Report are going to be implemented (or perhaps already have) before the Fall 2003 monitoring effort is completed. W etiand Creation Area #1 It appears that since no wetland replacement effort was ever instituted at this site, this site has been abandoned and instead Wetland "100" has become the replacement area. Adolfson assumes that no further action is planned at the location of proposed Creation Area #1. Wetland Creation Area #4 This area has been "a failure" in the past and has, according to a letter dated January 22, 2003 from J.S. Jones to the City of Federal Way, recently been replanted. In addition to documenting the installation of new plant material, the January 2003 letter also noted that the topsoil at this site would need to be amended with organic compost material once conditions on the site dried out in the spring. Adolfson will conduct a site visit in the late summer to observe conditions in this area. ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 96107 74 206 789 9658 1— 206 789 9684 ac%�on�.ado�oro{om Harris/Heritage Woods L"—) 21 July 2003 Page 2 of 3 Wetland Creation Area "DEA-A" The data table provided by J.S. Jones indicates that wetland acreage requirements have not been met at this location. Some explanation as to why the acreage requirement hasn't been met and an explanation of how it will be rectified, should be provided. Wetland Creation Area #5 The J.S. Jones report states that a ditch needs to be altered in order to effectively direct water to the created wetland area, and that additional planting would benefit this area. It appears from the information provided by J.S. Jones that lack of water may be a problem at this location. It will need to be demonstrated how altering the ditch configuration to provide sheet flow will remedy the problem of too little water. It may be an issue of not enough water rather than incorrect ditch configuration. If an insufficient amount of water is actually the problem at this location, an alternative source of water will need to be provided. Wetland Creation Area #7 The J.S. Jones report states that this area is a success. However, the data table included in the report indicates that the wetland acreage requirement has not been met and that there is currently less than 80% vegetation survival. An explanation for this needs to be provided. Additionally, since lack of water has been a problem on the Heritage Woods site in general, and because wetland hydrology is being inferred only from presence of drainage patterns, a site visit should be conducted early in the growing season (rather than during the Fall) specifically to check for the presence of water in the created wetland area. Wetland Creation Area #8 It appears that the vegetation in this area is as it should be. However, as with Wetland Creation Area #7, because wetland hydrology is being inferred only from the presence of drainage patterns, a site visit should be conducted early in the growing season to check for the presence of water in the created wetland area. In addition, it is not clear from the monitoring report, whether or not the additional plantings recommended in past reports, were ever installed. Wetland Creation Area 11100" The data table included in the J.S. Jones monitoring report indicates that the wetland acreage requirement has not been met. An explanation for why this is true, and how it will be rectified, is needed. And as with Wetland Creation Areas #7 and #8, a site visit should be conducted early in the growing season to check for the presence of water in the created wetland area. Wetland "D" Enhancement Previous reports by J.S. Jones have recommended the release of this enhancement area from further monitoring. During the site visit that will be conducted to check the status of the mitigation efforts, this area will be checked and if it appears to be functioning as proposed, then it will be released from future monitoring. Harris/Heritage Woods Let( 21 July 2003 Page 3 of 3 The monitoring report information for the following areas appears to be in order. The City will conduct a site visit in order to confirm the conditions described. ■ Buffer Enhancement Area #1 • Buffer Enhancement Area #2 + Buffer Enhancement #3 • Buffer Enhancement #4 • Buffer Enhancement Area #5 ■ Detention Pond Buffer Restoration • Slope Buffer Conclusions In summary, most of the areas addressed in the monitoring report are accompanied in the report by adequate explanations, and appear to be headed toward success as long as the recommendations made by J.S. Jones are implemented. However, a few areas described in the J.S. Jones report require more detailed explanation. The areas that require an explanation about why the wetland acreage requirements have not been met, and how they will be met in the future are: ■ DEA-A, ■ Wetland Creation Area #7, and + Wetland Creation Area 100. Areas that require site visits early in the growing season specifically to observe the presence or absence of wetland hydrology are: • Wetland Creation Area #7, • Wetland Creation Area #8, and ■ Wetland Creation Area "100". Finally, J.S. Jones has requested that Wetland "D" Enhancement, Wetland Creation Area #7, Wetland Creation Area "100", and Buffer Enhancement Area III be released from future monitoring requirements. Since reliable wetland hydrology has not been confirmed at Wetland Creation Area #7 or at Wetland Creation Area "100", these two areas cannot be released from future monitoring. Adolfson will visit the Heritage Woods site during late summer 2003 and a decision regarding releasing Wetland "D" Enhancement and Buffer Enhancement Area III from future monitoring will be made at that time. Please feel free to call me at (206) 789-9658 if you need clarification on any of this. I would be glad to answer any questions you might have. Sincerely, ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES,INC. `w"f "[j�^-�' �. Ltzaxe Zemke Senior Ecologist Uzzie Zemke From: Lizzie Zemke Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 12:10 PM To: 'bluejayjones @ nventure.com' Cc: Jim Harris (E-mail) Subject: Heritage Woods Fall 2002 Monitoring Report Lance: At the request of the City of Federal Way, I have reviewed the Fall 2002 Heritage Woods Wetland and Buffer Mitigation Monitoring Report prepared by your firm for Schneider Homes, Inc. In reviewing the 2002 report I referred back to the Fall 2000 monitoring report, also prepared by your firm, and in comparing the two I encountered a few problems. I typically review the monitoring reports that the City receives and then forward my comments in a letter to Jim Harris at the City. Jim then forwards the comments to the applicants, and the applicants respond to the City. Jim then forwards the applicant's responses to me and I prepare another letter. In the case of the Fall 2002 report I felt it might be quicker and more cost effective to send you a brief e-mail that points out where there are discrepancies, and instead of going through the process I just described, I am hoping you will be able to compare the two reports in light of the comments in this e-mail, and can then provide a revised Fall 2002 monitoring report to the City for me to review. A few, but not all, of the discrepancies I observed are listed below. With respect to some of the buffer enhancement areas, recommendations that were made in 2000 are made again in 2002, with no explanation about why. It is not clear if these are typos, or if the recommendations were never implemented, or if the recommendations were implemented and the recommended plantings did not survive. In another buffer enhancement area the percent cover of trees has decreased considerably between the 2000 and the 2002 monitoring periods. An explanation for why this has occurred and recommendations for how to remedy the problem are needed. For a number of the created wetlands, the associated information tables indicate that there is greater than 50% cover of ferns, but ferns aren't mentioned in the overall descriptions of the wetland. Soil saturation was generally not observed in the mitigation wetlands, which is not surprising during the fall of a drought year. However, because lack of water has historically been a problem at the Heritage Woods site, the presence of water in the mitigation wetlands must be substantiated before wetland creation success can be claimed. It is our recommendation that J.S. Jones visit the site early in the growing season to document the presence or absence of saturated soil or inundation, and that a follow-up memo documenting these hydrologic observations be sent to the City. With regard to Wetland Creation Area #5--J.S. Jones made a recommendation in 2000 and again in 2002 to supplement wetland hydrology in Area #5. It will be necessary to explain how wetland hydrology would be supplemented to achieve wetland conditions at the site. As I stated at the beginning of this e-mail, these comments do not include all of the discrepancies between the two reports. It is my recommendation that you carefully compare the Fall 2000 and the Fall 2002 reports and revise the 2002 report to address all discrepancies. Please feel free to call me at (206) 789-9658 if you need clarification on any of this. Thank you. 1 J. S. Jones aiaa Associa too, l[nc. RESUBMITTED OCT 17 2003 Fall 2003 Monitoring of Heritage Woods Div. 1 & 11 Federal Way, Washington File No.: SUB98-0003 (98-102890-000-00-SU) Prepared for: Schneider Family Homes 6510 Southcenter Boulevard Suite #1 Tukwila, Washington 98155 (206) 248-2471 October 8, 2003 Prepared by: Lance Erickson, Environmental Designer Suzannah White, Ecologist 3408 52nd Place, N.E. TACOMA,WASHINGTON 98422 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 Executive Summary The following is a brief summary of the information contained in the following report. It is intended to provide background information and our interpretation of the data contained within. It is my hope that this will clear up any confusion regarding the status of the Heritage Woods project. Wetland Creation Area #4 Wetland Creation Area #4 was installed in the spring of 2003. Wetland creation area #4 was designed to address the short fall in mitigation area throughout the site. During the initial wetland mitigation installation and subsequent additional mitigation measures, problems arose with regards to the square footage of creation areas. Based upon the approved as built plans and the supplemental creation of Wetland "100", Wetland #4 creates the area required in the original approved wetland mitigation plan. Plant materials within wetland #4 are thriving. Some mortality has taken place with the planted trees and red -osier dogwood cuttings. During the spring of 2003, shallow inundation was present. Further documentation will be submitted in March of 2004 to verify the presence of wetland hydrology. Wetland Creation Area "DEA A" The approved mitigation plan called for wetland creation area "DEA-A" to be 3,535 square feet in size. The approved as built plan shows the created area being 2,744 square feet. This is the reason for the wetland acreage requirements not being met. Short fall in mitigation areas are included in the construction of wetland creation area "100", wetland creation area #4 and Wetland "D" enhancement. A native plant community dominated by red alder and salmonberry is developing. Invasive vegetation is minimal. During the past three season wetland hydrology has been present at the mitigation area in the form of saturation to the soil surface, drainage patterns and drift lines. Further documentation will be submitted in March of 2004 to verify the presence of wetland hydrology. Wetland Creation Area #S Wetland creation area #5 still suffers from a lack of adequate hydrology. The original design called for a ditch located along the east side of the maintenance road to sheet flow water into the mitigation area. Since the time of construction changes to the maintenance road and blowdowns have either diverted the water or changed the ditch configuration. A pipe is located in the center of the maintenance road that can be altered to divert water into the mitigation area. Currently this pipe is adding additional hydrology to wetland creation area #4. A native plant community dominated by red alder and willow is developing. With adequate hydrology, an emergent community should begin to develop as well. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc., will contact Schneider Homes about altering the flow of the pipe. A notice will be sent to the City of Federal Way upon completion of the work. Further documentation will be submitted in March of 2004 to verify the presence of wetland hydrology. October 2003 i J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Wetland Creation Area #7 At the time of initial mitigation installation only 95 square feet of the original 1,425 square feet of mitigation area was created. The chart reflects the amount of wetland area originally designed versus the actual created area as depicted on the approved as built drawings. The created area is as depicted on the as built drawings. A native plant community has developed and there is minimal invasive vegetation. During the past three seasons wetland hydrology has been present at the mitigation area in the form of shallow inundation, saturation to the soil surface, drainage patterns and drift lines. Further documentation will be submitted in March 2004 to verify the presence of wetland hydrology. Wetland Creation Area #8 Wetland creation area #8 is developing a strong native plant community. Willows are currently 10 to 12 feet in height. Planted Sitka spruce and red -osier dogwood are thriving. A slough sedge dominated emergent plant community is developing. During the past three season wetland hydrology has been present at the mitigation area in the form of shallow inundation, saturation to the soil surface, drainage patterns and drift lines. Further documentation will be submitted in March of 2004 to verify the presence of wetland hydrology. Wetland Creation Area "100" Wetland creation area "100" was designed to off -set the short fall of wetland creation area. Wetland creation area "100' was partially constructed on a Lakehaven Utility District sewer easement. The area of wetland created on the sewer easement can not be counted as mitigation area. This situation leads to the calculated area being less than the designed area, eventhough the wetland area has been created. Wetland creation area "100" was created adjacent to the on -site pond. The elevation of the bottom of the wetland is lower than the concrete outflow structure, which regulates the water levels within the pond. During the past three season wetland hydrology has been present in the mitigation area in the form of shallow inundation, saturation to the soil surface, drainage patterns and drift lines. Further documentation will be submitted in March of 2004 to verify the presence of wetland hydrology. Very T i , Lance Erickson Environmental Designer October 2003 ii J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 1.0 Introduction This report presents the results of the fall 2003 annual monitoring for the Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Plan. Only fall monitoring is scheduled for the remainder of the monitoring events. Photos of the mitigation and enhancement areas are attached. 2.0 Results 2.1 Wetland Creation Areas 2.1.1 Wetland Creation Area #4 Wetland #4 was installed in the spring of 2003. This is the first monitoring event for Wetland #4. Tree cover is 40% consisting of red alder, big -leaf maple, Sitka spruce and quaking aspen. Planted tree cover is 15% with existing over hang comprising the other 25%. Six dead red alder, one western hemlock, two Sitka spruce and two quaking aspen are present in the mitigation area. Shrub cover is 20%, consisting of pacific ninebark, Nootka rose, willow and salmonberry. Salmonberry throughout the site appears heavily stressed, this includes existing native vegetation. None of the red -osier dogwood cuttings have survived. Ground cover is 80%, consisting of grasses and slough sedge. Invasive cover is less than 5%. Most of the planted species are thriving. Those planted species, which have survived, have grown significantly. Periodic inundation is present throughout the winter and spring months. Soils are a black (1OYR 2/1) sandy loam. Table 1 Performance Standards YIN Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos* I Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 80% Survival rate>80% Yes 82% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met Yes 0.063 acres • Drainage patterns are present indicating the presence of hydrology Recommendations 1. Replace dead trees in -kind, 1 western hemlock (4-6 ft), 2 Sitka Spruce (4-6 ft), 2 quaking aspen (5-6 ft) and 6 red alder (5-6 ft) 2. Substitute willow cuttings (57) for the dead red -osier dogwood. 2.1.2 Wetland Creation Area "DEA-A" The wetland creation area is on track to meet performance standards. Tree cover is 70%. Red alder and willow, spaced approximately 6'x6', dominate the area. Planted western red cedars are present and thriving. Shrub cover is 40%, dominated by salmonberry and red -osier dogwood. Groundcover is 75%, dominated by creeping buttercup, grasses, herb-robert and soft rush. Invasive vegetation is 5%, consisting of Himalayan blackberry. Tansy ragwort is present along the service road to the west of Wetland "DEA-A". Soils are a black (10YR 2/1) sandy loam. Soils were not saturated at the time of monitoring. A water channel and drainage patterns are present. A dense red alder/salmonberry plant community surrounds the plot. October 2003 1 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Table 2 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos* I Soils: Pos Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 80% Survival rate>80% No 70% Ferns >50% Yes 50% Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met No 0.063 acres • W ater Channel and drainage patterns are indicators of wetland hydrology Recommendations 1. Install 10 salmonberry (1 gal) 2. Install 25 red -osier dogwood cuttings along the edges of the water channel 3. Remove invasives Himalayan blackberry and tansy 2.1.3 Wetland Creation Area #5 Supplemental planting of Wetland #5 was performed during the fall of 2002. Planted Sitka spruce are thriving. Willow and dogwood cuttings, salmonberry and Nootka rose are developing. Currently Wetland Creation Area #5 does not meet performance standards. Wetland hydrology was not present at the time of monitoring. Adequate hydrology still remains a problem in the area. Soils were a dry and loose. Until the hydrology issue is resolved, determining the acreage of created wetland is not possible. Tree cover is 10%, dominated by red alder and Sitka spruce. Shrub cover is 40%, consisting of willow, snowberry and Nootka rose. Groundcover is 70%, consisting of grasses and soft rush. Some sedge and common speedwell are present as groundcover. Table 3 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist No Hydr: Neg I Soils: Pos j Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining No 60% Survival rate>80% Yes 85% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met No* 0 acres • Supplemental hydrology is needed to determine created area Recommendations 1. Supplement wetland hydrology by piping water into the mitigation area to create wetland conditions 2. Install 20 salmonberry (1 gal) 3. Install 20 Nootka rose (1 gal) October 2003 2 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 2.1.4 Wetland Creation Area #7 The wetland creation area is a success. The mitigation area meets the performance standards as described in Appendix 11 of the del Moral mitigation plan. The as built was submitted in January 1997. After five years vegetative cover exceeds 80%. Minimum survival rate for trees, shrubs, herbs is greater than 80%, including planted individuals and volunteers. Woody plants have more than doubled in height. Plants show no sign of disease or abnormal growth. Tree cover is 45%. One planted western red cedar was observed. Shrub cover is 60%, consisting of osoberry and salmonberry. Pacific willow is present within the mitigation area. Existing wetland vegetation dominates the area. Groundcover is 80%, dominated by lady fern, skunk cabbage, horsetail and creeping buttercup. Soils were a black (10YR 2/1) sandy loam. Saturation to the soil surface was not present at the time of monitoring. Upon completion of maintenance, we recommend approval of Wetland Creation Area #7. Table 4 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos* I Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 80% Survival rate>80% Yes 80% Ferns >50% NIA N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met No 0.002 acres ' Drainage patterns are present indicating wetland hydrology is present Recommendations 1. Some Himalayan blackberry canes are present. These canes should be removed to avoid future invasive problems. 2.1.5 Wetland Creation Area #8 Wetland Creation Area #8 is on track to meet performance standards. Dense black cottonwood seedlings, less than 4 feet in height have reestablished in Wetland #8. Tree cover is 30%, dominated by willow and black cottonwood. Shrub cover is 50%, dominated by willow and red -osier dogwood. Groundcover is 65%, dominated by slough sedge, soft rush and unidentified grasses. Less than 5% invasive vegetation is present. Soils were a black (10YR 2/1) sandy loam. Saturation to the soil surface was not present at the time of monitoring. Table 5 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos* Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 90% Survival rate>80% Yes 85% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met Yes 0.18 acres Drainage patterns andwatermarks indicate wetland hydrology is present October 2003 2 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Recommendations 1. Thin black cottonwood seedlings to a spacing of 15'xl5' 2.1.6 Wetland Creation Area "100" The wetland creation area is a success. The mitigation area was implemented in 2000. Performance standards were not provided on the Kuzinski planting plan. The mitigation area meets the performance standards as described in Appendix 11 of the del Moral mitigation plan. The mitigation area meets the five-year vegetative cover standard of 80%. Minimum survival rate for trees, shrubs, herbs is greater than 80%, including planted individuals and volunteers. Woody plants have more than doubled in height. Ferns are well established. Plants show no sign of disease or abnormal growth. Watermarks and drift lines are present indicating inundation. Seasonal inundation has been observed throughout the past three seasons. Tree cover is 0%. The wetland area was designed as an emergent plant community. Planted Douglas fir were observed in the north and south buffer areas. Shrub cover is 5%. Large willow and red -osier dogwood are present on the perimeter of the wetland area. Groundcover is 90%. Sedges, soft rush and cattail dominate the bottom of the wetland. Invasive Scot's broom is present in the buffer areas. Wetland Creation Area 100 does not meet the required wetland area because a portion of the mitigation was constructed on a utility easement. This portion of the mitigation can not be included in the creation area totals. The short fall in area was incorporated into the design of Wetland Mitigation Area 4. Upon completion of maintenance, we recommend approval of Wetland Creation Area 100. Table 6 Performance Standards V/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos* I Soils: Pos Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 95% Survival rate>80% Yes 85% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes 5% Wetland acreage requirements met No 0.088 acres waterman:s ana ann nnes inaicare wcaana nyoraiogy is present Recommendations 1. Remove invasive vegetation from buffer 2.2 Buffer Enhancement Areas 2.2.1 Buffer Enhancement Area I Buffer Enhancement Area I does not meet performance standards. Red alder seedlings are reestablishing in the buffer area. Tree cover is less than 10%, consisting of seven Douglas fir. Approximately 20 big -leaf maple seedlings are present as well. Shrub cover is less than 5%, consisting of 20 snowberry. Groundcover is 90%, dominated by unidentified grasses. Invasive Scot's broom is present at less than 5%. October 2003 4 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Recommendations 1. Install 50 snowberry (1 gal) 2. Install 50 wild rose (1 gal) 3. Install 100 salal (1 gal) 4. Remove Scot's broom 5. Remove trash from buffer area 6. Remove dead Douglas fir 2.2.2 Buffer Enhancement Area II The buffer enhancement area is a partial failure. Many of the newly planted species have died due to the extremely dry summer. A walking trail is present through the middle of the enhancement area. Tree cover is 20%, consisting of existing tree overhang from outside of the plot. One 45-foot hemlock and one 65-foot Douglas fir are present in the enhancement area. The Douglas firs installed last fall have died. Eight of the hawthorns installed in 2002 have survived. Shrub cover is 10%, consisting of snowberry and wild rose. Most of the snowberry installed in 2002 have survived. Salal and huckleberry are present near the existing hemlock and Douglas fir. Groundcover is 95%, dominated by unidentified grasses, dandelion, clover and trailing blackberry. Recommendations 1. Install 15 snowberry (1 gal) 2. Install 25 salal (1 gal) 3. Remove dead trees 2.2.3 Buffer Enhancement Area III A Lakehaven Utility District Easement runs through the middle of the enhancement area. The easement area is a rock road surface approximately 15 to 20 feet in width. The roadway bisects the three plots. No plants were installed in the roadway. Performance standards do not apply to the sewer easement. The remainder of the enhancement area meets the performance standards as described in Appendix 11 of the del Moral mitigation plan. The as built was submitted in January 1997. After five years vegetative cover exceeds 80%. Minimum survival rate for trees, shrubs, herbs is greater than 80%, including planted individuals and volunteers. Woody plants have more than doubled in height. Ferns are well established. Plants show no sign of disease or abnormal growth. Upon completion of maintenance, we recommend approval of Buffer Enhancement Area III. In the west plot, tree cover is 10%, consisting of western red cedar. Vegetative cover percentages included the area of the sewer easement roadway. Many volunteer red alder are present on the edges of the plot. Shrub cover is 10%, consisting of salmonberry, salmonberry and red elderberry. Groundcover is 80%, dominated by grasses and weeds. Greater than 5% invasive vegetation is present on north and south edges of the plot. No plantings were observed within the easement area. The access road through the plot, is primarily rocked. October 2003 5 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. In the middle plot, tree cover is 10%, consisting of western red cedar, spruce and Douglas fir. Vegetative cover percentages included the area of the sewer easement roadway. Many volunteer red alder are present. Shrub cover is 10%, consisting of snowberry, snowberry and willow. Groundcover is 60%, dominated by grasses, unidentified weeds and horsetail. Greater than 5% invasive Himalayan blackberry is present. No plantings were observed within the easement area. The access road through the plot, is primarily rocked. In the east plot, tree cover is 25%, consisting of western red cedar, Douglas fir, willow, big -leaf maple and red alder. Vegetative cover percentages included the area of the sewer easement roadway. Volunteer cottonwood is present in the southeast corner. Volunteer red alder are present in the southwest corner. Shrub cover is 30%, consisting of salmonberry, snowberry, thimbleberry and red elderberry. Groundcover is 90%, dominated by grasses, horsetail, common speedwell and clover. No plantings were observed within the easement area. Greater than 5% invasive Himalayan and evergreen blackberry is present. Recommendations 1. Remove invasive vegetation from enhancement area 2.2.4 Buffer Enhancement Area IV The buffer enhancement area is a partial success. Species diversity is low due to dense volunteer red alder. Two 30' x 50' plots are located in buffer enhancement area IV. In the western plot, tree cover is 65%. Dense red alder and some big -leaf maple are present. Shrub cover was 25%, consisting of snowberry and salmonberry. Groundcover is 60%, consisting of grasses and western sword fern. Approximately 10% invasive Himalayan blackberry, Scot's broom and soft rush are present. In the eastern plot, tree cover is 80%, consisting of dense red alder and three Douglas fir. Shrub cover is 10%, consisting of snowberry, osoberry and salmonberry. Groundcover is 60%, consisting of grasses and western sword fern. Invasive vegetation is 25%, consisting of a large wall of Himalayan blackberry along the eastern edge of the enhancement area. A pedestrian trail is present through the middle of the enhancement area. Recommendations 1. Thin red alder to a 6'x6' spacing 2. Install 25 salmonberry (1 gal) 3. Install 25 snowberry (1 gal) 4. Install 25 wild rose (1 gal) 5. Install 25 western sword fern (1 gal) October 2003 6 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 2.2.5 Buffer Enhancement Area V Tree cover is 15%, consisting of two big -leaf maples, ten Douglas fir and numerous red alder seedlings. Shrub cover is less than 5%, consisting of vine maple. Groundcover is 85%, consisting of unidentified grasses, trailing blackberry and birdsfoot trefoil. Less than 5% invasive Scot's broom is present. Recommendations 1. Install 15 wild rose (1 gal) 2. Install 15 snowberry (1 gal) 3. Remove trash from enhancement area 4. Remove invasive vegetation 2.2.6 Detention Pond Buffer Restoration The buffer enhancement area is on track to meet performance standards. Two 30' x 50' plots are located in the Detention Pond Buffer Restoration Area. In the western plot, tree cover is 40%, consisting of Douglas fir, cottonwood and red alder. Shrub cover is 30%, consisting of snowberry and Nootka rose. Groundcover is 90% grasses. Less than 5% Himalayan blackberry and other invasives were present. To the north of the plot a dense patch of wild rose is present. In the east plot, tree cover is 50%, consisting of Douglas fir, big -leaf maple and red alder. Shrub cover is 25%, consisting of snowberry. Groundcover is 80%, dominated by grasses. Approximately 10% invasive Himalayan blackberry, Canadian thistle and Scot's broom. Recommendations 1. Remove invasive vegetation from planted buffer 2.2.7 Slope Buffer The buffer enhancement area is a partial success. Three 30' x 50' plots were located in the southern slope buffer. In the west plot, tree cover is 10%, consisting of spruce, Douglas fir, western red cedar and red alder. Shrub cover is 10%, consisting of vine maple and snowberry. Groundcover is 70%, dominated by unidentified grasses and clover. Some invasive Scot's broom is present. In the middle plot, tree cover is 15%, consisting of red alder, western red cedar, Douglas fir and spruce. Shrub cover is 5%, consisting of vine maple. Vine maple appear healthy. Groundcover is 95%, dominated by grasses and clover. Less than 5% invasive Scot's broom and Himalayan blackberry are present in the plot. In the east plot, tree cover is 10%, consisting of spruce, western red cedar and Douglas fir. Shrub cover is 10%, consisting of vine maple and snowberry. Groundcover was 95%, dominated by grasses and clover. Less than 5% invasive Scot's broom is present in the plot. October 2003 7 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Recommendations 1. Remove invasive vegetation 3.0 Landscape Screen The landscape screen located on the north edge of the bioswale is developing well. Conifers are 15 to 30 feet tall. Invasive Himalayan blackberry is present. Recommendations 1. Remove invasive Himalayan blackberry 4.0 Conclusions Most of the mitigation and enhancement areas are progressing well. Native plant communities are developming with minimal invasive vegetation present. Mortaility of supplemental plantings from fall 2002 is realtively high due to a very dry summer. Wetland hydrology continues to be an issue at wetland creation area #5. With the installation of wetland creation area #4, the mitigation area ratios finally meet those specified in the intitial mitigation plan. Wetland creation areas #7 and "100" meet and exceed performance standards. Wetland creation areas #8 and "DEA-A" are progrssing well. Buffer enchancement areas I and II continue to struggle due to pedestrian traffic and full sun. Buffer enhancement areas III, IV, and V, slope buffer and the R/D pond buffer are all progessing well. October 2003 8 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. i i + _ .�xa• ^�''.`�" �, nip � ... •'� . i,,M"1' . �^; _ yVA • • C1 4 r ! � A.4� erT _ skiff- �_ •� _ •. -. rY`4 _'yy. • _ ' 1-.�3.4,1[i�t..9q. ,�'�g rs `ter-. .. - . It 1-�, _• a - "A 1• �04 -- • �'yy�.; . • �r :7''. �' •, ,� is , •ram }�ii• � •>V;'�.� , :t ns�, ro - _ t f_ . ' _ .` ��� . j: rr`T:=- ' i 'i fir �• • � ..L • ... st • ray ` r ;_ y.� 4 t' »w y 49 'F _ -�-�-.....yew.. : J�-s.'i�ri�-=-•- 's-� _`:r. _ " 46. ! Ir Photo Point: Buffer Enhancement Area III Middle Plot Photo Point: Buffer Enhancement Area III West Plot October 2003 f J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 41 �•" `.r •� � �, • 1 �- ice' i � � . _ i N - ti J. S. Janes anal Associates, Inc, Annual Monitoring Field Data Sheet TRAN,SEC7S Site: Date: Transect: Plant Species Ctiunt Stratum Indicator Status Total Number of Species: Total Number of Plants: Notes: PLOTS Site: I'- i� � _ � 1 Date: 0. Plot: Vegetative Strata 7/[--Cover Plant Species Tree Cover ,-rt J _. r - r S.).y b Cover %� f`%.� Y•.Ar G•aunci Cover Sin. q Invasive Cover, Estimated Total Plant Survival: Notes: j - r� J. S. Jones and Associales, !nc Annual Monitoring Field Data Sheet TRANSEC7 S Site: Total Number of Species: Total Number of Plants: Notes: Site: Date: PI U Ts i u.m Date: ) :r Transect: Plot: '�re ("' - A V,eg.etative Strata °Io Doy.er Plant Species Treo Cover r �, Shrob Cover, � 4;' �� �:.. �•-, to !:'round Cover -7s- �Ih ;n,vaslve Cm,e1 m• Estimated Total Plant Survival: 707� Notes: {{ r� III .I. S. Jones and Aswocialws, Inc, Site: Annual Monitoring Field Data Sheet TR A NVE CTS Date: Transect: Plant Species Count Stratum Indicator Status Total Number of Species: Total Number of Plants: Notes: ll PLOOTS Site: l: i-� Date: J-7 I0i Plot: Vegetative Strata '/6 Cover Plant Species Tree Covet 1e� � r_ Shrub Cover `�" I � Grourw Cover !nvasive Cover . t_[ G Estimated Total Plant Survival: Notes: �. �...•'. .�, r� r;_ r�. .1. S. Janes and Assvciales, Inc. Annual Monitoring Field Data Sheet TRAN S EC7 S Site: Total Number of Species: Total Number of Plants: Notes: Site: Date: PLOTS Transect: Date: Plot: ,y trata '4lc=(rover Fklant Species Shrub Cover•,y�,� GrauhO Cover fez) t 7 li7.ir[�;� :�? •�QV�i �o ,1 v Estimated Total Plant Survival: S % Notes•. ,, i Annual (Monitoring Field Data Sheet TRA NSCC7 S Site: Total Number of Species: Total Number of Plants: Notes: Date: PLOTS Site: I Y - , , Date: Vegetative Strata Tree Cover Sirrob Cover CrotlM) Seaver Invasive Cover Dever I Plant Estimated Total Plant Survival: Transect: Plot: 3 Notes: CITY OFJf�i� CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 March 21, 2003 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 R L Ms. Lizzie Zemke Adolfson Associates 5309 Shilshole NW Seattle, WA 98107 Re: File No. 98-102890-00-SU; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND MONITORING Fall 2002 Monitoring and Contingency Plan Dear Ms. Zemke: Enclosed is a copy of the revised (January 15, 2003) Fall 2002 Heritage Woods wetland monitoring report from J.S. Jones and Associates Inc. Your firm will continue to review the monitoring reports for the Heritage Woods project, as we have contracted. Pursuant to your February 1, 1999 letter, the budget for the Fall 2002 monitoring review is $1,065.00. Therefore, do not exceed the budgeted amount of $1,065.00 without prior written authorization from me. I understand that you have already used a portion of the budget for the initial review you conducted on the first draft of this report as identified in your November 19, 2002, e-mail to Lance Erickson and me. Please review the enclosed revised Fall 2002 monitoring report and provide your written comments to me. Also, please conduct a brief review of the enclosed January 22, 2003 J.S. Jones letter regarding the Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Area #4, and provide your comments on this subject. Given that you have already conducted an initial review of the monitoring report, and I'm asking for brief comments on the Mitigation Area #4, let me know in advance if you anticipate exceeding the monitoring budget amount described above. Contact me at 253 661-4019 or jini.harris a,cityoffederalway_.com if you have any questions. Si erely, t L Jim H ris Senior Planner enclosures Doc. I.D. 22345 J. S. cones &imd Associates, 1 3mc. Fall 2002 Monitoring of Heritage Woods Div. I & II Federal Way, Washington File No.: SUB98-0003 (98-102890-000-00-SU) Prepared for: Schneider Family Homes 6510 Southcenter Boulevard Suite #1 Tukwila, Washington 98155 (206) 248-2471 September 13, 2002 Revised: January 15. 2003 Prepared by: Lance Erickson, Environmental Designer Jeffery S. Jones, Certified Professional Wetland Scientist 3408 52nd Place, N.E. TAC0MA,WASHINGT0N 98422 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 ✓. Jones and Associates, Inc. Forward In response to an Adolfson Associates e-mail dated November 19, 2002, I have prepared a revised monitoring report comparing the 2000 and 2002 monitoring reports. Revisions to the monitoring report are underlined. Wetland Creation Area #1 and the Wetland "D" Enhancement were included in the 2000 report but were not covered in the 2002 report. An explanation is given below. It is my hope that this will clear up any confusion regarding the status of the Heritage Woods project. Wetland Creation Area #1 This area was never implemented. It was referred to in the 2000 report to document the status when our firm was hired to take on the monitoring. It was not included in the 2002 monitoring and will not be included in any fixture monitoring events. Wetland "D" Enhancement Wetland "D" enhancement was included in the 2000 monitoring report to document previous monitoring results. Previous reports recommended the release of the enhancement. Our firm will do no further monitoring of the area. It is also our opinion that wetland hydrology is a continual problem for this site. We will perform periodic site visits throughout the winter and spring to check wetland hydrology. A written report of our findings will be presented in the spring of 2003. Very Tr y Lance rickson Environmental Designer 1 �. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 1.0 Introduction This report presents the results of the fall 2002 annual monitoring for the Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Plan. A table of mitigation areas is provided on fall 2000 monitoring plans. Only fall monitoring is scheduled for the remainder of the monitoring events. Photos of the mitigation and enhancement areas are attached. 2.0 Results 2.1 Wetland Creation Areas 2.1.1 Wetland Creation Area #4 Currently a new wetland mitigation plan has been submitted for Wetland Area #4. Upon approval by the City of Federal Way, construction will begin with annual monitoring to follow. Wetland Creation Area #4 This area is a failed or never constructed area. It is currently under constructi be included in future monitorinLi events. 2.1.2 Wetland Creation Area "DEA-A" The wetland creation area is on track to meet performance standards. Tree cover is 65%. Red alder, spaced approximately 6'x6', dominates the area. Planted western red cedars are present and thriving. Shrub cover is 40%, dominated by salmonberry and red -osier dogwood. Groundcover is 50%, dominated by creeping buttercup, grasses, herb-robert and soft rush. Invasive vegetation is 5%, consisting of Himalayan blackberry. Soils were a black (IOYR 2/1) sandy loam. Soils were not saturated at the time of monitoring. A water channel is developing and drainage patterns are present. A dense red alder/salmonberry plant community surrounds the plot. Table 2 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos* I Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 80% Survival rate>80% No 60% Ferns >50% Yes 50% Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met No 0.063 acres . Wate rChanneI and drnina-e pasterns are indivinun tir%vetland hydrology Recommendations 1. Thin red alder to a 15'x15' spacing 2. Install 10 salmonberry (1 gal) 3. Plant 25 red -osier dogwood cuttings in the water channel 2 j. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Wetland Creation Area "DEA A" The tables used for quantifying t11C success of t11e mitigation were approved priorty our firms involvement in the monitoring. Fern cover is listed as a measure for success. However ferns were not included in the planting plan. Wetland "DEA-A" exceeds 50% cover for ferns. No other wetland area has fern cover. Tree cover percentages are lower for 2002 due to tllinninn. 2.1.3 Wetland Creation Area #5 Wetland Creation Area #5 does not meet performance standards. Wetland hydrology was not present at the time of monitoring. Soils were a dry and loose. Tree cover is 10%, dominated by red alder. Shrub cover is less than 5%, consisting of willow cuttings. Groundcover is 15%. Some sedge and common speedwell are present as groundcover. Table 3 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist No Hydr: Neg I Soils: Pos Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining No 25% Survival rate>80% No 20% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met No 0 acres Recommendations 1. Supplement wetland hydrology to create wetland conditions 2. Thin red alder to a 15'x15' spacing 3. Install 10 Sitka spruce (4-5 ft) 4. Install 20 salmonberry (1 gal) 5. Install 20 Nootka rose (1 gal) 6. Install 50 willow and 50 red -osier dogwood cuttings Wetland Creation Area #5 Tree cover in Wetland #5 is sianificant1v lower die to diinnina of dense red alder. A drainage ditch that flows along the east end of [lie access road was designed to supRleinent the hydrology of Wetland #5. This drainage ditch has not functioned as designed in the past. Improvement of this ditch will direct sheet flow from the access road into Wetland #5 and provide the necessary wetland hydrology. The recommendation provided for 2000 and 2002 are similar. Recommendations were not fully implemented following 2000 and additional planting of similar species, sizes and quantities would benefit the mitigation area. ✓. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 2.1.4 Wetland Creation Area #7 The wetland creation area is a success. The mitigation area meets the performance standards as described in Appendix 11 of the del Moral mitigation plan. The as built was submitted in January 1997. After five years vegetative cover exceeds 80%. Minimum survival rate for trees, shrubs, herbs is greater than 80%, including planted individuals and volunteers. Woody plants have more than doubled in height. Plants show no sign of disease or abnormal growth. Tree cover is 45%. One planted western red cedar was observed. Shrub cover is 60%, consisting of Indian plum and salmonberry. Pacific willow is present within the mitigation area. Existing wetland vegetation dominates the area. Groundcover is 80%, dominated by lady fern, skunk cabbage, horsetail and creeping buttercup. Soils were a black (10YR 2/1) sandy loam. Saturation to the soil surface was not present at the time of monitoring. Upon completion of maintenance, we recommend approval of Wetland Creation Area 97. Table 4 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist No Hydr: Pos* Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 80% Survival rate>80% No 60% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met No 0.002 acres - i-immage pammis are prescin lnuicatina, m'C[lsmu iiymni way Is presem Recommendations 1. Some Himalayan blackberry canes are present. These canes should be removed to avoid future invasive problems. Wetland Creation Area #7 Our firm recommends the release of Wetland #7. It meets performance standards for the created area. 2.1.5 Wetland Creation Area #8 Wetland Creation Area 98 does not meet performance standards. The recommended thinning of black cottonwood saplings, from the revised 2000 monitoring report, was done in September 2001. Dense black cottonwood seedlings, less than 4 feet in height have reestablished in Wetland #8. Tree cover is 5%, dominated by willow and the remaining black cottonwood saplings. Shrub cover is 80%, dominated by willow stakes, red -osier dogwood stakes and black cottonwood seedlings. Groundcover is 10%, dominated by slough sedge and unidentified grasses. Less than 5% invasive vegetation is present. Soils were a black (10YR 2/1) sandy loam. Saturation to the soil surface was not present at the time of monitoring. M ✓. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Table 5 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria _ Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos* Soils: Pos Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 90% Survival rate>80% No 40% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met Yes 0.18 acres •Drainage patterns nnuI watemlark+ bidicate wcfl.lsid hydrology Is present Recommendations 1. Thin black cottonwood seedlings to a spacing of 15'x15' 2. Install 5 Sitka spruce (4-6 ft) 3. Install 25 salmonberry (1 gal) 4. Install 25 Nootka rose (1 gal) 5. Install 1000 slough sedge to increase groundcover percentage Wetland Creation Area #8 Dense cottonwood and willow dominated the area in 2000. Since that time thinning has occurred significantly Iowerina the tree cover percentages for 2002. Recommendations are provided that continues thinning SO thzt the shrubs and conifers canted will not be choked out. Additional similar recommendations were made because it is our opinion that thev would bel-iefit the mitigation area 2.1.6 Wetland Creation Area "100" The wetland creation area is a success. The mitigation area was implemented in 2000. Performance standards were not provided on the Kuzinsld planting plan. The mitigation area meets the performance standards as described in Appendix 11 of the del Moral mitigation plan. The mitigation area meets the five-year vegetative cover standard of 80%. Minimum survival rate for trees, shrubs, herbs is greater than 80%, including planted individuals and volunteers. Woody plants have more than doubled in height. Ferns are well established. Plants show no sign of disease or abnormal growth. Watermarks and drift lines are present indicating inundation. Tree cover is 0%. The wetland area was designed as an emergent plant community. Planted Douglas fir were observed in the north and south buffer areas. Shrub cover is 5%. Willow and red -osier dogwood are present on the perimeter of the wetland area. Groundcover is 90%. Sedges, soft rush and cattail dominate the bottom of the wetland. Invasive Scot's broom is present in the buffer areas. Upon completion of maintenance, we recommend approval of Wetland Creation Area 100. ✓. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Table 6 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist No Hydr: Pos* I Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 95% Survival rate>80% No 70% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes 5% Wetland acreage requirements met No 0.088 acres Wntennarks :utd drill lines intlimsic wetlasuf hydrology is present Recommendations 1. Remove invasive vegetation from buffer Wetland Creation Area "100" Our firm recommends the release of Wetland "100". It meets performance standards and is thriving. 2.2 Buffer Enhancement Areas 2.2.1 Buffer Enhancement Area I Buffer Enhancement Area I does not meet performance standards. The area was cleared of all red alder last year. Since that time new volunteer red alder seedlings are establishing. Tree cover is less than 5%, consisting of seven Douglas fir. Approximately 20 big -leaf maple seedlings are present as well. Shrub cover is less than 5%, consisting of 20 snowberry. Groundcover is 90%, dominated by unidentified grasses. Invasive Scot's broom is present at less than 5%. Recommendations 1. Thin red alder seedlings to a 15'x15' spacing 2. Install 15 Douglas fir (5-7 ft) I Install 25 snowberry (1 gal) 4. Install 25 wild rose (1 gal) 5. Remove Scot's broom 6. Remove trash from buffer area Buffer Enhancement Area I Recommendations for thinnina, alder to a 4'x4' sl)acinw were made durinsa the 2000 monitoring. The area was conipletely cleared oC red alder in 2001. The red alder are reestablishing as seedlings and continued thinninu was recommended to allow for the shrubs and groundcovers to establish. 6 Jones and Associates, Inc. 2.2.2 Buffer Enhancement Area II The buffer enhancement area has failed. Planted species have died due to dry soil conditions and pedestrian traffic. A walking trail is present through the middle of the enhancement area. Tree cover is 20%, consisting of existing tree overhang from outside of the plot. One 45-foot hemlock and one 65-foot Douglas fir are present in the enhancement area. Shrub cover is less than 5%. Two snowberry were present. Salal and huckleberry are present near the existing hemlock and Douglas fir. Groundcover is 75%, dominated by unidentified grasses and tansy ragwort. Recommendations 1. Install 10 black hawthorn (4-6 ft) 2. Install 5 Douglas fir (5-6 ft) 3. Install 25 wild rose (1 gal) 4. Install 15 snowberry (1 gal) Buffer Enhancement Area H The enhancement area has been a failure. Recommendations from the 2000 monitoring report were not performed. The recommendations made in the 2002 report have been installed. 2.2.3 Buffer Enhancement Area III A Lakehaven Utility District Easement runs through the middle of the enhancement area. The easement area is a rock road surface approximately 15 to 20 feet in width. The roadway was reconstructed during the summer of 2002 (see attached photos). The roadway bisects the three plots. No plants were installed in the roadway. Performance standards do not apply to the sewer easement. The remainder of the enhancement area meets the performance standards as described in Appendix 11 of the del Moral mitigation plan. The as built was submitted in January 1997_ After five years vegetative cover exceeds 80%. Minimum survival rate for trees, shrubs, herbs is greater than 80%, including planted individuals and volunteers. Woody plants have more than doubled in height. Ferns are well established. Plants show no sign of disease or abnormal growth. Upon completion of maintenance, we recommend approval of Buffer Enhancement Area III. In the west plot, tree cover is less than 5%. Vegetative cover percentages included the area of the sewer easement roadway. Eight planted western red cedars were present on the edges of the plot. Many volunteer red alder are present on the edges of the plot. Shrub cover is less than 5%. Willows are present in the north quarter of the plot. Groundcover is 60%, dominated by grasses and weeds. Greater than 5% invasive vegetation is present on north and south edges of the plot. No plantings were observed within the easement area. The access road through the plot, is primarily rocked. 7 �. �. Jones and Associates, Inc. In the middle plot, tree cover is 10%. Vegetative cover percentages included the area of the sewer easement roadway. Three planted western red cedars, one spruce and four Douglas fir were observed within the plot. Many volunteer red alder are present. Shrub cover is less than 5%, consisting of snowberry and willow. Groundcover is 50%, dominated by grasses, common speedwell and horsetail. Greater than 5% invasive Himalayan blackberry is present. No plantings were observed within the easement area. The access road through the plot, is primarily rocked. In the east plot, tree cover is 10%. Vegetative cover percentages included the area of the sewer easement roadway. Five planted western red cedar and two Douglas fir were observed in the plot. Volunteer cottonwood was present in the southeast corner. Volunteer red alder were present in the southwest corner. Shrub cover is 15%, consisting of sahnonberry, snowberry, thinibleberry and willow. Groundcover is 80%, dominated by grasses, horsetail, common speedwell and clover. No plantings were observed within the easement area. Greater than 5% invasive Himalayan and evergreen blackberry is present. Recommendations 1. Remove invasive vegetation from enhancement area 2. Thin red alder to a 15'x15' spacing 3. Grass seed edges of road surface Buffer Enhancement Area III Our firm recommends release of the enhancement area conditional on the implementation of the recommendations from the 2002 report. Red alder seedlings are beginning to reestablish and need to be thinned to alIow the conifers. shrubs and grou17deovers the thrive. 2.2.4 Buffer Enhancement Area IV The buffer enhancement area is a partial success. Species diversity is low due to dense volunteer red alder. Two 30' x 50' plots are located in buffer enhancement area IV. In the western plot, tree cover is 65%. Dense red alder are present at a V x V spacing. One dead Douglas fir was observed. Shrub cover was 5%, consisting of ten snowberry. Fourteen western sword fern are present. Groundcover is 60%. Approximately 10% invasive Himalayan blackberry, Scot's broom and soft rush are present. In the eastern plot, tree cover is 80%, consisting of dense red alder and three Douglas fir. Shrub cover is less than 5%, consisting of 10 snowberry. Ten western sword fern are present. Groundcover is 60%, dominated by grasses. Invasive vegetation is 25%, consisting of a large wall of Himalayan blackberry along the eastern edge of the enhancement area. A pedestrian hail is present through the middle of the enhancement area. ✓. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Recommendations 1. Thin red alder to a 15'x15' spacing 2. Install 25 salmonberry (1 gal) 3. Install 25 snowberry (1 gal) 4. Install 25 wild rose (1 gal) 5. Install 25 western sword fern (1 gal) Buffer Enhancement Area IV Recommendations from the 2000 report for Buffer Area IV were never implemented. I have spoken with Schneider Homes regarding this area and they will be performing the 2002 recommendations. 2.2.5 Buffer Enhancement Area V Tree cover is 15%, consisting of two big -leaf maples, ten Douglas fir and numerous red alder seedlings. Shrub cover is less than 5%, consisting of vine maple. Groundcover is 85%, consisting of unidentified grasses, trailing blackberry and birdsfoot trefoil. Less than 5% invasive Scot's broom is present. Recommendations 1. Thin red alder seedlings to a 15'x15' spacing 2. Install 15 wild rose (1 gal) 3. Install 15 snowberry (1 gal) 4. Mow or weedeat grasses Buffer Enhancement Area V Recommendations from 2000 were implemented. Cover percentages in the 2002 report reflect the new plantings. Recommendations for 2002 were made to increase cover percentages and benefit the enhancement area. 2.2.6 Detention Pond Buffer Restoration The buffer enhancement area is on track to meet performance standards. Two 30' x 50' plots are located in the Detention Pond Buffer Restoration Area. In the western plot, tree cover is 20%. Seventeen Douglas fir, nine cottonwood and five red alder are present in the plot. Shrub cover is 25%. Eleven snowberry and eight Nootka rose are present in the plot. Groundcover is 90% grasses. Less than 5% Himalayan blackberry and other invasives were present. To the north of the plot a dense patch of wild rose is present. In the northern plot, tree cover is 20%. Eleven Douglas fir, one big -leaf maple and one red alder were present in the plot. Shrub cover is 25%. 50 snowberry were observed in the plot. Groundcover is 80%, dominated by grasses. Approximately 10% invasive Himalayan blackberry, Canadian thistle and Scot's broom. 0 J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Recommendations 1. Remove invasive vegetation from planted buffer 2. Mow or weedeat grasses Detention Pond Buffer The area is on track to meet performance standards. 2.2.7 Slope Buffer The buffer enhancement area is a partial success. Three 30' x 50' plots were located in the southern slope buffer. In the west plot, tree cover is 10%, consisting of spruce, Douglas fir and red alder were observed in the plot. Many volunteer red alder seedlings are present. Shrub cover is less than 5%. Four vine maples are present. Groundcover is 70%, dominated by unidentified grasses and clover. Some invasive Himalayan blackberry is present. In the middle plot, tree cover is 5%, consisting of western red cedar, Douglas fir and spruce. Many volunteer red alder are present in the plot. Shrub cover is less than 5%. Vine maple appear healthy. Groundcover is 85%, dominated by grasses and clover. Greater than 5% invasive Scot's broom and Himalayan blackberry is present in the plot. In the east plot, tree cover is 10%, consisting of spruce, western red cedar and Douglas fir. Shrub cover was less than 5%. Many red alder seedlings are present. Three vine maples were observed in the plot. Groundcover was 95%, dominated by grasses and clover. Greater than 5% invasive Scot's broom is present in the plot. Total plant survival for the buffer enhancement is approximately 70%. Recommendations 1. Remove invasive vegetation 2. Thin red alder seedlings to a 15'x15' spacing 3. Install 30 big -leaf maples (4-6 ft) 4. Install 50 snowberry (1 gal) 5. Install 50 wild rose (1 gal) 6. Mow or weedeat grasses Slope Buffer Additional recommended plantings were made to increase cover and diversitv in the slope buffer. 2000 recommendations were implemented and are thriving. 3.0 Landscape Screen The landscape screen located on the north edge of the bioswale is developing well. Conifers are 15 to 30 feet tall. Invasive Himalayan blackberry is present. 10 �. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Recommendations 1. Remove invasive Himalayan blackberry Landscape Screen A wall of H_ inzalayan blackberry is present to the north of the landscape screen. Continued removal of invasives is recommended to prevent the blackberry from spreading_ 4.0 Conclusions The Heritage Woods monitoring plan has progressed since the last monitoring event. Two wetland mitigation areas and one buffer area are recommended for approval. Most of the other mitigation and buffer enhancement areas have increased in species diversity and plant survival. The area of wetland mitigation is still less than original approved mitigation plan called for. With the approval and construction of the proposed Wetland #4, the correct areas of wetland mitigation will be achieved. Thinning of red alder, removal of invasives and supplemental plantings as described in this monitoring report, will help keep this project on track to achieved performance standards. J. S. cones aimd AssociatEes, 13ac. January 22, 2003 Mr. Jim Harris Senior Planner City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services 33530 First Way South Federal Way, Washington 98003-6210 RE: Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Area #4 City of Federal Way File No.: 98-102890-00-SU Mr. Harris: Schneider Homes, Inc., has completed the construction and installation of the Wetland Area #4 mitigation. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc., performed a site visit to check the installation. Filter fencing is in place along the northern edge of the mitigation area. Plant materials have been installed at the quantities specified in the approved mitigation plan. However, it is our opinion that the quality of the topsoil is inadequate and should be amended with organic compost. Because the rains have made the soil wet, it is not practical to attempt to do this work now. Schneider Homes has been directed to amend the topsoil, and will do so this spring when weather conditions are more conducive to working. A final as -built letter and red lined plans will be prepared upon completion and inspection of the amended topsoil. Photos of the current condition of the mitigation area are attached. If you have any questions, please contact us a 253-942-7131 or by e-mail at bluej4yiones@nventure.com. VieErickson y, L Environmental Designer cc: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, Inc. Dan Richter, Schneider Homes, Inc. 3408 52nd Place, N.E. TAC0MA,WASHINGTON 98422 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 41 Rv 10pe, R I /z 1.7 . I .%. , P. r 1. - j-.-, q TM- Mal, O Mimi vIl Page 1 of 2 Jim Harris - Heritage Woods Fall 2002 Monitoring Report From: "Lizzie Zemke" <Izemke@adolfson.com> To: <bluejayjones@nventure.com> Date: 11 / 19/2002 12:13 PM Subject: Heritage Woods Fall 2002 Monitoring Report CC: "Jim Harris (E-mail)" <jim.harris@ci.federal-way.wa.us> Lance: At the request of the City of Federal Way, I have reviewed the Fall 2002 Heritage Woods Wetland and Buffer Mitigation Monitoring Report prepared by your firm for Schneider Homes, Inc. In reviewing the 2002 report I referred back to the Fall 2000 monitoring report, also prepared by your firm, and in comparing the two I encountered a few problems. I typically review the monitoring reports that the City receives and then forward my comments in a letter to Jim Harris at the City. Jim then forwards the comments to the applicants, and the applicants respond to the City. Jim then forwards the applicant's responses to me and I prepare another letter. In the case of the Fall 2002 report I felt it might be quicker and more cost effective to send you a brief e mail that points out where there are discrepancies, and instead of going through the process I just descri bed, I am hoping you will be able to compare the two reports in light of the comments in this e-mail, and can then provide a revised Fall 2002 monitoring report to the City for me to review. A few, but not all, of the discrepancies I observed are listed below. With respect to some of the buffer enhancement areas, recommendations that were made in 2000 are made again in 2002, with no explanation about why. It is not clear if these are typos, or if the recommendations were never implemented, or if the recommendations were implemented and the recommended plantings did not survive. In another buffer enhancement area the percent cover of trees has decreased considerably between the 2000 and the 2002 monitoring periods. An explanation for why this has occurred and recommendations for how to remedy the problem are needed. For a number of the created wetlands, the associated information tables indicate that there is greater than 50 fo cover of ferns, but ferns aren't mentioned in the overall descriptions of the wetland. Soil saturation was generally not observed in the mitigation wetlands, which is not surprising during the fall of a drought year. However, because lack of water has historically been a problem at the Heritage Woods site, the presence of water in the mitigation wetlands must be substantiated before wetland creation success can be claimed. It is our recommendation that J.S. Jones visit the site early in the growing season to document the presence or absence of saturated soil or inundation, and that a follow- up memo documenting these hydrologic observations be sent to the City. With regard to Wetland Creation Area #5--J.S. Jones made a recommendation in 2000 and again in 2002 to supplement wetland hydrology in Area #5. It will be necessary to explain how wetland hydrology would be supplemented to achieve wetland conditions at the site. As I stated at the beginning of this e-mail, these comments do not include all of the discrepancies between the two reports. It is my recommendation that you carefully compare the Fall 2000 and the Fall Page 2 of 2 2002 reports and revise the 2002 report to address all discrepancies. Please feel free to call me at (206) 789-9658 if you need clarification on any of this. Thank you. Lizzie Zemke Senior Ecologist Adolfson Associates, Inc. (206) 789-9658 telephone (206) 789-9684 fax CITY OF V CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 October 29, 2002 Ms. Lizzie Zemke Adolfson Associates 5309 Shilshole NW Seattle, WA 98107 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way,. WA 98063-9718 Re: File No. 98-102890-00-SU; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND MONITORING Fall 2002 Monitoring and Contingency Plan Dear Ms. Zemke: Enclosed is a copy of the Fall 2002 Heritage Woods wetland monitoring report (September 13, 2002) from J.S. Jones and Associates Inc. Your firm will continue to review the monitoring reports for the Heritage Woods project, as we have contracted. Pursuant to your February 1, 1999, letter (enclosed) the budget for the Fall 2002 monitoring review is $ 1,065.00. Therefore, do not exceed the budgeted amount of $1,065.00 without prior written authorization from me. Please review the enclosed Fall 2002 monitoring report and provide your written comments to me. Contact me at 253 661-4019 or jim.harrisncilvof%deral\vay.eorn if you have any questions. Sincerely, . 6alzt� J Harris Senior Planner enclosures Doc I D 20829 I February 1999 Mr. Jim Harris City o'f Federal Way 33530 First Way South Federal Way, Washington 98003-6210 RE: Heritage Woods Mitigation flan Review AA1 Task 97103-81 Dear Jim: A1)()L SON, ASSOCIATES, INC:. Adolfson Associates, Inc. (AAl) has reviewed the most recent (25 January 1999) revision of the ,Supplemental Wedattd Creation Ph-171 for. the proposed Heritage Woods project. The plan and its subsequent revisions were, produced by Kucinski Consulting Services, Inc. ($.CS) for Schneider Hornes, and were intended to provide an approach to rectify failed wetland witidgation efforts atI the Heritage Woods site located on Military Road in Federal Way, Washin.gtott. Our earlier concerns have been addressed by the most recent plant. The last time we reviewed this plan our main con=m was that the anticipated water regimes and vegetation classes were not described in the text or shown on the plan shects. Although we would still litre snore assurance that particular wetland conditions will develop at specific locations in the mitigation areas, as requested the applicazrt has addressed the issue, and we arc comfortable approving the plat with the level of detail it currently provides. In addition to revie%ving the mitigation plan, AAI has also been asked to review the. Heritage Woods mitigation n10-11itoring reports that will, be submitted over the next five years. For the purpose of explaining the new znortitorino schedule, we will refer to the- oril;inal monitoring phase (1997-20k0l) as Phase 1, and the second monitoring phase (1999-2003) as Phase 11. The original mitigation. worlr (Phase 1) was to be monitored for five years beginning ire 1997, This original monitoring schedule cdtled for two monitoring events in 1991 and two monitoring events in 1998, and then one monitoring event in each of the next three years. Schneider Homes and/or Parklane Ventures submitted some late reports and missed submittals during the first two years of monitoring for this phase, and therefore the City has now required that Phase I be monitored twice in 1999, twice in 20W, once in 2001 and once in 2W2. The new mitigation plan (Phase 11) will also require five years of monitoring, and it will be possible to combine some of that work with the originally scheduled monitoring effort. 4% F.nviro► ottental Ana!ysis 5309,51tilskole Ave. NTV Seattle, ti'A, 98107 adulrsox@adolfson.u,nt (2061)789-9658 FAY fi0617. -9684 � �VV i U_ JVUY n1�VL1 .JIJIY HJJL monitoring schedule will be as follows: pring Fall Additional Cost for Phase 11 1999 Phases I&T1. Phases 1&11 $1005 2000 Phases I&II Phases 1&11 $1035 2001 Phases 1&11 $305 2002 Phases 1&11 $1065 2003 Phase 11 1095 $4505 Total Additional Cost The total cost for monitoring Phase II, hi addition to the amount already set aside for Phase I monitoring, would be $4505. This cost reflects anticipated AAI billing rate increases, as well as a More hitimse le.v4 of monitoring review necessary because of the history of problems associated with this project. Please call me at (206) 789-9659 if you nave questions. Again, thank --you for providing us with the opportunity to work or, this project. Sincerely, tIAUL e�q Adolfson Associates, Inc. LOLA I�V� IJizzie Zemke Senior Ecologist J. S. Joiaes aiacl Associafes, October 9, 2001 Mr. Mike Brewer Surface Water Management Inspector Public Works Department City of Federal Way 33530 Ist Way South P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 RE: Heritage Woods Pond Dear Mr. Brewer: ]InC. RECEIVEC CITY QF �tI. VVAY pUBUC WORK � : ;'xPARMEN The bottom of the pond lacks a natural soils profiled. Submerged soils are liquidified till 0-8 inches deep, underlaid with compacted gravelly sandy. A natural profile should have a black "A" horizon. There is no evidence of soil deposition in the pond. Clouded runoff, observed during construction of the plat, may have contained dissolved particles. The prior owner excavated and enlarged the pond, digging down to the compacted substrate. Lance Erickson, of J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc., observed changes in the pond as he grew up in the area. Sediment removal would disturb the current ecological balance of the pond. The pond provides wildlife habitat for aquatic insects, amphibians, low oxygen tolerant fish, ducks, and belted king fishers, all of which have been observed. The aquatic plant community is dominated by pond weed (Potamogeton natans), and smartweed (Polygonum sp.). Pond weed is a food source for waterfowl. The pond is seasonal stagnate and algae is present, but not to the exclusion of other desirable plant species. Two pipes discharge runoff from the plat above. Their outlets are buried under aquatic root masses and sediment. Annual cleaning of these outlets is necessary to ensure full function. The outlets were not constructed according to plan. The plans called for a "T" section at the outlet to disipate the force. The pipes are steep enough to create flow velocities that will force any blockage from the outlet. However, it would be better to have an outlet that does not discharge below the pond high water line. If the pipe was cut above the pond high waterline and a rock splash basin installed, it would be easier to inspect the outlet and avoid annual cleaning. Very Truly, �� A Jeffery S. Jones Certified Professional Wetland Scientist cc: Dave Nelson, Schneider Homes, Inc. 3408 52nd Place, N.E. TACO MA,WASHINGTON 98422 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 REGEIVED BY TPARWEN-r SEP 2 0 2.001 11 September 2001 Environmentd Solutions Mr. Jim Harris City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services 33530 First Way South Federal Way, Washington 98003-6210 RE: Heritage Woods: Changing to an Overall Wetland Enhancement Approach Dear Mr. Harris: Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) is pleased to present the following guidance regarding changes in the Heritage Woods wetland mitigation approach. Several years ago the City of Federal Way approved a proposal for a residential development on the Heritage Woods site. This proposal included creating wetlands in order to mitigate the loss of wetlands that would be eliminated during the development of the site. The Heritage Woods housing development has been completed and most of the houses are now occupied. Due to a number of factors, the attempts at wetland creation on this site have been, to varying degrees, unsuccessful. As you described in your letter to me dated 13 July 2001, the City is considering changing the action plan for this project to an overall wetland area enhancement program rather than pursuing further attempts at wetland creation on the site. In light of the past failures associated with wetland mitigation on this site, Adolfson agrees that changing the overall action plan is appropriate. At your request we are providing the City with the following guidance in order to provide direction to the applicant: It is most important at this point in the project that the new proposal must provide some measurable ecological benefit. Also, years have passed since the original wetland losses were incurred; and more time will pass before this next phase of mitigation is implemented. Therefore it is imperative that whatever is proposed must be successful as well as ecologically valuable. In response to your question regarding whether or not the Washington State Department of Ecology's wetland functions assessment program document would be an appropriate tool to use as a guideline for determining enhancement objectives, we believe that document could be helpful and should be suggested to the applicant. However, the primary wetlands that should be evaluated under the Ecology methodology have already been eliminated from the Heritage Woods site. We suggest that in order to develop appropriate enhancement objectives the consultant look beyond the immediate project area to determine what types of wetlands and wetland functions have been degraded or eliminated in the past in the project vicinity. Then with this information the consultant would look on site to determine how some of the lost features might be replaced or approximated at the on site wetlands. For example if the consultant were to determine ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 ` c[ 206 789 9658 Jav 206 789 9684 ado�N-Oado( on,(om Federal Way/Harris letter 11 September 2001 Page 2 of 2 that relatively few forested wetlands remain in Federal Way, development of a forested component in the wetlands on the Heritage Woods site could -be proposed. Or if it were determined that flood storage is a wetland function that is generally lacking in Federal Way, then a proposal to improve the flood storage function of the wetlands on the Heritage Woods site could be proposed. The following is a list of items that we believe should be considered by the applicant's consultant: ■ In order to determine the size of the enhancement area, the consultant will need to calculate the current wetland creation deficit —the amount of wetland that has actually been created subtracted from the amount of wetland that was supposed to have been created. The deficit amount will need to be doubled in order to arrive at the amount of wetland that needs to be enhanced per the updated FWCC. • An educational/interpretive element should be included in the enhancement proposal. • The applicant should propose more than one concept so the City can pick the more appropriate proposal. + The applicant/consultant should review the entire project history in order to avoid past mistakes. ■ Once a concept has been developed, it will be important for the consultant to develop a set of parameters that evaluated both by the applicant's consultant as well as by the City, can be easily measured so that the success or failure of the project can be ■ A monitoring schedule will need to be developed for the entire mitigation project since the existing monitoring schedule is currently off track. We very much appreciate the opportunity to assist the City with this project. Please feel free to call Andy Castelle or me at (206) 789-9658 if you have questions about what we have provided. Sincerely, ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 1V�w hYA� Lizzie Zemke Senior Ecologist 2 J. S. cones zLxxcl AssociaEes, ]Inc. May 4, 2001 Mr. Jim Harris Plan Reviewer City of Federal Way 33520 First Way South P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 rCF-IVED BY RE: Lakehaven Sewer Line Easement and Heritage Woods Spring 2001 Maintenance Dear Mr. Harris; t Schneider Homes, Inc. has been unable to secure permission for the wetland mitigation in the Lakehaven Utility District sewer line easement (Wetland "100"). J S. Jones and Associates, Inc. prepared a conceptual mitigation plan for Wetland 4, the 500 square feet of wetland effected by the easement can be created adjacent to Weltand 4. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. is currently in the process of designing the Wetland 4 mitigation area. As soon as the mitigation area is approved, Schneider Homes, Inc. will begin construction. Schneider Homes, Inc. would like to proceed with maintenance and supplemental plantings for the rest of the site while the Wetland 4 mitigation area is being designed. Schneider Homes, Inc. is prepared to do maintenance as soon as they receive your approval. If you have any questions, please call. Very Tr y, Lance Erickson Environmental Designer cc: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, Inc. Dan Richter, Schneider Homes, Inc. 3408 52nd Place, N.E. TACOMA,WASHINGTON 9 842 2 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 ■ / M0 A O O L F S❑ N Evwironmentd ,Solagons nnROq"r'nrrr FC'ENFD 3Y 3 May 2001 "T ��DARTRMYr Y °' 4 2001 Mr. Jim Harris City of Federal Way 33520 First Way South Post Office Box 9718 Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 Re: Heritage Woods Monitoring Review Dear Jim: Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) is pleased to provide this review of the revised Fall 2000 monitoring report and contingency plan for the Heritage Woods mitigation project owned by Schneider Homes Inc. and located in Federal Way, Washington. The monitoring report was prepared by J.S. Jones Associates Inc. was originally dated 15 December 2000, and was revised on 20 March 2001. The revised J.S. Jones report was submitted in response to comments made by Adolfson regarding the December 2000 J.S. Jones report in a February 18, 2001 letter to the City of Federal Way. The issues that were of most concern to Adolfson in the last J.S. Jones submittal were: • The discrepancy between the text and the tables describing wetland conditions on the site, ■ The choice of tree species to be planted, • The discrepancy between the amount of area that needed to be created or enhanced and the actual amount that had been installed or was planned, and. • The lack of approval from the Lakehaven Utility District (LHUD) for the plantings installed in the LHUD sewer line easement. In this most recent submittal, J.S. Jones has addressed all of these earlier concerns, with the exception of the LHUD approval. During a telephone conversation with Jeff Jones of J.S. Jones, Inc., I learned that Mr. Jones had requested that Schneider Homes Inc. obtain a letter of approval for the plantings from the LHUD, and then submit it to the City of Federal Way. This approval letter appears to be the only outstanding requirement for the wetland mitigation portion of this project. ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 'Te( 206 789 9658 1., 206 789 9684 ci�oHson�uc%rysorv.Lbm Harris/Heritage Woods Letter 3 May 2001 Page 2 of 2 Please feel free to call me at (206) 789-9658 if you need clarification on any of this. I would be glad to answer any questions you might have. Sincerely, ADOLFSON ASSOCIATESJNC. u Lizzie Zemke Senior Ecologist CITY OF f -- 1 � J1:TJOOOO' CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 Mr. Lance Erickson J.S. Jones Associates Inc. 3408 52nd Place NE FILE Tacoma, WA 98422 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Re: AAI Review of Heritage Woods Fall 2000 Wetland Monitoring Report File No. 98-102890-SU Dear Mr. Erickson May 11, 2001 The J.S. Jones Associates Inc. revised Fall 2000 Wetland Monitoring Report and Contingency Plan for the Heritage Woods mitigation project is hereby conditionally approved. Please find enclosed a copy of the May 3, 2001, Adolfson Associates Inc. review of the revised report. This approval grants authorization to implement the recommendations contained within the J.S. Jones Associates Inc. revised Fall 2000 Wetland Monitoring Report and Contingency Plan for Heritage Woods (revised March 20, 2001). I have also received the J.S. Jones Inc. May 4, 2001, letter regarding Schneider Homes' inability to secure approval from Lakehaven Utility District (LUD) to construct a wetland within the Lakehaven sewer easement. Your May 4, 2001, letter identifies that a revised wetland creation plan for Wetland 4 is currently being designed to fulfill the wetland creation area deficiency. This forthcoming design for Wetland 4 is in lieu of further pursuit of wetland creation area on the LUD easement. The wetland creation plan for Wetland 4 must be submitted to the city for our review and approval, prior to constructing the proposed creation area. We anticipate timely receipt of a design for Wetland Creation Area 4. Upon completion of implementing Creation Area 4 (following submittal, city review, and approval) and implementing the recommendations within the approved revised Fall 2000 report, provide two copies of an as -built, and also provide an updated proposed monitoring schedule for the project. Please call me at 253-661-4019 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jinn Harris Senior Planner Enclosure c: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, Inc., 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Lizzie Zemke, AAI Associates Doa. I.D. 14562 J. S. Jones azacl Associates, llnc. May 4, 2001 Mr. Jim Harris Plan Reviewer City of Federal Way 33520 First Way South P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 c 20011 RE: Lakehaven Sewer Line Easement and Heritage Woods Spring 2001 Maintenance Dear Mr. Harris; Schneider Homes, Inc. has been unable to secure permission for the wetland mitigation in the Lakehaven Utility District sewer line easement (Wetland "100"). J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. prepared a conceptual mitigation plan for Wetland 4, the 500 square feet of wetland effected by the easement can be created adjacent to Weltand 4. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. is currently in the process of designing the Wetland 4 mitigation area. As soon as the mitigation area is approved, Schneider Homes, Inc. will begin construction. Schneider Homes, Inc. would like to proceed with maintenance and supplemental plantings for the rest:of the site while the Wetland 4 mitigation area is being designed. Schneider Homes, Inc. is prepared to do maintenance as soon as they receive your approval. If you have any questions, please call. Very T y, ' �a Lance Erickson Environmental Designer cc: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, Inc. Dan Richter, Schneider Homes, Inc. 3408 52nd Place, N.E. TAC0MA,WASHINGT0N 98422 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 F&I E-nvironmenrd .So�taons ,_ k ,. 3 May 2001 Mr. Jim Harris City of Federal Way 33520 First Way South Post Office Box 9718 Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 Re: Heritage Woods Monitoring Review Dear Jim: 0 � ZOOr Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) is pleased to provide this review of the revised Fall 2000 monitoring report and contingency plan for the Heritage Woods mitigation project owned by Schneider Homes Inc. and located in Federal Way, Washington. The monitoring report was prepared by J.S. Jones Associates Inc. was originally dated 15 December 2000, and was revised on 20 March 2001. The revised J.S. Jones report was submitted in response to comments made by Adolfson regarding the December 2000 J.S. Jones report in a February 18, 2001 letter to the City of Federal Way. The issues that were of most concern to Adolfson in the last J.S. Jones submittal were: • The discrepancy between the text and the tables describing wetland conditions on the site, ■ The choice of tree species to be planted, • The discrepancy between the amount of area that needed to be created or enhanced and the actual amount that had been installed or was planned, and. ■ The lack of approval from the Lakehaven Utility District (LHUD) for the plantings installed in the LHUD sewer line easement. In this most recent submittal, J.S. Jones has addressed all of these earlier concerns, with the exception of the LHUD approval. During a telephone conversation with Jeff Jones of J.S. Jones, Inc., I learned that Mr. Jones had requested that Schneider Homes Inc. obtain a letter of approval for the plantings from the LHUD, and then submit it to the City of Federal Way. This approval letter appears to be the only outstanding requirement for the wetland mitigation portion of this project. ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 'T,( 206 789 9658 tar 206 789 9684 ndo�on�a�o�%son{om _J Harris/Heritage Woods Letter 3 May 2001 Page 2 of 2 Please feel free to call me at (206) 789-9658 if you need clarification on any of this. I would be glad to answer any questions you might have. Sincerely, ADOLFSON ASSOCIATESJNC. ulea-�- I�U� Lizzie Zemke Senior Ecologist CITY OFrjr.- CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 April 5, 2001 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Ms. Lizzie Zemke FILE Adolphson Associates 5309 Shilshole NW Seattle, WA 98107 Re: File No. 98-102890-00-SU; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND MONITORING Revised Fall 2000 Monitoring and Contingency Plan Dear Ms. Zemke: Enclosed is a copy of the Fall 2000 Heritage Woods wetland monitoring and contingency plan dated revised March 20, 2001. This revision is intended to respond to your February 18, 2001, review (copy enclosed). Please conduct a brief review of the revised report and provide a brief response (or phone call to me), as the bulk of the monitoring budget for review of this report review has already been spent. The report also states they are proposing to plant and implement the recommended changes in the fall of 2001, but I spoke with Jeff Jones about this and he said they are willing and prepared to implement this spring. My preference is to implement the revisions and planting as soon as possible, and not to defer to the fall if at all possible. Please call me at 253 661-4019 if you have any questions. Sincerely, i Harris Senior Planner enclosures Doc. I D. 14066 t aa�r J. S. ones mind Associ-mics, RESUBMITTED MAR 2 8 2001 Fall 2000 Monitoring and Contingency Plan of Heritage Woods Div. I & II Federal Way, Washington File No.: SUB98-0003 (98-102890-000-00-SU) Prepared for: Schneider Family Homes 6510 Southcenter Boulevard Suite #1 Tukwila, Washington 98155 (206) 248-2471 December 15, 2000 Revision March 20, 2001 Prepared by: Lance Erickson, Environmental Designer Jeffery S. Jones, Certified Professional Wetland Scientist 3408 52nd Place, N.E. TAC0MA,WASHINGT0N 98422 253-942-7131 / FAX 253-942 -7132 S Jones and Associates, Inc. 1.0 Introduction This report presents the findings of the Fall 2000 monitoring for the Heritage Woods Wetland Mitigation Plan. This document is intended to clearup any confusion about what has been done and what needs to be done to meet the performance criteria set forth in the approved mitigation plan. Information from previous consultants, del Moral and Associates, Inc. and Kucinski Consulting Services, Inc., along with data collected by J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc., have been compiled into new maps and tables. 2.0 Results 2.1 Wetland Creation Areas 2.1.1 Wetland Creation Area #1 Wetland creation area #1 was not implemented. Mitigation area was created at the west end of existing pond (Wetland "100'). Since the creation area has been abandoned no further monitoring or recommendations will be given. 2.1.2 Wetland Creation Area #4 The mitigation area has failed. One monitoring point was located in the mitigation area. Plant survival is less than 5%. Tree cover is less than 5%. Shrub cover is 5%. Some shrubs are present on the edges of the area. Groundcover is 90%, dominated by creeping buttercup, grasses, common speedwell and horse tail. Soils are fill material and although they have hydric characteristics, the soil is not suitable for wetland mitigation. The site is topographically higher than the surrounding wetlands. No planted species were observed in creation area #4. One planted spruce was observed in the wetland south of creation area #4. Invasive species are less than 5%. Table 1 Performance Standards YIN Criteria Wetland conditions exist No Hydr: Neg I Soils: Neg I Plants: Neg 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 90% Survival rate>80% No >5% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met No 0 acres Recommendations Total redesign and replant of the creation area 1. A conceptual mitigation elan is attached for review. The conceptual mitigation elan calls for creation of 2,050 square feet of wetland between Wetland D and the existing pond. Wetland will be created by excavating to the compacted till, which is gleyed and mottled. Twelve inches of topsoil will be placed on the till and the area will be planted to native groundcovers, shrubs and trees. Construction will occur in September of 2001 and plant installation between October 15 and November 15, 2001. Upon approval of conceptual mitigation plan a final mitigation elan will be prepared. Jones and Associates, Inc. 2. The mitigation table, shown on the Wetland Mitigation and Enhancement Areas as Designed by Del Moral & Associates clearly accounts for design, created. im act and mitigation shortage. The total site shortage of created wetland is 2,048 sf. 2.1.3 Wetland Creation Area "DEA-A" The wetland creation area (2,744 sf) is developing well. One 25' x 50' plot is located in the mitigation area. Tree cover is 90%. Dense cottonwood and red alder, spaced approximately 18" x 18", dominate the area. Eight planted western red cedar were observed in the plot. Shrub cover is 10%. Salmonberry, lady fern and western sword fern are dominants. Groundcover is 50%, dominated by creeping buttercup, grasses, herb-robert and soft rush. Invasive vegetation is 5%. The middle portion of the plot is saturated to the surface. Seepage springs were observed in the saturated area. Dense red alder/salmonberry plant community surrounds the plot. Table 2 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos I Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 90% Survival rate>80% No 60% Ferns >50% Yes 50% Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met No 0.063 acres Recommendations No recommendations at this time. RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES. INC. REVIEW FEB. 18.200 1. Soil Description: Soils are a black 1 OYR 2/1 silt loam from 0 to 16+ inches. 2. The invasive plant species referred to is Himalayan blackberry 3. The original designed mitigation area is 3,525 square feet, 2.744 square feet was actually created see the attached table. 2.1.4 Wetland Creation Area #5 Wetland hydrology is not present within the creation area. Soils were a dry and loose. Tree cover is 95%, dominated by red alder, spaced approximately 6" x 6". Shrub cover is less than 5%. Groundcover is 15%. Some sedge and common speedwell are present as groundcover. Table 3 Performance Standards YIN Criteria Wetland conditions exist No Hydr: Neg I Soils: Pos Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 95% Survival rate>80% No 20% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met No 0 acres 2 ✓. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Recommendations 1. Supplement wetland hydrology to create wetland conditions 2. Thin red alder to a 4' x 4' spacing 3. Plant 10 western red cedar 4. Plant 20 salmonberry 5. Plant 20 Nootka rose 6. Plant 50 willow and 50 red -osier dogwood cuttings RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. REVIEW FF_B- 18, 2001 1. The soils profile is a two chroma with prominent mottles at 4 inches. Most two chroma soils with prominent mottling, colored at 10 inches or below the "A" horizon whichever is shallower, are hydric. The soil surface froze 0 to 4 inches looks like stearco, a commonly used soil supplement. The area has compacted soils which were placed on top of the pipeline easement. 2. We are not proposing to replace dead or missing western red cedar. The proposal is to thin red alder and add western red cedars. Our experience with Nootka rose is that it tolerant of seasonal wet condition and should thrive in this location. 2.1.5 Wetland Creation Area #7 The wetland creation area, 95 square feet, is developing well. Tree cover is 45%. One planted western red cedar was observed. Shrub cover is 40%. Existing wetland vegetation dominates the area. Groundcover is 80%. Soils were black and saturated to the surface. Table 4 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist No Hydr: Pos I Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 80% Survival rate>80% No 40% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation EVW7E>5% Wetland acreage requirements met I No 1 0.002 acres Recommendations No recommendations at this time RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES. INC. REVIEW FEB. 18.2001 1. The data was incorrectly entered into the Table 4 above. The changes to Table 4 are widerlined._ The soils profile is black 10YR 2/1, 0-18 inches, and saturated_ at the soil surface. 2. The plant community is hydrophytic. 3. Only 95 square feetof wetland was created. The oriizinally designed area was 1,475 square feet. .I �. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 2.1.6 Wetland Creation Area #8 The wetland creation area #8 is successful. Tree cover is greater than 95%. Dense black cottonwood (spaced approximately 6" x 6") dominate the area. Shrub cover is less than 5%. Red -osier dogwood is sparsely spaced throughout. Groundcover is 10%, with slough sedge present near the southern margin. Less than 5% invasive vegetation is present. Table 5 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist Yes Hydr: Pos I Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 95% Survival rate>80% No 60% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes >5% Wetland acreage requirements met Yes 0.18 acres Recommendations 1. Thin black cottonwood to a spacing of 10' x 10' 2. Plant 100 willow and 100 red -osier dogwood cuttings to increase shrub cover 3. Plant 1000 slough sedge to increase groundcover percentage RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES. INC. REVIEW FEB. 18.2001 1. Dense young black cottonwood comprise created wetland #8. There is also some slough sedge and several willow. Our recommendation is to thin the black cottonwood and add willow. red -osier dogwood and slough sedge. to improve species diversity. 2.1.7 Wetland Creation Area "100" The wetland creation area is successful. The wetland was inundated 12" deep at the time of monitoring. Tree cover is 0%. Planted Douglas fir was observed in the north and south buffer areas. Two dead Douglas fir are present in south buffer. Shrub cover is 5%. Willow and red -osier dogwood are present on the perimeter of the wetland area. Groundcover is 75%. Sedges and cattail are developing in the bottom of the wetland. Invasive Scot's broom is present in the south buffer. Table 6 Performance Standards Y/N Criteria Wetland conditions exist No Hydr: Pos I Soils: Pos I Plants: Pos 80% Vegetation cover and self sustaining Yes 75% Survival rate>80% No >5% Ferns >50% N/A N/A Minimal invasive vegetation Yes 5% Wetland acreage requirements met No 0.088 acres S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Recommendations 1. Install 100 willow and 100 red -osier dogwood cuttings in wetland bottom 2. Remove invasive vegetation from buffer 3. Replace dead conifers in -kind 4. Install 10 big -leaf maple, 25 salmonberry, 25 snowberry and 25 vine maple in buffer RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. REVIEW FEB. 18, 2001 1. The data was incorrectly entered into the Table 6 above. The ch es to Table 6 are underlined. The soils profile is black IOYR 2/1, 0-16 inches, and saturated at the soil surface. 2. The mitigation area was inundated 12 inches during monitoring event. 3. The plant community is hydrophytic. 4. Schneider Homes, Inc. will provide documentation of Lakehaven Utility District approval. 2.1.8 Wetland "D" Enhancement Tree cover is greater than 60%, dominated by red alder and cottonwood. Planted spruce and western red cedar were observed. Shrub cover is 80%, dominated by salmonberry and dogwood. Groundcover is 90%, dominated by unidentified grasses and weeds. Invasive Himalayan blackberry is present. Invasive vegetation should be removed as necessary. RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES INC. REVIEW FEB. 18, 2001 1. Wetland "D" Enhancement area is located between Buffer Enhancement III Wetland 94. No specific area was given on previous plans. In previous monitoring reports, future monitoring events are recommended to be discontinued. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. has included this area in our first monitoring event to have a record of all mitigation and enhancement areas. Attached are the as -built and monitoring documents_ from previous monitoring reports. 2.2 Buffer Enhancement Areas 2.2.1 Buffer Enhancement Area #1 The buffer enhancement is a partial success. Tree cover is 60%. Ten planted Douglas fir were present. Twelve dead Douglas fir was observed. Dense volunteer red alder are present in the enhancement area. Cottonwood saplings are sparsely spaced throughout. Shrub cover is less than 5%. One snowberry was present near the northern end of the enhancement area. Groundcover is 90%, dominated by unidentified grasses. Invasive Scot's broom is present at less than 5%. Recommendations 1. Thin red alder to a 4' x 4' spacing 2. Replace dead conifers in -kind 3. Install 50 snowberry 4. Install 100 salal along length of sidewalk 5. Remove Scot's broom 6. Remove trash from buffer area 5 i. Jones and Associates, Inc. RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES. INC. REVIEW FEB. 1 1. Planted conifers died because of poor plant installation, lack of maintenance and lack of water. Planting holes should be two times the root ball area and supplemented with topsoil_ _Removal ofinvasiv_ es, annual mulching and seasonal watering will significantly improve survival. 2.2.2 Buffer Enhancement Area #2 The buffer enhancement area has failed. Tree cover is 30%. Volunteer red alder and black cottonwood are present. One 45-foot hemlock and one 65-foot Douglas fir are present in the enhancement area. Shrub cover is less than 5%. Two snowberry were present. Salal and huckleberry are present near the existing hemlock and Douglas fir. Groundcover is 75%, dominated by unidentified grasses. Recommendations 1. Install 10 black hawthorne 2. Install 10 Douglas fir 3. Install 25 Nootka rose 4. Install 15 snowberry RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES INC. REVIEW FEB. 18 2001 1. Planted species died because of poor plant installation, lack of maintanence and pedestrian foot traffic. A pedestrian trail is present through the middle of the enhancement area. Planting hawthome will discourage pedestrian access. 2.2.3 Buffer Enhancement Area #3 The buffer enhancement area is a partial success. Three 30' x 50' plots were located in enhancement area #3. For monitoring purposes they will be referred to as: west, middle and east, referring to their location within the restoration area. 2.2.3.1 West Plot Tree cover is less than 5%. Four planted cedars were present on the edges of the plot. Many volunteer red alder are present on the edges of the plot. Shrub cover is less than 5%. Willows are present in the north quarter of the plot. Groundcover is 60%, dominated by grasses and weeds. Approximately 5% invasive vegetation is present on north and south edges of the plot. No plantings were observed within the easement area. The access road through the plot, is primarily rocked. 2.2.3.2 Middle Plot Tree cover is 15%. Two planted cedars and one spruce were observed north of the plot and one planted Douglas fir was observed in the southeast corner. Many volunteer red alder are present. Shrub cover is less than 5%. Groundcover is 50%, dominated by grasses, common speedwell and horsetail. No plantings were observed within the easement area. The access road through the plot, is primarily rocked. 2 �. Jones and Associates, Inc. 2.2.3.3 East Plot Tree cover is 15%. Four planted Douglas fir and one hemlock were observed south of the plot. Four planted cedars were observed north of the plot. Volunteer cottonwood was present in the southeast corner. Volunteer red alder were present in the southwest corner. Shrub cover is 15%. Groundcover is 80%, dominated by grasses, horsetail, common speedwell and clover. No plantings were observed within the easement area. Less than 5% invasive Himalayan blackberry is present. Recommendations 1. Remove invasive vegetation from enhancement area 2. Install 10 western red cedar, 10 Douglas fir and 10 western hemlock 3. Install 25 snowberry, 25 salmonberry, 25 vine maple, 25 red elderberry and 50 western sword fern RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. REVIEW FEB. 18, 2001 1. Our proposal is to plant additional trees and shrubs. Invasive vegetation is to be removed and annual maintanence will be performed. 2.2.4 Buffer Enhancement Area #4 The buffer enhancement area is a partial success. Two 30' x 50' plots were located in buffer enhancement area #4. In the western plot, tree cover is 95%. Dense red alder are present at a 1' x 1' spacing. One dead Douglas fir was observed. Shrub cover was less than 5%. Five snowberry and four sword fern were observed. Groundcover is 60%. Less than 5% invasive Himalayan blackberry, Scot's broom and soft rush are present. In the eastern plot, tree cover is 90%. Six planted conifers were observed. One dead Douglas fir is present. Shrub cover is less than 5%. Groundcover is 60%, dominated by grasses. Approximately 10% invasive Himalayan blackberry and Scot's broom is present. Recommendations 1. Thin red alder to a 4' x 4' spacing 2. Install 15 salmonberry, 15 snowberry, 15 Nootka rose and 15 western sword fern RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES INC. REVIEW FEB. 18 2001 1. Schneider Homes Inc. will provide documentation of Lakehaven Utility District approval. 2. This section pertains to the buffer enhancement area not the created wetland area. A 50-foot buffer was planted Upropriately for the wetland that was created. 2.2.5 Buffer Enhancement Area #5 The buffer enhancement area has failed. No planted materials were observed in the enhancement area. 7 .,. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. Recommendations 1. Install 5 big -leaf maple 2. Install 5 Douglas fir 3. Install 10 snowberry 4. Install 5 vine maple RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. REVIEW FEB. 18, 2001 1. A five year monitoring will begin upon installation. As -built drawing will be submitted. 2.2.6 Detention Pond Buffer Restoration The buffer enhancement area is a success. Two 30' x 50' plots were located in the Detention Pond Buffer Restoration Area. In the western plot, tree cover is 20%. Seventeen Douglas fir, nine cottonwood and five red alder were present in the plot. Shrub cover is 25%. Sixteen snowberry and seven roses were present in the plot. Groundcover is 100% grasses. Less than 5% Himalayan blackberry and other invasives were present. In the northern plot, tree cover is 20%. Eleven Douglas fir, one big -leaf maple and one red alder were present in the plot. Shrub cover is 25%. 50 snowberry were observed in the plot. Groundcover is 100%, dominated by grasses. Less than 5% invasive Himalayan blackberry and Scot's broom were present in the plot. A large patch of Canada thistle is present immediately east of the plot. Recommendations 1. Remove invasive vegetation from planted buffer 2. Remove filter fence on western edge RESPONSE TO ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. REVIEW FEB. 18, 2001 1. Trees and shrubs in the enhancement area are thriving and rig. Few invasive plants are present. There are Uproximately 80 Douglas fir that are doing well and 150 shrubs. Groundcover is 100% Grass. The trees and shrubs in the enhancement area should meet or exceed performance standards by the end of the monitoring period. 2. This section pertains to the buffer enhancement area not the created wetland area. 2.2.7 Slope Buffer The buffer enhancement area is a partial success. Three 30' x 50' plots were located in the southern slope buffer. 2.2.7.1 West Plot Tree cover is 10%. Two planted spruce and two Douglas fir were observed in the plot. Many volunteer red alder are present. Shrub cover is less than 5%. Four vine maples are present. Groundcover is 70%, dominated by unidentified grasses and clover. 8 r \ S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 2.2.7.2 Middle Plot Tree cover is 30%. Three planted cedars and three spruce were observed in the plot. Many volunteer red alder are present in the plot. Shrub cover is less than 5%. Vine maple appear healthy. Groundcover is 95%, dominated by grasses and clover. Greater than 5% invasive Scot's broom is present in the plot. 2.2.7.3 East Plot Tree cover is 35%. Four planted spruce, seven cedars and one Douglas fir were present in the plot. One dead Douglas fir is present southeast of the plot. Shrub cover was 5%. Three vine maples were observed in the plot. Groundcover was 95%, dominated by grasses and clover. Greater than 5% invasive Scot's broom is present in the plot. Total plant survival for the buffer enhancement is approximately 70%. Recommendations 1. Remove invasive vegetation 2. Install 30 big -leaf maples and 50 snowberry 3. Replace dead conifers in -kind 3.0 Landscape Screen The landscape screen located on the north edge of the bioswale is developing well. Conifers are 15 to 30 feet tall. Invasive Himalayan blackberry is present. Recommendations 1. Removal of invasives is suggested 4.0 Conclusions The Heritage Woods monitoring plan has gone through many changes since it was initially approved. Mitigation areas have completely failed (Area #4) or did not appear to have been installed (Area # 1). J S. Jones and Associates, Inc. has prepared two maps showing the proposed and current state of the mitigation and enhancement areas. Removal of invasive vegetation, thinning of volunteer species, supplemental plantings, replacement of dead species in -kind, supplementing wetland hydrology and the redesign and construction of mitigation area #4 need to be completed for the project to get on track and meet the performance standards set forth in the approved mitigation plan. E ice: P y1 } +PP 40 JU 41b IN- Al �t+ ky� - '+ � ll• t � �r' � � �V f. . r7j 40 i �'!� i � i •�r'y e l ry4.y�/ 't ��' I, •• ti I L, II :k 7 r Mid r� �t+yrk ., l.L �'' 11' �` `rh a�lr. , ' .i •'fir', ■ rviir �• � ����i S � - ,cY •'r� � � � �,� 11��. � �,?,3' .,+ fit, i.�. 1� 10 �;Yry_ y `• `�;�� �...r!' -11� � ' ' ` �'' I {� ` 'i .r "�L.7h 4`� ,f� �`'� r►�1�r=1 � I , Z1 r 'h ,� . 1 ' �r. '•� ., fug � i ,'.. •+r .� 41 . � '' { ��tIJ �' , } � I• }• ='�. •,� • �, 4,�: � fir} ,I. i { s' y ,, �' � + , �•s'rh '+-.' .`1�.. firs - ' t;,-.�.:. .;,;.. � ., _ ,•,` ti �`y:�,ynr•�l ° Sri . 5 { il`'... y` - .. .. I, ! .s.. � �� �;.I`4'• •;-gym ,r•'• `'4 5� .+�. ,•�y'•���� Ci{.;y 1;'•�;5�'}, , .. � s r l', Am Al Rw 4w ►, .'f" ' �`'�;°J �'� a "'► r f � �C'r`-'s) I, . ti 1 lit • � .a`'� � �•fl . ,5E � �, r I' ,i} r' �• 'rar- � . err s �t' A '�?�+,+•'. � r � /L' r � ` w . S A.. t •lac: r. � �� .. • ■■ liY , t �i� 5") gwfoill fir- +� '' \ , i •�, '� � �.�'. f. .�L. �j •ray i, .}: ': j _ w.� ;.` ?� • ( 1 :1. ! - � � •,may w f. fC^• • �' +., � • •- �+J� r - I , r� r'`' fit.• ���•�'' Jr•. .ry, rr.�',r.. l afr �1 �. rol f�. •� kip PA `ri' 1 � .� rl .1 ' r �•y � �' ��✓,. r �, � � " ����,{ -. f Girl. ' C J ; µ ! � � } � Y l:�� . ter•}� � •}• �l � ��i+ ' 1. �. ��' 1 . '1 l _{� �` }'� '�-' 4 aY �d •.�• � i. - ;O ^� +~ it . 0 .r j,. r' �k 1 •1 C DA i DEA - AREA A ( l5 s.f.). A total of ten red cedars forn_ ;e matrix for this site. Plants should be at least 3 ft tall to become established quickly. Fifteen Scouler's willows shall be planted in the upper portion of the created site. An additional 15 Pacific willows should be s planted in the lower portion of [he site. PIants should be grown in 1 gal. pots. Fifteen salmoriberries shall be planted in the higher portions of the created zone. This material should either be larger Mare -root plants, or in 1-gal. pots. Finally, twenty lady ferns should be scattered within the matrix of woody plants to provide diversity. One -gal plants are standard for this ap-- plication. Though this fern is listed as facultative, it is usually found in forested wetlands, rather than in uplands. There is a total of 75 plants in this section, including an evergreen species, a deciduous tree-slu-ub, a deciduous shrub and a fem. Proximity to WL-E and the pond provides sources for additional colonists. Planting will be irregular, to fill in among existing vegetation. The average spacing of plants in this area is about 6 ft. AREA 5 (3,000 s.f.). 17his area will be planted with a mixture of 8 Pacific willow and 8 Piper's willow, at 3 ft intervals along the channel. Eight red twig dogwoods will be spaced in the creation area in depressions. A total of 20 salsnonbeny will be placed in more open areas and along small channels to fill in the creation area. 24 lady ferns will be planted in depressions in clusters of three. AREA 1 (3,000 s.f.). Interspersed among the existing vegetation will be 10 red -twig dogwoods, 20 salmonberry and 30 lady fern. Wetland Enhancement Site WL-D (870 s.f). The wetland will be enhanced after disturbance by the addition of 5 Pacific willows, 3 red cedars and 3 red -osier dogwoods. The 11 plants wiU be spaced at about 7 ft spacing to cover the disturbance but be at least 5 ft from the drain line. The permanent impact to this wetland fragment is mitigated elsewhere. A section of WL-D will be traversed by a sewer maintenance road (see note on site plan).` In order to minimize impacts to the wetland from heavy equipment, this road shall be constructed using quarry spalls for the crossing. A layer of geotexdile filter fabric will be laid down and covered with a 12 inch thick layer of quarry spalls. This is to ensure the continuity of potential hydrologic surface flows through WL-D. Buffer Restoration Sites BUFFER I (2,610 s.Q. This buffer along Military Road requires an evergreen screen and a relatively dense understory. Near the property .Iine, 26 Douglas. fx,.(UPL, Bseudotsuga »ten iesii) will be planted from 2 gal or larger pots at 10 ft intervals. A staggered i•ow-of 26 red cedars from 2 gal. pots shall be planted 6 to 8 feet inside the property line. Finally, 52 snowberry (FA�U, Symphoricarpos albus) shall be planted among the conifers from 1 gaI. pots. A total of 104 plants with a mean spacing of 5 ft results. 12 .i ' n ancement Area L 4 s ' l As planned and approved - The DEA plan called for enhancement of 0.02 acre (870 s of�wetland D. This will be accomplished in a disturbed portion of this wetland. Here f �� willows, red cedar and red -osier dogwood will be planted. No herbs are needed since they already occur. Table 8 summarizes the proposed and counted areas. Table 8. Summary of installation for Enhancement area. Species # Specified # Counted October 1995 November 1996 Red cedar 3 2 Pacific willows 5 0 Red -twig dogwood 3 0 Salmonberry 0 7 Lady fern 0 3 Total 11 12 As - Built The differences in plantings resulted from analysis in October of the actual conditions. Different species were proposed to match the site more closely. The vegetation is quite dense and the opportunities for enhancement are more limited than they appeared last year. The vegetation was dense, but it appears that 2 red cedars, no willows or dogwoods, 7 salmonberries and 3 lady ferns were planted. Hydrologic Discussion Wetland creation projects require coordination of appropriate plant materials, appropriate hydrology and appropriate soils. Under normal circumstances in this region, soils will develop hydric properties as higher organic content relatively quickly if the appropriate hydr0109• is maintained. The abilities of plant species to grow under various hydzic regimes axe relatively well known, though there is some variability in individual responses and genetic potential. Wedand by drolo, r is usually the most difficult parameter to predict, and is less readily tnanipulnted. On the other hand, it is relatively easy to fine-tune the H ['able 5. Summary of transect data. Clung, and transect III was 8 m long. Spring Transect I was 6 m long, Transect 1, was 10 m cans c Autumn Spring Transect II Transect III Autumn Spring Autumn Recommendations: Continue monitoring shrubs for height and mortality. Discontinue monitoring for soil moisture and herb cover. The wetland appears to have become established, though a considerable portion of its success is due to natural invasion of willows and cotton- woods. Enhancement Area D This site was enhanced with 2 red cedars, 7 salmonberries and 2 lady ferns. They have grown so well that it is difficult to determine which were planted, and which are the natural spe- cies. No further monitoring is planned for this area, and no photos were taken. Recommendation: Discontinue monitoring. Buffer Area Results Detention Area The slopes of the detention pond are within the buffer of Wetland C, off -site. The deten- tion pond slopes are covered with grass, clover, dense snow berry, roses on the lower slopes, 4 ft Douglas fir, and a variety of desirable invaders, including black cottonwood. The lower slope y]� as saLmonberry in the former wetland creation area that is not now considered to be wetland. Other plants, inc uding some wt ows, are surviving in this area wid may contribute to Te buff- ering for adjacent vegetation. Plot A is documented by Photos 28 to 31, and the associated Douglas firs are shown in Photo 34. Plot B is documented by Photos 32 to 36. Table 6 summarizes the monitoring results. Table 6. Summary for Detention Pond buffers. Douglas firs are the middle row plants. Sorine Autumn Species N Height ± s.d. Spread N Height ± s.d. Spread Douglas fir (total) 27 59.9 ± 8.3 --- 19 70.3±14.7• ---- Snowberry—A 52 29.4 ±7.5 3.6 52 35.6±6.7' 14.1 Snowberry—B 28 27.1±6.8 3.1 26 35.5±5.7` 14.0' Nootka rose—B I 1 28.4.9.E 3.0 11 44.7±9.9+ 5 ! . X: Mitigation Area del Moral Kucinskr As built as of Success/Failure ecommendatimis Designed Designed Dec. 2000 Reasons Area #1 2,700 sf 0 abandoned not suitable for construction Area #4 7,750 sf 0 complete failure redesign and install 5,000 sf Area #5 3,000 sf 6,210 sf planted, soils ok, hydrology improve hydrology, thin red alder, source questionable install wetland vegetation Area #7 1,475 sf 95 sf success crave in current condition Area #8 4,375 s 7,908 sf success thin cottonwood, suppletnenlal \ planting, improve and clear[ ditching \ Area D.E.A.-A 3,525 sf 2,744 sf success Icave in currentcgnd'stron Wetland 100 3.820 sf I 3,820 sf success supplemental planting Total Designed Area: 26,645 sf Total As Built (Dec. 2000): 20,777 sf Total Wetland Impact to be Mitigated: 22,825 sf Total Wetland Shortage: 2,048 sf Enhancement Area Area I del Moral Designed 2,610 sf Kucinski Designed As built as of Dec.2000 2.160 sf Success/Failure Reasons partial success Recommendations thin red alder, supplemental planting, remove invasive vegetation Area It 2 iDD sf Z.30D sf failure supplemental planting Area III 11,800 sf 11,800 sf partial success remove invasive vegetation, thin red alder, supplemental planting Area IV 9,900 sf 6,280 sf j partial success thin red alder. supplemental planting Area V 1, 000 sf 0 sf no evidence of installation supplemental planting Detention Pond 23,600 sf 12,400 sf success remove invasive vegetation Buffer Wetlan 100 6,034 sf 6,034 sf success supplemental planting, remove invasive vegelation Slope Buffer 27,570 sf 27,570 sf success replace dead plan[s=in-kkind.remyeinvasive ve r otai uc�ilvencu r%Ica. Q'.— - Total As Built (Dec. 2000): 68.544 sf Mitigation and Enhancement Areas taken from Tables 1 and 2 (pg. 2 & 3) of the Final Wetland Creation and Buffer Enhancement Plan: Heritage Woods prepared by del Moral & Associates (October,1995) Wetland Mitigation and Enhancement Areas as Designed by del Moral & Associates Existing Conditions at Wetland #4 ■ From 0 to 14 inches is fill material. ■ From 14+ inches the soil is a gray (5YR 6/1) sandy loam. ■ The plant community is grasses and weeds. Conceptual Mitigation Plan ■ Remove 18 to 24 inches of soil. i 4 CITY OFfjr.- M O. March 8, 2001 CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 Mr. Jeff Jones J.S. Hones Associates Inc. 3408 52"d Place NE Tacoma, WA 98422 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Re: AAI Review of Heritage Woods Fall 2000 Wetland Monitoring Report File No. 98-102890-SU Dear Mr. Jones: FILE Please find enclosed a copy of the February 18, 2001, Adolphson Associates Inc. (AAI) review of the Fall 2000 wetland monitoring report. As you can see in AAI's review, the monitoring and reporting appears to be on the right track in comparison to past monitoring events. However, the AAI review includes several recommendations throughout their review in addition to the final recommendations contained on page five. Please respond to each item requested throughout the AAI review, in addition to addressing the comments and recommendations on page 4 and 5. To expedite the city's next review of the forthcoming revised JS Jones Fall 2000 Monitoring Report, I suggest the Fall 2000 report be revised using strikeout (for eliminated text) and underline (for new additional text) format to address each of the requested AAI revisions. Please provide two copies of the revised Fall 2000 monitoring report and two copies of any accompanying plans or other applicable information. The city will expeditiously review the revised monitoring plan in order to allow Schneider Homes to implement the recommended plantings and modifications in early spring 2001. Please contact me at 253-661-4019"if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jim arris enior Planner Enclosure c: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, Inc., 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Doc, I.D. 13750 aECU ED BY �''-'iTn�rnnTgP��T I 18 February 2001 Mr. Jim Harris Environmental Solutions City of Federal Way 33520 First Way South Post Office Box 9718 Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 Re: Heritage Woods Monitoring Review Dear Jim: Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) is pleased to provide this review of the Fall 2000 monitoring report and contingency plan for the Heritage Woods mitigation project owned by Schneider Homes Inc. and located in Federal Way, Washington. The monitoring report was prepared by J.S. Jones and Associates Inc. and was dated 15 December 2000. As you know, many letters and telephone conversations have been exchanged during the past three years with the intent of establishing an acceptable monitoring protocol for this project. Previous consultants have included Del Moral and Associates, Inc. and Kucinski Consulting Services, Inc. (KCS), with KCS having been the most recent consultant to contribute to the project on behalf of Schneider Homes, Inc. In a letter dated 11 April 2000 from Adolfson to the City of Federal Way, Adolfson provided fairly specific guidelines for monitoring the mitigation areas and for reporting the monitoring results. The following review of the J.S. Jones report was prepared with the expectation that J.S. Jones would follow the guidelines provided in Adolfson's April 2000 letter. It should be noted here that the requirements listed in the Adolfson letter were developed directly from the performance standards described on pages 7-9 of the January 1999 KCS report. The City, as a condition of project approval, approved the KCS report. Our comments are listed below, and follow the format used in the J.S. Jones monitoring report. Wetland Creation Area #1 It appears that since no wetland replacement effort was ever instituted at this site, this site has been abandoned and instead Wetland "100" has become the replacement area. Adolfson assumes that no further action is planned at the location of proposed Creation Area #1. ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 'T,G 206 789 9658 1— 206 789 9684 mL on.@iac%yom.Com- Harris/Heritage Woods Le—f 18 February 2001 Page 2 of 5 Wetland Creation Area #4 Schneider Homes will need to provide a detailed explanation of how an acceptable wetland replacement area will be created at this site. This explanation will need to include a timeline for completion of a conceptual plan as well as the actual implementation of the new mitigation plan. During the development of the new conceptual plan, it will be important to consider why the initial plan failed. It is indicated that the originally designed area would cover 7,750 square feet and the proposed redesign will cover 5,000 square feet. The remaining area needs to be accounted for. Wetland Creation Area "DEA-A" Schneider Homes will need to provide a brief description of soil conditions observed at this site. The table that accompanies the description of this site indicates that the hydric soil criteria are satisfied. However, some documentation of the presence of hydric soil characteristics (such as soil color) is needed. The description of the plants present in the understory at this site suggests that invasive weedy species may be a problem, however, the text description of this wetland creation area states that only 5% of the vegetation present is considered invasive. Some clarification is needed with respect to the presence of weedy species at this site. The discrepancy between the originally designed amount of wetland and the actual amount needs to be addressed. Wetland Creation Area #5 A brief (a sentence or two) description is needed regarding how the soil does or does not meet the hydric soil criterion, and why the wetland hydrology criteria are or are not satisfied. In light of the problems that are commonly observed with young western red cedars on mitigation sites, Adolfson recommends the dead or missing western red cedars be replaced with a different tree species. Also, if the hydrologic regime will be altered to create a wetter site, the Nootka rose may not survive. Consider replacing with a more moisture tolerant plant. Wetland Creation Area #7 It is unclear why, if the soil is black and was saturated to the surface at the time of the monitoring, the table referring to this mitigation area indicates that neither the soil nor the hydrology at the site satisfy the wetland criteria. The discrepancy between the originally designed amount of wetland and the actual amount needs to be addressed. Y Harris/Heritage Woods Le,,wr 18 February 2001 Page 3 of 5 Wetland Creation Area #8 Schneider Homes declares this site to be a success. However, the description provided suggests that the vegetation cover is actually quite sparse. Adolfson recommends that some attempt be made to increase cover before weed invasion becomes a problem. If the degree of vegetative cover is indeed sufficient, then a clearer explanation is necessary. Wetland Creation Area "100" A brief description of the soils and hydrology is needed for this site. There is a discrepancy between the hydrology description in the text and the hydrology criteria in the accompanying table. This needs to be clarified. This planting area overlays a Lakehaven Utility District sewer line easement, and according to the as -built plans plants have been installed within the easement. Schneider Homes will need to provide documentation that the Lakehaven Utility District has approved these plantings. Wetland "D" Enhancement It is not clear from the as -built drawing where within Wetland D this planting has occurred. It appears that this area was also omitted from the data table that is printed on the as -built plan sheets. Buffer Enhancement Area #1 Before replacing the dead plants with more individuals of the same species, some attempt needs to be made to understand the cause of plant failure at this location. Poor soils, lack of water, and/or initially unhealthy plants are common causes of failure. Buffer Enhancement Area #2 Our comments and recommendations for this site are the same as those provided for Buffer Enhancement Area #1. Buffer Enhancement #3 This site is described as a partial success. However, from the text description it sounds as though the plantings have thus far been unsuccessful in terms of percent cover. A high percentage of weeds in the understory was noted in the report along with the recommendation to remove the weeds. However, no recommendation as to how to prevent a re -invasion of understory weeds was included. Adolfson recommends that Schneider Homes plant additional trees and shrubs in this area to discourage additional weed growth and to increase overall vegetative cover. Buffer Enhancement #4 The monitoring report text indicates that trees have been successfully established with in the Lakehaven Utility District sewer line easement that overlays the site. See below for recommendations regarding the easement issue. The discrepancy between the originally designed amount of wetland and the actual amount needs to be addressed. Harris/Heritage Woods Le,.-,c 18 February 2001 Page 4 of 5 Buffer Enhancement Area #5 This area will require monitoring for the next five years because it has yet to be installed. The monitoring period will begin once installation is complete. Once installed, specific planting details for this area will need to be added to the "as -built" drawing. Detention Pond Buffer Restoration It appears that the degree of tree and shrub cover observed at this location is barely sufficient to meet expectations. Adolfson recommends that Schneider Homes plant additional trees and shrubs in order to assure success at this site. The discrepancy between the originally designed amount of wetland and the actual amount needs to be addressed. Slope Buffer Adolfson has no recommendations regarding this area. In general, and especially in light of past attempts at monitoring and reporting on this site, Schneider Homes, Inc. appears to be on the right track with respect to monitoring this site and establishing self-sustaining replacement wetlands on the Heritage Woods site. However, we do have some comments and recommendations. Our recommendations are summarized below: a One of Adolfson's main concerns with the J.S. Jones monitoring report is replacement of dead trees with more of the same species —if this is going to be done, then a clear explanation of why the original trees died and why Schneider Homes believes new ones will survive needs to be provided. Adolfson strongly recommends replacing dead trees with different species in order to prevent additional failures and further delays in completing this project. • A text description is needed for soils and hydrology at each wetland creation area in order to justify whether or not wetland conditions have been established. Consistency of information between the text description and the accompanying summary table for each wetland creation area is also necessary. • Adolfson recommends that the City of Federal Way require Schneider Homes to provide a separate letter to the City documenting that that plantings and maintenance of plantings installed within the Lakehaven Utility District's sewer line easement have been approved by the Lakehaven Utility District. • Typically, "as -built" plans are drawn onto copies of the original planting plans. In the case of Heritage Woods, a complete set of original planting plans does not exist, so the plans provided with the J.S. Jones report will be acceptable. However, in all future submittals a north arrow and a legend will be needed on the plan sheets. And Harris/Heritage Woods LelLer 18 February 2001 Page 5 of 5 for the planting areas that have yet to be installed, the actual planted locations of each species should be shown. • For those planting areas where actual square footage is less that designed square footage, it will be necessary to explain the discrepancy between designed and actual square footage, and to explain how and where the discrepancies will be made up. Adolfson recommends that the City request Schneider Homes Inc. to provide a letter describing how the above —stated recommendations will be addressed. Please feel free to call me at (206) 789-9658 if you need clarification on any of this. I would be glad to answer any questions you might have. Sincerely, ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES,INC. 1�1� 1�9_" Lizzie Zemke Senior Ecologist c► i WETLAND CONSULTANT AUTHORIZATION FORM DATE 4 September 1997 CITY City of Federal Way 33530 First Way South Federal Way, Washington 98003 CONSULTANT Adolfson Associates, Inc. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW Seattle, WA 98107 PROJECT Heritage Woods Mitigation Monitoring Review PROJECT APPLICANT Parklane Ventures, Inc. TASK AUTHORIZATION No. 9727-79C -Z[ZI_ Jim Harris TASK SCOPE (1) Review wetland mitigation sites and monitoring report for one monitoring event in 1999. Monitoring report to be prepared by applicant's consultant. (2) Prepare letter report of findings (10 hr. Staff scientist, 1 hr. Senior review, $610). (4) Reimbursable (mileage, photography, clerical, etc.): $65.00. TASK SCHEDULE All work to be completed and report submitted to City staff within two weeks of receipt of signed authorization to proceed. TASK COST Not to exceed $675.00 without written amendment to this Task Authorization. DELIVERABLES Letter report C' ACCEPTANCE Date ���1 CITY OFr��. - 2 E� CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 January 31, 2001 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Ms. Lizzie Zemke Adolphson Associates 5309 Shilshole NW Seattle, WA 98107 Re: File No. 98-102890-00-SU; HERITAGE WOODS WETLAND MONITORING Fall 2000 Monitoring and Contingency Plan Dear Ms. Zemke: Enclosed is a copy of the Fall 2000 Heritage Woods wetland monitoring and contingency plan, and accompanying plan sheets (2) by J.S. Jones and Associates Inc. Your firm will continue to review the monitoring reports for the Heritage Woods project, as we have contracted. The developer has now contracted with J.S. Jones to conduct the wetland monitoring. As you know, this is the third wetland consultant to work on the project for the developer. The Fall 2000 monitoring report is considered the fifth monitoring event for the project; however, the past documented problems in meeting performance objectives will likely result in extending the monitoring timeline. I have only briefly glanced at the Fall 200 report. Please contact me to discuss your findings and analysis, following your review of the report and prior to writing your review. A couple of items we need to make sure are addressed are as follows: 1) revising the monitoring schedule; 2) wetland creation area "100" needs Lakehaven approval that I believe has not been secured; and 3) compliance with original performance objectives for wetland creation and enhancement areas. It appears (per the chart on plan sheet 1) that the mitigation object for wetland creation area is still short a few thousand square feet, and the enhancement areas are significantly short of the original design objectives. However, J.S. Jones is proposing to compensate the creation area shortfall by re -designing creation area #4. Recommendations for the enhancement areas have also been provided. I anticipate receiving your review of the monitoring report by approximately February 16, 2001. Please contact me at 253 661-4019 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Harris Senior Planner Doc. I.D. 13370 Jim Hams -Heritage Woods Div. 2 (?} Wage 1 _.-_.... From: Robert Sterbank To: JimH Date: 3/17/00 1:16 PM Subject: Heritage Woods, Div. 2 (?) Hi Jim: I know this is going back a little ways, but I'm trying to catch up with little things after my office move. You'd asked me for a You asked whether the generic reference to "landscape & entry sign easement" was an easement to the City of Federal Way and what action was needed to remove it. After we discussed it, you asked me for an email confirming our discussion. My thought is that it is not an easement to the City. The plat's dedication states that the dedication to the public is for "all easements and tracts shown on this plat for public purposes as indicated hereon, including but not limited to parks, open space, utilities and drainage...." The "landscape & entry sign" easement is not an easement to the public, but rather to the plat's lot owners in common. The plat owners, or homeowners' association, if the association owns the plats common areas, could release the easement via a quit claim deed. This is consistent with RCW 58.17.215, 64.04.175, and our code (Section 20-144(e), which provide that an easement established by dedication cannot be extinguished without the consent of the easement owner, because the quit claim deed from the putative easement owners (i.e., either all of the lot owners in common, or the HOA) would constitute the consent of the easement owners. If the property were considered to have been dedicated to the City, it could be released via a plat alteration, under RCW 58.17.215. The City's consent to extinguishment of the easement would occur in the form of the approval of the plat alteration. Sorry for the delay in getting formal confirmation of this to you. Let me know if there are more questions on this. Bob 01/13/2000 12:25 2538545663 DMP INC PAGE 02/03 Kin,R Counry ol& O{. of E}crclappmsnt and Env�mnmsntaf Servscea Land Use SaMen Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 99055.1219 To: King County Recording Department STATE. OF WASHINGTON) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: All- � s land surveyor, THAT he made a survey of thG land comprising the plat of which plat was rccorded on the W--�11 y of-- 4__ in volume of plats, on pages _ under recording number 4 Records of King County, Records and Elections Department, Seattle, Washington. THAT there being an error, the affiant approves the following change on said plat. day of D QcR-, t 9 y NOTARY PUBLIC In and for the State of Washington, residing at: M e ri i O1/13/00 THU 11.22^ [TX/RX NO 80811 01/13/2000 12:25 2538546663 DMP INC PAGE 01/03 r 1 King County Departtnent or Development and Environmenml Services Land Use Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Wa 98055-1219 m E z c pQsCr r._ AFFIDAVIT OF 'CORRECTION OF PLAT King Coun Washington ADDrovais: - DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Examined and approved this 19 DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS day of Examined and approved this ____ day of Manager, Land Use Services Division Examined and approved this _ day of Development Engineer 19�_ 19__ Assessor Deputy Assessor Account Number 114 of _1/4, S._— T. LEGAL DESCRIPTION TRF- I ►� ot at1w o ;;A- —Azb� J517 01/13/00 THU 11:22 [TX/RX NO 80811 01/13/2000 12:25 2538546663 DMP INC PAGE 03/03 EXHIBIT "A" CORRECTED LANGUAGE TO AN ERROR IN NOTE No.12, SHEET 2 OF 4, SAID PLAT 12. (PRIVATE ACCESS NOTE) TRACT "F" IS FOR ACCESS AND UTJOUTMS FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOTS 5 AND 6. LOTS 5 AND 6 SHALL HAVE AN EQUAL AND UNDIVIDED OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN SAID TRACT "F". THE OWNERS OF SAID LOTS 5 AND 6 HAVE EQUAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF SAID TRACT. THIS IS A COVENANT RUNNING WITH THE LAND AND BINDING UPON THE GRANTORS, GRANTEES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. LOTS 4 AND 7 ARE HEREBY DENIED ACCESS TO TRACT "F". O1/13/00 THU 11:22 [TX/RX NO 80811 �0 � (.0 ��O� From: Jim Harris To: BOBS Subject: Plat easement Bob: The owner/developer of Heritage Woods has inquired about modifying or extinguishing an easement that is shown on the face of the recorded final plat. The easement is over a portion of one of the platted lots and is identified for landscaping and entry sign easement. The easement is not specifically dedicated to any entity, however the dedication statement on the plat says in summary: ... ...dedicate to the use of the public all the easements shown on this plat for public purposes as indicated hereon... unless easements or tracts are specifically identified in this plat as being dedicated or conveyed to a person or entity other than the public". So this means to me the easement was dedicated to the public (city). Myself, gregF and the project surveyor agree the easement should have been dedicated more appropriately to the Home owners assoc. (HOA), as the city has no use with an easement for signage and landscaping. The surveyor admits he erred in not granting the easement to the HOA on the plat map. It seems logical that the city would be supportive of extinguishing said easement. So.... is there a mechanism to release the easement, short of a plat amendment? A plat amendment process seems intensive for this modification, but I cannot find any code provisions for any less process. Additionally, RCW 58.17.218 Alteration of Subdivision- Easement by dedication, references RCW 64.04.175, which is Easements established by dedication - Extinguishing or altering. This statute states that such easements cannot be extinguished or altered without the approval of the easement owner or owners, unless the plat document provides for an alternative method to extinguish the easement. (The plat map does not provide such alternative process). I have received a boilerplate release of document form from City of Kent and have talked to a contact in Kent's property mgmt office about how this document is used. Kent's contact said the release is typically used for release of obsolete utility easements, and is signed by city staff. I'm not proposing this particular form as an option, but rather offer it as something we might consider. However, the concern I have with this type of release is that if said easement is extinguished without altering the plat, then the plat map will in perpetuity show the easement incorrectly. I can provide any information you need. Thanks JIMH CC: GREGF, TRENTW Golder Associates Inc. 4104 -148th Avenue, N.E. Redmond, WA 98052 Telephone (425) 883-0777 Fax (425) 882-5498 November 13,1998 Schneider Homes 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 6 Tukwila, Washington 98188 ATTENTION: Mr. Dennis Alfredson RE. CONSTRUCTION MONITORING SUMMARY REPORT HERITAGE WOODS LOTS 52 TO 58 FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON Dear Dennis: Goldex 1�5soCiates Our ref: 983-1216.000 RECN�� 6-u1LUjogU LET e v Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) is pleased to present this summary of our field observations and testing on the Heritage Woods project. The project involved the filling to grade of seven single family building lots, numbered 52 through 58 in Tract H and J. The geotechnical recommendations for the lot grading were presented in our geotechnical report dated April 14,1998. The civil grading plan was prepared by Jaeger Engineers. The work involved the placement of thick structural fills against a steep slope to create the building pads and yards. Significant geotechnical issues requiring our observation and testing included the following: • Removal of mud and debris from the area of the previous slope failure, ■ Installation of a sand drainage blanket, • Benching of structural fill into the native slope, • Compaction testing of the structural fill and, • Observation and testing of the reinforced fill rockery at the toe of lots 57 and 58. A member of our geotechnical staff was on -site throughout construction from August 25 to October 2,1998, initially on a full-time basis, and then switching to part-time observations once the contractor was able to demonstrate consistent compaction and began routine fill placement. Our construction monitor completed daily field reports of his observations and compaction test results. During the coarse of the work, copies of these reports were provided to Schneider Homes and the City of Federal Way's inspector, Mr. Jim Pryal. OFFICE`_' I'N AUSTRALIA, CANADA, GERMANY, HUNGARY, ITALY, SWEDEN, UNITED KINGDOM, UNITED STATES November 13,1998 2 983-1216.000 Our field observations and testing indicate that the contractor completed the work in substantial compliance with our geotechnical recommendations and the civil grading plan. We trust this letter meets your needs. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, GOLDER ASSOCIATES INC. ames G. Johnson Associate Engineering Geologist Ri6ard . Luark, P.E. Associate Engineer JGJ/RDL,/slt IM2jgllAa EXPIRES I Q' f % P Golder Associates n„" schneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard•Suite #1 *Tukwila, WA 98188.(206) 248-2471 •FAX (206) 242-4209 David Graves Madrona Planning and Development 651 78th St NW Seattle, WA 98117 Re: Plat of Heritage Woods Division II Final Plat Approval Dear Mr. Graves: November 13, 1998 Ato 998 In a letter dated October 23, Mr. Harris requested that a topographic survey be made of lots 18-31 to confirm that excess fill has not been placed. That survey has now been completed, and is enclosed herewith . * Before inspecting the survey, may I direct your attention to the approved plan by Jaeger Engineering; specifically, sheet 3 of 21. The drawing shows no detailed grading plan on the lots, other than filling in three existing swales. With this exception, the contours shown are existing only. There are no design spot elevations or contours on the lots (or for that matter, on the street.) However, on the road profile, it is clear that the new finished grade of the street is in fact higher than the existing grade at all of the lots in question. For example, at station 24+00, the finished street grade is 508.94. Since it is impossible to construct a street so that it hangs out in the air, implied is that the adjacent grade must be at or near the grade of the street. In fact, the grade adjacent to 24+00 is between 508 and 509 feet, which is where one would expect it to be.** There has been little or no disturbance for the westernmost 30 feet of the lots, and none whatsoever for the westernmost 15'feet. * Although the direction from Jim was to topo lots 18-31, the surveyor deleted lots 18 & 19. Those lots are currently being used as stockpile areas. Consequently, conditions existing today do not represent final conditions. At any rate, no fill was placed on these lots because the road is at a lower elevation. ** While the plans are acceptable, the omission of lot grading is an item that I would have asked to be addressed had Schneider Homes contracted to have the design done originally. The plat was purchased by Schneider already designed and permitted. SC-HN-EI-245 PB In conclusion, the work appears to have been done in a manner consistent with the approved plans. I trust this answers the City's concerns. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do. Respectfully, SC ID RHO S, INC. f' I De s Alfredsori, P.E. Manager of Development & Construction schneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard•Suite #1 *Tukwila, WA 98188a(206) 248-2471 *FAX (206) 242-4209 Jim Harris, Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33530 1st Way S Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 Re: Plat of Heritage Woods Division II Final Plat Approval Dear Mr. Harris: October 23, 1998 RECEIVCD BY COMMUNITY DEVELOIRMIENT DEPA RTMENT O C T 23 1998 Transmitted herewith is the resubmittal of final plat documents for Heritage Woods Division II. Your memo of October 2 noted several other conditions which had not yet been met. Our response to these items follows. • " ... payment of applicable fees. " As of today, I do not have a figure from the City as to what fees are outstanding. I trust you will notify me of the fees required when we get close to final recording so that I can have a check drawn up. • "Items allowed to remain incomplete must be bonded. " Unlike some other jurisdictions, Federal Way requires the whole of the plat work be fully bonded before work may begin. A $616,000 Plat Improvements Bond was posted in May of last year. You can confirm this with Stephen Clifton. • "Final Plat Map Item 9. A condition my be noted on the plat that requires fencing be placed on the back of Lots 1 through 10. " I have previously written to you to state our position regarding this condition. I have not heard back, so at this time I am assuming you are in acceptance. • "Conditions of Preliminary Plat Approval Item 3. " ... you are requested to propose a more effective method of implementing and enforcing the NGPE clearing and grading restriction. " This was also addressed in my previous letter. SC-HN-EI-245 P8 • "Conditions of Preliminary Plat Approval Item 6A: ... the planting must be completed ... " The landscaping has been delayed because of construction problems upstream related to the street lights. As of now, it looks like this work should be done within two weeks. However, if I understand Mr. Clifton correctly, only those items affecting life and safety must be completed prior to recording. The rest of the work is bonded. I assume this includes the landscaping. Please correct me immediately if I am wrong. • "Conditions of Preliminary Plat Approval Item 7,4: Provide three copies of the closing report to Jim Harris. " Three copies of the closing report are transmitted herewith. • "Conditions of Preliminary Plat Approval Item 10 & 14: A Statutory Warranty Deed must be prepared ... " [conveying tract E]. " The deed has not yet been finished: It is expected to be finished within one week. ■ "Conditions of Preliminary Plat Approval Item 11: The Department of Public Works is in the process of performing a follow-up inspection to determine if the pond has been properly maintained. " We have not heard from the City regarding this. I trust that no news is good news. • "Conditions of Preliminary Plat Approval Item 13: Verification of storm drainage stubs must be provided before final plat approval. " The storm drainage stubs are in, with one exception. For lots 22-31, two drain stubs are required. The front stubs, draining toward the street, are in. The back stub cannot be installed until the lots are regraded, which will be done when we obtain individual building permits. Jim Pryal can confirm this. This work is covered by the plat bond. ■ "SEPA Conditions Item 2: The applicant shall demonstrate how they have complied with the ... clearing limits, NGPE or buffer areas ... " This item was addressed also in the previous letter. Again, because I have not heard otherwise, I trust that this is no longer an issue. "SEPA Conditions Item 4: Provide a status of the action plan and a proposal for getting the wetland monitoring back on track ... " We have hired a new wetland consultant, who has spent considerable time in getting the monitoring program back on track. I am assured the report will be forthcoming next week. • "SEPA Conditions Item 7: Landscaping of the Military Road frontage (behind Tract H & .9 ... " The back side of Tracts H & J has been landscaped. See also response to "Conditions of Preliminary Plat Approval Item 6A" ■ "SEPA Conditions Item 8: The contribution to be paid ... is $6, 844 ... " A check for $6,844 was delivered to you on October 8. • "SEPA Conditions Item 9: Required Military Road improvements ... are under construction ... " The improvements are now complete. Jim Pryal can confirm this. • "Other Comments Item 2: Provide letters of water and sewer acceptance from Lakehaven Utility District " To my knowledge, we have satisfied all requirements of Lakehaven except two. First, Lakehaven demands a water line easement across Tract A, which is now owned by the City. The demands of the City for the granting of the easement have now been met, including a payment of $1,000. Consequently, the City is now in a position to grant the easement to Lakehaven. Second, as-builts must be submitted. The field work is done, but as of today has not been transferred to the mylars. The engineering consultant is working on that as this is written. Once Lakehaven receives these two items, which hopefully will be within a week, letters of acceptance will be written. • "Other Comments Item 3: Provide a typewritten legal description ... " The legal description will be forthcoming next week. "Other Comments Item 4: ... groundcover shall be planted in the full 20 foot width triangular pattern ... " Our landscape professional has been advised of this change. Those items that are yet incomplete will be delivered to you as they are finished. I trust this meets with your satisfaction. .E. & Construction RECEIVED DACOMMUNIVELLENNT DEPARTMENT HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION 2 OCT 2 3 1993 LEGAL DESCRIPTION TRACTS G, H & J, HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION 1, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 179 OF PLATS, PAGES 76 THROUGH 83, INCLUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 34134.e COMMUN RECEopM � p aMME. HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION 2 r� LEGAL DESCRIPTION ���R TRACTS G, H & J, HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION 1, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 179 OF PLATS, PAGES 76 THROUGH 83, INCLUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 34134.4 COMMUNITRY DEVVEELOPMENTDEPARTMENT HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION 2 OCT 23 1999 LEGAL DESCRIPTION TRACTS G, H & J, HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION 1, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 179 OF PLATS, PAGES 76 THROUGH 83, INCLUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. }fZ000 r RSCEIVE0_13Y HERTAGE WOODS DIVISION 2 COMMUNrrN I)VELopMFii i OEPAIMAEW Porbo m of the 8N., 1/4 and SE, 1/4, 33, Twp. 22 N, Fve, 4 E_ City of r-oderW Way, Kkg Coun , ty, WasNngion 2 3 1948 A replat of Tracts 'G.�, 'K, and V, Hwtage "Nooeb Dw-am ............................... . . . . . ............ i w Ir r:rM;;;,:,; C�r. 11 %3 ACE, Y'A ow.m AAn uai opo K M �4M % ,a 4r,4 1a mA jrgi op AVL7i'S!;. "Uz_ Vog "al "i"V" pr maww 'k4 _.K Kw 6rac is w" Nh. - fE 44"K-4 ULRV.C.l� N, w4k i.MV ........... .... .......... Z vw. N"�Xly .. ......... .......... ----------- V.—I!o Y claTWE .%T — ... ......... ... ... . ............ fah 5 wa AiTiowo m L, kuAve W "T � �7 7 r T N! -- — -- ---- - ------ OR my k4b a M UK17% T�� VEWTM.0 TA," M USP.W ' I Aw SUB 91—WO! + SUB 98-OM .......... CM �X_ ...... . ..... . . . . .. . . ........... . . . . ....... iFt .ZM _rVP,- .................. ....... . ...... . ........ .. . .......... a. irv4 Wv tom. cz Nila wl *lpea f -A ta 031%mb To P;WT (�sj(4y ARY -AA &!* O'Ax 1u aca C.a?4Q b,'[01M AN FUT ftu-SL or P.-, ton. C".VIAA q4ML% WZ' M'V. *r w3ana twi -ok C"fcTw'�_ Tuk:--u xta -�Vox tin- _'Y VAVl. -C)*"r,*A �-'C;ubl- Al ,WrtF Fee-' t-;jr. fNo.-M- 1:1,r4j _kl�tAl Ti - $k.*Piw.3 im -Oak w Sr'jv1q.* A3 ?.FAR pt k4mk rm. t by "#C4� OR 'SZ.olt M67j+ T'... WALL &gm. VW ' V pA N A AYM:K� . .. . ...... ....... ......... Ye rs .... . . ... I ...... ... ... HERITAGE WOODS -DMSION 2 Portlom of the SW 114 and SE 114, Se<-- 33, TWF% 22 N, Rge, 4 E, WM,• City of FederW Way, K7ng Comity, WaWnMon A replat of Tracts. 'G, 'H', and ',J,*, Harnage Woods MWOA I TRACT C TRACT F N4 4.- W rTRACT E 4+ 64 r 55- gr. AID TRACT EQ11 k 14 1 za ........... 13 Z7 TRACT J -t w IV W " % =10 TRACT D N M13 w NER k vo 28 100 24 17 yl 45 In* SF wm SF 12 5F ME SF 14 rl TRACT A 4; V np 11. 4,. Sr_ -25M 54 7m 5F 2L-mv A t "=,W 4 46 I 7=sr 7204 3F j5a mo SF 7M SF lil SIP t 72's SrSF fw f 4w, 4 4P sr YAM w 91 44 Md �F ow 11146 SF "M SF orb g` fr2" Sr CT G mar f 7239 Sr 43 Tl —9- GRAPHIC SCALE A yfgp-INTMI'M SN0111 I sash a too ft SM SF mi SW :0.01 SF . . 35 SF ..... bev. :less 9f rom u Main" 8484 SF M77 ff-OF— WMI 54 Za 19 DAM �Orfjow tog.s v Z rll maw SUB 91-0M + SUB 98-OM ....... ... . ... ..... ... ... _ ......... HERITAGE WAS ONMON Pens of tlie aW. 114 and 8,E 1/4, Sw. 3 3, Twp. 22 N,, Rge• 4 E, W.M. of Federal Way, Khg Comte, Wa*ngton .A r t Of ` MCU 'a, 'K, and ¢> 1 690 weds MlSkDn I TRACT A ' (3C3DS DIV. VOL. 179/76—OS SOW �`!f �i-��^FP}3�i��xp�` i � ` �"r� � •... r//mac $V` i -�' A § • '- �'h •`�� ,3� TY ar: z. 55 :j , :., Y •I p.t �.V xQE}CT•.r j�e.�{'�++.' 1k'� -7 �: �. �. '.�. J/J/ Yyh gg °3V - `� r r/ .S.' ��, ..r • ..2Y sv.er..r�'7�N�R. ' 'r549Cs2 .:ti"G: 4 j \ ,Sy ! .?: :::., y ! CiL•". 1WiE Zia '.�. �: a.:t� > C 9. lw F y 4 �• 44 0 k .T.r 4x 1^ y ..4' .. av i' I � C�j��P .. `= . ;.sGRAPHICd E �• �r .S' �[Lr A OAF 6 ���>ti , f .. ' � i i--4 ., NM � , �'� \\' \ 37 •6•, ! i? ..:Ike'. ac^:st: u . as3. rnt,.•'.'x..a5 • , c -': • vim-" 7�;d7 �� • '• "- •y� r .x �e,raccv oitia§r �or,�:.v L:.:.d�id`A:•.i:a'�, �� •fix � r _!�-� :`C3'.'�Lr! r n�. � �at< ii :. • ;'`� � ���'� . s..,. k�:, ..• ;;ru�cm xvwh n»nY ?%�ruxE,�; .0 �\ rFY ��• ♦���yppy � iVR' iW�iE.�1x �• �. t�: �•tws. R: aYf YA'jwal x .�i, itc"s.%Ei`.F4�e ;SFc"r: zrr<r K�\4t:L8rwWm W 7,C =.ro�pM EF6f#4HC V��a !W9'.C).riD7+ YMYUrcir] 10/1 . - sr :,w*B 'OM+ SUB �98-000,3 ;... .x^ ...�'�'!.+... .... ■ l:e......... i ... .-... ... .-- .-. .... ---- -- HERITAGE WOODS D#SJO 'Pores of the S.W,114 and SE 1/4. Sec, 33, Twp. 2-2 N.: Rgo, 4 E., W., City of FederalWay, King sty, ladftton '00 s3 J)jv. TRACT A r 56 �y ^cy�q Tay: '� x00 :^�'��;y-'.•• - �„„r, +L ' w sTv r• - 'kip tee• ` a lS p6' r 47 � J i fps.'•: 3 � � �S � � .. r% ir, of .•. _ : '�Sp-.f �r I �; ; ,@is • ., :.v .. , . � 7�wiL'4:'r.$• .; �i."s, h`�'SE'S�P, � 45 _•bL�Rr - 49 37 • �._, ..S i' -W t�•r k-hr:- YfS;��'a -` 42 ',�qq t •i 1.w:i i'':.t �,...tc •:.•._ 4 �.:s. g''r• ; �� �t ^Y... y. J CFtAI'FiIi S£ ATF •/ t s,eaa n sa sk glirl . Y-..-..� ,..5' ,�. , Y7�' a+f"iG•�.!^ "SF �; � 'o. �\ r4 N -0 6s=.n10 . • ... .� '.�A..+.=fi' ~a, •L' LdlEerlher ..,...:;w ^y_£5. yay�� �R i lr. • �•. S° ::S '_ c '. . `. sae `.. �� ~ '"� T^ ..•� !+ _C1�.M1 �F%.'AKS1?•. •• �v � � .�'' fYV1E Jhr �'�4(. Y. s1^w•e 17.ni. an A i 1t1 ` �.• R .�, . °p-..�•i{? W-16 e}'y." .E11... n'<l'7j-'die fk•.? 'Jf �,$ 'J•7 tG.W.I + ..--..i.. l'. x7� :.f 1P>% S'•ii7[.4 fxl l 1hy'fh.q.1 , g� .UtyyAS ..- ...�lf�, '.. �. •-Li�S'.`3 '- a 11T 1.�,fLr+Kti� d •• ''}7 :lF'if•' d • 5:: .>� ::< T a7PriK:':bdU�t3 xi Wuxi. P-..•em,2Tw " L�rx,rk. Irraits v x9voar a67rr uo�xa�e w, r iTxrxcnr as sv Q !ion,::x sx Wwvx ,v {• [r'} vyT�l�ry'•� 1 41= }= f7'I 1J17• A`'..'.v fw✓ 3� yl ., .`^`�`• ig'F�t k#EC.c 8y .i'�r�°aP�ca..w� i ve ie7unra3 snlEi 8,a•4a W NU: n „�:xs•-ErC'Yk'• '9 :eY.s6 +-.'P ele: r:#sei!: Er 8z: -.X5 '•1F'^.. faua lS x�?:i;;:x<o f=>= � ^_�.,� .. ry >t B+C.[a!a:irxrr 98�5,i e+riaeCs �'�a1731�•-aS►a a�isY!-•&�3 UN V iLRNW*0 - d —OM SLF ... . ... .- --. ...-... ..... ... ... ---- _. _,. HERTAGE WOODS DMSION2 rod � of the SW 1/4 ond SEI,f ,Sea 33, Twp 22 R, Rge. 4 E, Wk _ .. A.repI i %D Iiracta V, "H , arld V H0f#&9t WVOdO DMwc .��iOQFa I TRACT .A WOans DIV. a 7 IIER�'r�GE 79r745--B3 ri 6.4 i i�r � Y' 1 feR?•N,. r-Y�:a�,,e slR4??'C=+�%F ---� 57EE7 a aF 6 r�,•�� 7w " y�e E ASftifi:iol�:�i' }70iE kC. sC •A ... .. .. � � ±�JS7�cF]tI 7� set. Fs ��`' 'sr 45 <� �►� nee^ '"��,[G .a `�, r, i=js,.. l'..Gs: - 9i oeilaf. s /} •�r><..';eg'.s3''i•`::a 3� >v. +pro L� : y� �•` w- 1 � F: 71iFii i aF 6 c. 54 LM�:ri'r• �' �v l 1 - 21 a:rs'lie w D` t 2 .-r °: +` +, GRAPHIC SCALE 43 �.21 ::a::::z=: 41 �. S• C -� ..% M£`c: vX. irzxx f:1C�E; TCL'::S L?Y. j :>s +•'"! •'�'s" b Ra-..•.�rR'� amp x7 :.��. c;;...F.^: tea. ol FIX /21 er 36 ee� �• i2 e :�• ti •iwC:..'-i.� w^^�:?�A»�"�`.r•Y-3Fr•' ter f�"}":i� ` fJ E �S 4��I sa'N�%7i3[! -.;j 1 C;16.:s' L•--a1.f � � s:�re�= N� or�r taxE;-+�xn' �� � •w ir�i� jx�ac z� m:.r�a =,t.......,e f�.. �r,�icc-�orc'.r_xti '__."f��iSti�.-r•s„�y• ix = Lp v: @Y4tiSDPlev � :M;i �¢ wry �sralc tsI�nr? txu �x,'}c :wv� .�j0 L 19 LU ( (!, {'1 RiC ILK i' 7L Sy jB ,S3f19S3 NO,3 ua.i";�+ira�'. vS�.arra K �merv�.: '3�a�aa[� (. xrss:r-axes + 13US 96-OD03 HERITAGE WOODS DMSiON 2 Portia ol, the- 8-A 1/4 and SE, 114, See. 33, Twp. 22 N, Rge, 4 E, WM. CAY of Fedaral Way, King CmhlY, Wasfft-tOn A rep4at d TrachCU, 'H*, WA �*rftgc WOO& r-WOM 1 L 26 23 25 NM6,,a6-w 1'r7x* 10 � \-9- 29 5 rl 28 27 4 rjt 26 3 WAZA iI rASa�Wr 24 rk Ft� 11 IF I ,,-'- 45 (1 "k, ci 44 43 : SUB 9ill-wol + SUB 98--O= ... .... .. ... ....... 24 17 V. 16 32 15 \MTCV47E 14 V woo, 0; My A A-5724AW---,.% L-50sfppr 0 a ZWO PL 0 OF a 37 50 r WEE w Wo ( a4 "" ) I tb - eM IL 39 40 M. M" :1 EFL WE Weer HERITAGE WOODS DME-JON 2 For-tions of the SM, 114 and SE,, 1/4, Sec. 33, Twp. 22 N, Pqe-,. 4 E. WM Cdy e Federal Way, Khg 0ourity. Was on A t"Jint of Tmctd W, If, and %r, MwU96 W00cis DWDn I TRACT C 4,33 TRACT 44 42 41 36 TRACT E 37 40 L 38 :39 TRACT D L-Afk34� M-M 1%2 4p 62 i a J 04, 45, 4 TRACT A % v 13 GRAPHIC SCALE nww olx.i �V_ 4-7-0 <tr,::8Lxr, w -a) V-� 7 VeR -om + SUB 98-ODW ISUB 91 �N . L ............. .......... ------- .... ........... . ...... I .. HERITAGE WOODS DMSR)N parfiom of the € W. 114 and BE V4, Sea, 33, Twp. 22 N, fve, 4 E, WAC- Cffy ol Federal Way, King Counfy, WuHrgtom A rtpk§ <A tracts'Cr, x f and V, HarRage Woods DWO'm 1 M MARI.>ke7]fi . e 3'1`.ffi'11E •Fes. Yy°xN " rr'r n9:$ �5: V+k 1+••Y�'� 6ii*xl>� gv ,M VFyt f. L-1 h W ii�ipA 3(",. •at.`Ce. 3+E�•,=- iTu1C M!'i 4`4 i!`YS+' Tn\lyC+r='k'.1YA' :tC WF±'. i :tnC CLOY✓:•• [s liTFi (Y' r!e K^lu>rKAI i+'..p, �#.wl iQ'Ri tH FH:ti: CAp1Y, .p .RY7rFL`F� mL" Y:JM'.'X• iR Vt:Ldwia ice. 1N•l il�`x7:W[�! fsl. A.^t/.M e%..J �. Lfi /r.y'-.'-`%3 h �!f ,�[J[.: •! ��' .�� K E PR'r f7 FI�:.W. •...Y P�.[(I •`i My-^,AY:551s+F�i�AN} 6RL S.a- - rays 53::"E JCa'L�4it 715E CC �+r7`� 11 s ..A. t r.LT•l, rt!.:1?X !. • 33c:. • - �.:..w : r'S!a •.•• iFp4.wxl4r!il M6 xr,>wuo- rrs^°�¢zexv.Y;ci:cr+Lxs;%fT ±sa:PM' I -am 13/?i47Fk7i's ipFcdA�lk iF. �rorsi'iti ^emu.* .i �los ur :Yu•.n[7 •x:k:. x,7� .; s::ixxe>vs¢xa :.c>`:�w:t ;;r :s q 9xY. L�SYr S,L+aI• Z,1DS .tl+•. _ . " xG ?3•: :(�Wi AtL[iF:-MKfi»Pi ti RSr, .. fly-�i�.T. 115E Si.}Y !L A w'L[•ti�A. RJ. .�C..' � p•kv '• i ii.� •r1 ;� F'�4•Ff'n 'F.4`::lYfk7:;P:. •.�✓'.I�E$7.w FSv.4N �f<' ..... i [aKx-cc srl KtuK :r, sm+�ta=Aq:rTEc to; RkY: 2; n-� :7r ry=fi+k.L L-iat 1vC 7aa� Rt,,A[I "C_'ITR'. ra; nW 1�.'V1 % AG $ T' at' qq��-- rLAAti. M� 5%rs• ATG 173.r t� xmm �n ro .+6a'so'�::iF $I1C7�.'- FM1py�..� t.l' :L3, FA3 i2R• YCAgtg �r YL..7F�{I<' :7CRF+3� �y.L't •r�k•Y[7 •r':i=1Y! 7� i� 0�:� � �' '17616 >e7p5rx:1. a>:r wF�.zs•.;vrr. i� :s:i z•e1 �-�nfsrs �,t � rwLvaLt* �••'�x�a !W fl3LlP.C.:"l: 7nC ZTdL'R f�[•rrs['• ynl'i-.i+^71Y:. i' S"rL A L'f �'iN. ,•La T L'R.: 7''71i"+K7FS h •Li`•'.-1C� YR?ie YH( lyCit- 1i` INN, yK'K KN..;OrN •F4. Yfl4:= ' A:!. +ewa rwr :uL r.>n'ar�•r,cxsx! s Qac /eAaiC r(•ML!tE� Yi><i!: Li M!S7r0AH ��Ryr M71LLGpcT:y�+�+F��e' f•F�:Y(M._5'leve[ ><:'r: F•�y.Ri1 �re+d: R'r�gx1�CC!' !=: T3.aA tiwe :wS:: �'K3 .alG as Y.-•K%."!7 NGO�;TY: p'iLR% W% R'1vx FRY }#w!' WN!E lR- �. .T 1 :� 4.P.r' ARNIYA'S(. V (+pk Orsl�se i. aC S.A?:.?'lY=i' ��TR fatFt :S w••!>t;x w?:B'4•K'F 3 Yk�k Mlp wrirrr., :rsa�r !:3 � a�:e�tn ,i=x :'ys •:•. . �t. WC.'k.1 r w fit* yrleus ?il •n RthK L�A1 !'%�!!ArFOt..ft71dIR!`:'. �><{? lb+l rAIY rv,JoF.>'C .'$fiilY�Ai FK•.,70Lc 57At:TY ldbf rt AE ,VA6/[°*'�Yr•�[;1 YX!'i u(r;..F+c1i( >veY P�'Ad. $:•sw.. S�-t3t7.:o 0.'.r3pLf�A kY.•�%?!F YFpt Y• rum/+`(� r15r ±�]:.n17't fitL�b3 �V.'fi M'fa :+, y� it! F- ':i R'1� it t ..,.� .. rG i'+ ' . Uf [� ": �'r's ••3Y M]ati+c•r•' U `�-:•�.�}!• A61Aeti.L': [ r :. NaLKtiga� KVi4 i:. " •?'.'�"•'C•r�' /-a�i`a I.CC • �:.. � s 15'�ti i4',ri•f wi zv ... of 1FK y9dFLA,t G 4.. d[i :. >:!.se:rx3 7rx:' .. diy L� Xl. 7%R 5'a :.. :• �.SSS•M j/L n(- •c.. .... .. . -tme as [[5`��"•Y: •x ,�'.•... +:rae3,.r aLn,�': n'n�•-tom. �'S ii:i: f Y}Y,pt,�yi fU >Vt i:3N:.. Ska<i ..Al", *`: M10%, "' :a"ut* _it : M, e�i 7=.1=.3 9•r'-.' R4:'R.. 7K - �R!f �.7'" .. �xvA .:'t.�.PC : - - , Lg i+rtt7'LR= qk Lys wi.. �71f:S :E:_E-`.FR iev: ff»yeC' ' YE:.4QY•� li :x A'Lr M� N C"••�� '�u.! •V � F4rS.V,l p5�k '.+7'fJ'r tiA7 iCf[is4.Y fta :Yn=: f.� p;C'ZL'..r.,s^.x fl7L]r:rrY. tf: S.Yt [w 14Y+LY. =L• iyti YrILry'Jt > A. ex. irAL2. AedC • �.a4 lws, CA kl>1iCLl�•s3 •�Tf M4 k 9]C iri{ LSt,i lt�f .p., x�110.ic ` Y;;,�R:1Li "�. TtANE� Xr'!. SR{xL 1[R:7sF•• � sY. 1CA �t`Laltli.: rjrf Vw,. i'ri�k . ►i Sn Wt�PR _ �Tllya R SK�?!!r}i�'F. &Fl :rf�F�•L'Ea >4kHE u Fs0'rL�' xA� �lF7£�. •�'E ACN:�i.. -VFipFiFi m=.t, Lk Y4 naLs;aa' Lr�r.;7u .Fb ;xxr:aRtx 1' •�[ ;nLf sae• r. �xse•� q :>r ,r. '•kirk •:rplirs }itn; ec xe--�xno sxrs m xaw'.a re :r. sxxrr�r. iM F:,:.svFul+r:�k�x �?� e�,FFet ►,�O.iMlErm Adr3za {r�Twst suarsrr.3 �; C i•L1R3 L A xti1L1 iF R°b Y: rqY'•• or1RAVd1^r! ?7f�2N A iLs93: J.: 9�YAF :7FI •. �f�•`,.f17�-3+tsFi:. S:�i Y+sMN2i •Yi 7�:' i'p:t "$. CE.; ;se Sr c+e i ,yyYq'rTCwY f �C !d:lj'S'. 11L! Ylll' Oe: IXFfA T:R' lJ�1.fY YTnY:, r:!•Ve r� _Y, 'hFl i YArt.:•A1F +tY((W�.l�Yo- 11:"%pe{` ��e�{1. ¢ SA0.t.(.77�£ 9iNCF. t!S Nt+L;!31' 9�LiD 1W . �.bi k�.} �Wi:!i F(Y�f. 3,�C�.. rr�2'�l�iw •`�'.P. 'hJ. 1Kf+^t Si i �� tY_ rs Li'3t'-L.L.: iY.} ><'.b-�'�1 rVi : SF L•.tk�3� 72�1r1 Ei:1 ::tY.Di'ic: f'!J^�tlT �?�.:ii7a`: ..�. RxT :�,i'F FYI•tYtRC !;u� a to Y.a: Y axtia:F eRr..e]cr. eA PMUt ft •V?Ak d' p. a6:.UY'C:pF 4h'•t�>'>�F vAA IvAP y'I';iEA1:1l4Yc: rA.Y. F>>L![� i7YdYt q'JG'. FtA kA'U+6 JSLk� Yn'YMX '.:M Md BY •[Ab'i1:+W'"lw. 3YNl+t:it. vA:: -, :K 1Cf AIR vpt 75-7.7+fi:'1k?C iAY,Y'i':7RY f4fw "t ]Y3' P'RG1YXr , • 4- +t. tY: ELL`"-' w*✓y 1T17t C t x[+L• j"kR; :'+k �zf V tV R'= f 7••t'•'•r $! N•=uts: f:z Hat Po.C'yC : K l+A� 'aT iC.+Cn.. l.ffK Rf- ►MF: � y�qt� fu.t RLXf '!f"� r,,ir iSf: a" m_rRG5 v7¢4Z2i A F%WU v4 AF [!y, �,-If•[. :3eF(•[I1Lan :3 riii �'--�.``r�xxF•�r'r�� +lam :uS�: n� � �s� � � s��'rYe I-- --- - ... .F>G.Fi E?.YM'drL.FZ.a`.a%7Fi7�Fi..£3�`'X'.C..iRa = f><ArRter•' ytr. +rx •=atrs.h:• �;'•-:==z.sr. aava-.may r-rz_•t s�iA:<if7: F'vQ�Y: 3FrFY^>i�l: i'd`. 'FfiFGF?e„<`k :xyfyc7YF: >LaCf "i C'F.L'": f.'iE; 1eR.'rr•n x:iF`_+ wi „Mt 111j:=111� PIMP UZN,�' Ws J'Sfi• •07-39Af Ilk, �.'Y7-i :%.Y'.-.z r., •1. rrr�rl:. r•cf:ra..• rlt7YA'Nstf tLet arP 77(7Figr mg r�gXF'� �t17;iam r>t-i i�: sxru: mrY AWy l.rnx:: rr; :vs :;•xsr"o:x faVtd"f : >V.:E SGFa<0!; ZLR'i<::witY 4')-T v .i a3•n-:• ^-. roK"MA ml LRL bX-ffaK4=� : N=Y,m �!l `3'..� L.S t{,-r dco,r, nac aov.G�a a.YkdLSRYATe.,wb&'mrmloerpAfk%i. 1yZLyrSVr '3aydA. y Lr. - ar:.x_-r x»n+aa:- •:. .: - •. u:s xi:::, nx,x��,v: ` . ,its.:•: i,frl�+:.Ya,c a-aFws�r a7iYi7161 LRItllFF'F. :4'f'4 i9!(yF f q,+,l••:'{ •Ya• !:, }!'^' 1: X.�, -Lrii \ =rti'!. f:3' mi it -,t iSKd&Lt5 WP • 7ro x >,MM<" NioM ': V$ :nay xL.4A w ik f2 M Fat9Le!a'R`. -M ai.l'.r'A19 A- l i>•.,57`�a1 r rf :•A 5;+x s! 41 Y!F i! !� =- , -••7ii.Y' I•E' «Ff �•r i1 aG.Y c ,Y�'. J l-t,2 Y+.:w•11LIL l 14g1 rK]p fM LXK Ivry"ti >: RF•. �qi i9 ° LL6�R ae�l`il. A9°A.F4. Y'4.RRT T.L 7.�+X �' M:'.F .rr 1YPr Wi P,'i �^'i35L».+'PY iPtS `'M rr:I v K..�.a: m :zs x 7v x: � >•,�5��^: • �ew.s::.rrcm r�^4x+'t•:. unz txrsracxw.+ �_ ti ;,� Ott'. r.+c v� u5rn�x=;� csu�Y'- �r R*s,Yrr,Y,: =Krc?x;u (r YRR4= 's; NYs .vnxw ;'+• Lr`rF rssrrw•: kit .x:�, <» a :r.�z: x: AiA <!A[ie t[/: i£M R =m.9F:Ats vq face "l -VA6 D •;ipdk rr !W. aelV 1l RALit 7L I�IrO'! tHEA 7'S�L' Ad�t:>arr...rnr :ICi+1E r7�• ,ai' V. i1}.'#7.!M!: y}Im�auA':-..:7•% ;.-:tea .1F.Yk=NCK ��AFk�WA..mew +�.��r?�VAC 3-y-.i •Ed IUM-P- s' • F.F-?5-!!'xr"�?..1te�w.reaAL!• lEC; :S(iQiE '.��ar us�t°• a 8='1AE� NYi: re f MAL A t� � a � u T, xegi+�+c!a4r o -T mom Lot name: 24 North: 9187.4718 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9123.7327 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9123.7559 Curve Length: 1.75 Delta: 0-20-05 Chord: 1.75 Course In: S 88-56-17 E RP North: 9118.1959 End North: 9122.0035 Line Course: N 89-16-20 W North: 9123.3850 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E North: 9189.5036 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9187,4649 \,A C)0t!> S Z East: 19683.6300 Length: 63.75 East: 19682.4485 Length: 1.25 East: 19681.1987 Radius: 300.00 Tangent: 0.88 Course: S 00-53-40 W Course Out: N 89-16-22 W East: 19981.1472 East: 19681.1714 Length: 108.76 East: 19572.4201 Length: 66.13 East: 19573.6457 Length: 110.00 East: 19683.6269 Perimeter: 351.65 Area: 7,238 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0075 Course: S 24-44-46 W Error North:-0.00685 East:-0.00316 Precision 1: 46,603.97 Lot name: 25 North: 9252.9606 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9187.4718 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9189.5105 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E North: 9254.9993 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9252.9606 East: 19684.8439 Length: 65.50 East: 19683.6300 Length: 110.00 East: 19573.6489 Length: 65.50 East: 19574.8628 Length: 110.00 East: 19684.8439 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 Lot name: 26 North: 9318.4494 East: 19686.0579 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W Length: 65.50 RECEIVED MV O C T 2 3 1993 l F$ITAX'I E VlooDS pwvstoN 2- North: 9252.9606 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9254.9993 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E North: 9320.4881 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9318.4494 East: 19684.8439 Length: 110.00 East: 19574.8628 Length: 65.50 East: 19576.0768 Length: 110.00 East: 19686.0579 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 Lot name: 27 North: 9383.9381 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9318.4493 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9320.4880 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E North: 9385.9768 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9383.9381 East: 19687.2718 Length: 65.50 East: 19686.0579 Length: 110.00 East: 19576.0768 Length: 65.50 East: 19577.2907 Length: 110.00 East: 19687.2718 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 Lot name: 28 North: 9449.4269 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9383.9381 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9385.9768 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E North: 9451.4656 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9449.4269 East: 19688.4858 Length: 65.50 East: 19687.2718 Length: 110.00 East: 19577.2907 Length: 65.50 East: 19578.5046 Length: 110.00 East: 19688.4858 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 �l E [Z lTA{� � \•� o c�D S WIA Lot name: 29 North: 9514.9156 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9449.4268 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9451.4655 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E North: 9516.9543 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9514.9156 East: 19689.6997 Length: 65.50 East: 19688.4858 Length: 110.00 East: 19578.5046 Length: 65.50 East: 19579.7186 Length: 110.00 East: 19689.6997 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 Lot name: 30 North: 9580.4044 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9514.9156 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9516.9543 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E North: 9582.4431 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9580.4044 East: 19690.9136 Length: 65.50 East: 19689.6997 Length: 110.00 East: 19579.7186 Length: 65.50 East: 19580.9325 Length: 110.00 East: 19690.9136 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 Lot name: 31 North: 9638.9656 Curve Length: 38.47 Delta: 7-22-38 Chord: 38.44 Course In: S 81-33-39 E RP North: 9595.1212 End North: 9600.6581 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9580.4016 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9582.4402 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E East: 19694.4725 Radius: 298.75 Tangent: 19.26 Course: S O4-45-02 W Course Out: N 88-56-17 W East: 19989.9877 East: 19691.2890 Length: 20.26 East: 19690.9135 Length: 110.00 East: 19580.9324 Length: 72.82 r � � � V 1ST bt.�► Z- North: 9655.2477 East: 19582.2820 Line Course: S 81-36-36 E Length: 112.12 North: 9638.8883 East: 19693.2021 Line Course: N 86-39-23 E Length: 1.28 North: 9638.9629 East: 19694.4799 Perimeter: 354.94 Area: 7,264 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0079 Course: S 70-18-23 E Error North:-0.00266 East: 0.00742 Precision 1: 45,046.68 \,1 o 01-'�> 5 O VA2-- RECCOMMUNrry DEVELOPMENTEMDEPARTMENT ------------------ T-2 �---- Lot name: 24 North: 9187.4718 East: 19683.6300 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W Length: 63.75 North: 9123.7327 East: 19682.4485 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W Length: 1.25 North: 9123.7559 East: 19681.1987 Curve Length: 1.75 Radius: 300.00 Delta: 0-20-05 Tangent: 0.88 Chord: 1.75 Course: S 00-53-40 W Course In: S 88-56-17 E Course Out: N 89-16-22 W RP North: 9118.1959 East: 19981.1472 End North: 9122.0035 East: 19681.1714 Line Course: N 89-16-20 W Length: 108.76 North: 9123.3850 East: 19572.4201 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E Length: 66.13 North: 9189.5036 East: 19573.6457 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E Length: 110.00 North: 9187,4649 East: 19683.6269 Perimeter: 351.65 Area: 7,238 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0075 Course: S 24-44-46 W Error North:-0.00685 East:-0.00316 Precision} 1: 46, 603. 97 Lot name: 25 North: 9252.9606 East: 19684.8439 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W Length: 65.50 North: 9187.4718 East: 19683.6300 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W Length: 110.00 North: 9189.5105 East: 19573.6489 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E Length: 65.50 North: 9254.9993 East: 19574.8628 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E Length: 110.00 North: 9252.9606 East: 19684.8439 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 ------------------ Lot name: 26 North: 9318.4494 East: 19686.0579 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W Length: 65.50 F-�LTA'-G E \4ODDS 1� lV 1S1 O t-1 7- North: 9252.9606 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9254.9993 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E Forth: 9320.4881 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9318.4494 East: 19684.8439 Length: 110.00 East: 19574.8628 Length: 65.50 East: 19576.0768 Length: 110.00 East: 19686.0579 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 Lot name: 27 North: 9383.9381 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9318.4493 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9320.4880 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E North: 9385.9768 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9383.9381 East: 19687.2718 Length: 65.50 East: 19686.0579 Length: 110.00 East: 19576.0768 Length: 65.50 East: 19577.2907 Length: 110.00 East: 19687.2718 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 Lot name: 28 North: 9449.4269 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9383.9381 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9385.9768 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E North: 9451.4656 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9449.4269 East: 19688.4858 Length: 65.50 East: 19687.2718 Length: 110.00 East: 19577.2907 Length: 65.50 East: 19578.5046 Length: 110.00 East: 19688.4858 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 I-V G IE- dv ks\ o tA Lot name: 29 North: 9514.9156 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9449.4268 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9451.4655 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E North: 9516.9543 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9514.9156 East: 19689.6997 Length: 65.50 East: 19688.4858 Length: 110.00 East: 19578.5046 Length: 65.50 East: 19579.7186 Length: 110.00 East: 19689.6997 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 Lot name: 30 North: 9580.4044 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9514.9156 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9516.9543 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E North: 9582.4431 Line Course: S 88-56-17 E North: 9580.4044 East: 19690.9136 Length: 65.50 East: 19689.6997 Length: 110.00 East: 19579.7186 Length: 65.50 East: 19580.9325 Length: 110.00 East: 19690.9136 Perimeter: 351.01 Area: 7,205 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0000 Course: S 90-00-00 E Error North: 0.00000 East: 0.00000 Precision 1: 351,000,000.00 Lot name: 31 North: 9638.9656 Curve Length: 38.47 Delta: 7-22-38 Chord: 38.44 Course In: S 81-33-39 E RP North: 9595.1212 End North: 9600.6581 Line Course: S 01-03-43 W North: 9580.4016 Line Course: N 88-56-17 W North: 9582.4402 Line Course: N 01-03-43 E East: 19694.4725 Radius: 298.75 Tangent: 19.26 Course: S O4-45-02 W Course Out: N 88-56-17 W East: 19989.9877 East: 19691.2890 Length: 20.26 East: 19690.9135 Length: 110.00 East: 19580.9324 Length: 72.82 Z- North: 9655.2477 Line Course: S 81-36-36 E North: 9638.8883 Line Course: N 86-39-23 E North: 9638.9629 East: 19582.2820 Length: 112.12 East: 19693.2021 Length: 1.28 East: 19694.4799 Perimeter: 354.94 Area: 7,264 sq.ft. 0.17 acres Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.0079 Course: S 70-18-23 E Error North:-0.00266 East: 0.00742 Precision 1: 45,046.68 L Z-I1412oop CITYJF� 33530 1 ST WAY SOUTH October 23, 1998 Mr. Dennis Alfredson P.E. Schneider Homes Inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite Tukwila, WA 98188 FEDERAL WAY.F/J.,F�,61-4000 p03-6210 Re: Heritage Woods Division II Final Plat — Response to October 6, 1998, Letter Dear Mr. Alfredson: This letter responds to your October 6, 1998, letter objecting to three items in my October 2, 1998. memo regarding the Heritage Woods Division II final plat application. I will address each of the three items separately. Items 1 and 3 are broken out into separate issues within each item. 1 a. In regard to item nine of the Final Plat Map review, the condition does not require construction of a fence at the back of lots 1-10. The items states, "... a condition must be noted on the plat that requires fencing be placed on the back of lots 1-10, located 20 feet inside the Military Road property line, and to allow a 20 foot wide permanent landscape buffer between the fencing and Military Road." To clarify, staff is not requiring fencing of the back of the lots. Staff is requiring for clarification purposes that a note be placed on the final plat map, which identifies that any (future) fences constructed on lots 1 - 10 be constructed 20 feet from the Military Road right-of-way. This would assure the required 20 foot landscape buffer is retained between future fences and Military Road. lb. The type of landscaping required in the 20 foot landscape buffer behind lots 1-9 is clearly identified in my June 23, 1998, letter to Robin Bales (enclosed). The landscaping must include two staggered rows of trees planted approximately 10 feet on center along the length of the buffer. The trees in each of the two rows would be spaced at approximately 20 feet on center, resulting in an overall approximately 10 foot triangulated spacing (see diagram below). Conifer trees must be at least five feet in height, or deciduous with a two inch caliper. Shrubs meeting the planting standard of 18 inches high and attaining at least 80 percent coverage within two years of planting must also be included on the landscape plan. Please revise the landscape plan and submit two copies for city review and approval. Mr. Dennis Alfred'son October 23, 1998 ,4 4 Page 2 ' 20' 20, ti 5' 20 • Tree You have proposed to install a fence and tree spacing at 20 feet on center. Planting two rows of trees and vegetation as discussed above meets the preliminary plat condition. 1 c. Again, the city is not requiring construction of the fence. However, we do acknowledge that one consistent fence design along lots 1-9, and lot 10, would create a much more aesthetically pleasing appearance for the Heritage Woods project, than would future fences randomly designed and constructed by individual homeowners. This suggestion could be implemented by Schneider Homes through either CC & R's or by Schneider Homes constructing the fence concurrent with project development. Id. The city is not requiring creation of a separate tract for the 20 foot landscape area behind lots 1-10. We are simply advising that a separate tract may be a more effective way to provide for ownership and maintenance of the landscape area by the Homeowners Association through CC&R's. 2. You declined to propose a more effective or alternative method of implementing and enforcing the NGPE clearing and grading restrictions. Therefore, city staff will recommend to continue enforcement of the NGPE restrictions on a case by case basis as in Division I. Please be advised that several abutting homeowners have recently attended City Council meetings to voice concern over violations of the NGPE restrictions in Division I. As a result of these concerns, city staff and you should be prepared to respond to City Council concerns on this subject when the Division II final plat review comes before the City Council. 3. In regard to SEPA condition No. 2, there are two issues. 3a. Clearing and grading did occur in areas outside of the approved clearing limits. Implementation of the Military Road landscape buffer as discussed in item lb above will mitigate for unapproved clearing and grading on lots 1-9. Mr. Dennis Alfredson October 23, 1998 Page 3 Prior to final plat approval, please provide an as -built grading plan which verifies the finish grades of lots 18-31 comply with the approved grading plan. Again, the city has received complaints from abutting property owners that the grading on these lots exceeds the extent and depth of fill on the approved grading plan. 3b. The NGPE areas around the exterior of Division II were protected from clearing and grading during construction and do not require further attention. I trust this provides a satisfactory response and direction on these three items. If you have any additional questions, please contact me at (253) 661-4019. Sincerely, iUA"� Senior Planner enc: June 23, 1998, Letter to Robing Bales c: Greg Fewins, Principal Planner Stephen Clifton, Public Works Development Services Manager Jim Femling, Engineering Plans Reviewer LAPRMSYS\DOCUMENT\SUB98 0003\CD102398.DOC JT�YO33530 1 ST WAY SOUTH Mr. Robin Bales Schneider Homes 6510 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite # 1 Tukwila, WA 98188 FiLE Re: Heritage Woods Division 2 —Military Road Landscape Buffer Dear Mr. Bales: (253) 661-4000 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003-6210 June 23, 1998 This letter responds to your May 22, 1998, letter and preliminary landscape plan for the Military Road landscape buffer. The preliminary plat of Heritage Woods was subject to the city codes in place at the time of preliminary plat review. At that time, a 20-foot wide, standard three landscape buffer was required adjacent to Military Road. I have attached a copy of page 11 of the 1992 preliminary plat staff report discussing the buffer, and copies of the 1992 Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Sections 16.280 and 90.25. The submitted landscape plan must be revised to include two staggered rows of trees planted 8 to 10 feet on center along the length of the buffer. Conifer trees must be at least 5 feet in height, or deciduous with a 2-inch caliper. Shrubs meeting the planting standard of 18 inches high and attaining at least 80 percent coverage within two years of planting must also be included on the landscape plan. Please revise the landscape plan and submit two copies for review and approval. The Heritage Woods Division 2 final plat shall identify the 20-foot wide landscape buffer area as a separate tract to be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association. Lots adjacent to.the 20-foot buffer area along Military Road were not included for clearing and grading through the preliminary plat approval process and may not be cleared in conjunction with the Military Road widening as you have requested. If you have any questions, please contact me at (253) 661-4019. Sincerely, � aawu,o Jim Harris Senior Planner enc c: Stc lien Clifton, Public Works Development Services Manager ennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes LAPRMSYS'LiCUMENTUPR97 00.03\CD62398.DOC City will review each individual site plan for possible protection of additional ❑nsite trees - This will potentially provide additional opportunity to protect trees and vegetation not already accounted for under section 90.15.3 FWZC. ires that ivisions section 15.280 oW shi ld uresidences fromdarteral provide buffers t adjacent land uses. The streets or established adj foot wide applicant proposes to provide a Road Stwentouth. This landscape buffer along Military lenient buffer wilrequired supplement provide an adequate buffer. existing vegetation the applicant Although not required by code, elation proposes t❑ maintain fifteen feetaining th north, along the rear of variouliness (refer to Exhibit Yj - south and west property street trees along As required by Chapter 110 FWZC, public streets and a planted median along all P required. Military Road South will be 4. Ham An inspection report of observed i]avidwildlife Evansdated and January 10, 1991 was prepared by Associates, Inc• for the site (refer to Exhibit L). This report supplements wildlife observations junction with preparation Of the conducted in con Exhibit Gj. wetland report (refer to lse The site provides habitat well as S°far small rmmaand rodents and reptiles as wegig ected to insects. The site would also be and other provide food resources for hawks.habit the site. predators which may not actually These animals will be eliminated Q introduction of laced by the proposal. In adds human activities, including domestic animals to the site will threaten the viability of any remaining habitat. of those wildlife species identified, the WDW] Washington State Department opileatef wildlife ker is indicates that only the ethe Department. woodpecker No other listed as "sensitive by ethreatened or species are listed as endang WDW indicates that the s sensitive. uusing b optimal hab this site are probably already using habitat (a mosaic Of small micro - impacts to this species can be reduced by 11 d 16.280 pere :feasible, subdivision design shall recognize and preserve important i view corridors by proper location of street rights of way, view conservation easements or other means. Buffers .10 Subdivision design should provide ample buffers to shield new residences from arterial streets, or established land uses adjacent to the subdivision, under the provisions of Section 90.25, Landscaping, of the Zoning Code, as follows: A. Buffer Type 2 when adjacent to non-residential or non-agricultural uses; B. Buffer Type 3 when adjacent to multi -family or professional offices uses. C. Buffer Type 3 when the density of the proposed subdivision exceeds the allowed density of adjacent platted, single-family properties. FA1 .20 Existing mature vegetation shall be retained for buffering purposes as provided in Section 90.25 (8), Use of Significant Natural Vegetation, in the Zoning Code. .30 Perimeter fencing in subdivisions shall be located on the interior side of required buffer areas. ,/16.290 Retention of Vegetation All natural vegetation shall be retained on the site to be subdivided except that which will be removed for improvements or grading approved in the preliminary subdivision or short subdivision. ,116.300 Streets and Rights -of -Way .10 All streets within an approved subdivision or short subdivision shall be within a dedicated public right-of-way. .20 All streets within the public rights -of -way shall be improved to the standards specified in Chapter 110, Required Improvements to Rights -of- ay and Vehicular Access Easements and Tracts, of the Zoning Code. .30 All streets abutting the subdivision or short subdivision shall be improved in 10 accordance with Chapter 110, Required Improvements to Rights -of -Way and Vehicular Access Easements, of the Zoning Code. ,in All traffic control devices within the subdivision or short subdivision shall be 2. For buffering standard 2, the applicant shall provide a 30 foot wide landscaped strip planted as follows: a. Three staggered rows of trees, each row planted 8 feet on center along the entire length of the strip. No more than 50% of the required trees may be deciduous. At the time of planting, deciduous trees must be at least 2" in diameter as measured 6 inches above the top of the root ball; and coniferous trees must be at least 5' in height. b. Shrubs, 18 inches high planted to attain a coverage of at least 80% of the buffer area within 2 years. 3. For buffering standard 3, the applicant shall provide a 20 foot wide landscaped strip planted as follows: Imo_ a. Two staggered rows of trees, each row planted j 8 to 10 feet on center along the entire length r} of the buffer. Up to 100% of the required trees may be deciduous. At the time of planting, deciduous trees must be at least 2" in diameter as measured 6 inches above the top of the root ball; and coniferous trees• must be at least 5' in height. b. Shrubs, 18 inches high planted to attain a coverage of at least 80% of the buffer area within 2 years. 4. Location of the Suffer - The applicant shall provide the required buffer along the entire common border between the subject property and the adjoining property or the street, as the case may be. 5. Multiple Buffering Requirement. If the subject property has more than one adjoining property along the same property line, the applicant shall provide a gradual transition between different buffers. This transition must occur totally within the area which has the less stringent buffering standard. The specific design of the transition must be approved by the City. 6. Adloining Property Containing Several Uses - If the adjoining property contains several permitted uses, the applicant may provide the most stringent buffer required for any of these uses. G C; L t__ go •• . CITY OFrjr.- -.Ep *wY fq7JPo0' 33530 1 ST WAY SOUTH Mr. Robin Bales Schneider Homes 6510 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite # Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Heritage Woods Division 2 —Military Road Landscape Buffer Dear Mr. Bales: (253) 661-4000 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003-6210 June 23, 1998 This letter responds to your May 22, 1998, letter and preliminary landscape plan for the Military Road landscape buffer. The preliminary plat of Heritage Woods was subject to the city codes in place at the time of preliminary plat review. At that time, a 20-foot wide, standard three landscape buffer was required adjacent to Military Road. I have attached a copy of page 11 of the 1992 preliminary plat staff report discussing the buffer, and copies of the 1992 Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Sections 16.280 and 90.25. The submitted landscape plan must be revised to include two staggered rows of trees planted 8 to 10 feet on center along the length of the buffer. Conifer trees must be at least 5 feet in height, or deciduous with a 2-inch caliper. Shrubs meeting the planting standard of 18 inches high and attaining at least 80 percent coverage within two years of planting must also be included on the landscape plan. Please revise the landscape plan and submit two copies for review and approval. The Heritage Woods Division 2 final plat shall identify the 20-foot wide landscape buffer area as a separate tract to be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association. Lots adjacent to the 20-foot buffer area along Military Road were not included for clearing and grading through the preliminary plat approval process and may not be cleared in conjunction with the Military Road widening as you have requested. If you have any questions, please contact me at (253) 661-4019. Sincerely, � �GZ1/Gto Jim Harris Senior Planner enc c�_= en Clifton, Public Works Development Services Manager s Alfredson, Schneider Homes L:\PRMSYa'ZJCUMEN'11UPR97 0003\CD62398 DOC } City will review each individual site plan for possible protection of additional onsite trees. This will potentially provide additional opportunity to protect trees and vegetation not already accounted for under section 90.15.3 FWZC. Section 16.280 FWSC requires that subdivisions provide buffers to shield residences from arterial streets or established adjacent land uses. The applicant proposes to provide a twenty foot wide landscape buffer along Military Road South. This buffer will be required to utilize or supplement existing vegetation to provide an adequate buffer. Although not required by code, the applicant proposes to maintain fifteen feet of vegetation along the rear of various lots adjoining the north, south and west property lines (refer to Exhibit K) . As required by Chapter 110 FWZC, street trees along all public streets and a planted median along Military Road South will be required. 4. Habitat An inspection report of observed wildlife dated January 10, 1991 was prepared by David Evans and Associates, Inc. for the site (refer to Exhibit L). This report supplements wildlife observations conducted in conjunction with preparation of the wetland report (refer to Exhibit G). The site provides habitat for small mammals, rodents and reptiles as well as songbirds and insects. The site would also be expected to provide food resources for hawks and other predators which may not actually inhabit the site. These animals will be eliminated or displaced by the proposal. In addition, the introduction of human activities, including domestic animals to the site will threaten the viability of any remaining habitat. Of those wildlife species identified, the Washington State Department of Wildlife (WDW) indicates that only the Pileated Woodpecker is listed as "sensitive" by the Department. No other species are listed as endangered, threatened or sensitive. WDW indicates that the bird(s) using this site are probably already using sub -optimal habitat (a mosaic of small micro -habitats). Impacts to this species can be reduced by leaving 11 OMPF Moe"Wje'a'�si'ble, subdivision design shall recognize and preserve important view corridors by proper location of street rights of way, view conservation easements or other means. J 16.280 Buffers .10 Subdivision design should provide ample buffers to shield new residences from arterial streets, or established land uses adjacent to the subdivision, under the provisions of Section 90.25, Landscaping, of the Zoning Code, as follows: A. Buffer Type 2 when adjacent to non-residential or non-agricultural uses; B. Buffer Type 3 when adjacent to multi -family or professional offices uses. C. Buffer Type 3 when the density of the proposed subdivision exceeds the allowed density of adjacent platted, single-family properties. 21 .20 Existing mature vegetation shall be retained for buffering purposes as provided in Section 90.25 (8), Use of Significant Natural Vegetation, in the Zoning Code. .30 Perimeter fencing in subdivisions shall be located on the interior side of required buffer areas. ,/16.290 Retention of Vegetation All natural vegetation shall be retained on the site to be subdivided except that which will be removed for improvements or grading approved in the preliminary subdivision or short subdivision. J16.300 Streets and Ri hts-of-Wa 24 .10 All streets within an approved subdivision or short subdivision shall be within a dedicated public right-of-way. .20 All streets within the public rights -of -way shall be improved to the standards specified in Chapter 110, Required Improvements to Rights -of- ay and Vehicular Access Easements and Tracts, of the Zoning Code. .30 All streets abutting the subdivision or short subdivision shall be improved in isaccordance with Chapter 110, Required Improvements to Rights -of -Way and Vehicular Access Easements, of the Zoning Code. .40 All traffic control devices within the subdivision or short subdivision shall be nrnvirjPri by the riPVPlnner as required by the Director of Public Works. 6 2. For buffering standard 2, the applicant shall provide a 30 foot wide landscaped strip planted as follows: a. Three staggered rows of trees, each row planted 8 feet on center along the entire length of the strip. No more than 50% of the required trees may be deciduous. At the time of planting, deciduous trees must be at least 2" in diameter as measured 6 inches above the top of the root ball; and coniferous trees must be at least 5' in height. b. Shrubs, 18 inches high planted to attain a coverage of at least 80% of the buffer area within 2 years. 3. For buffering standard 3, the applicant shall provide a 20 foot wide landscaped strip planted as follows: a. Two staggered rows of trees, each row planted 8 to 10 feet on center along the entire length of the buffer. Up to 100% of the required trees may be deciduous. At the time of planting, deciduous trees must be at least 2" in diameter as measured 6 inches above the top of the root ball; and coniferous trees must be at least 5' in height. b. Shrubs, 18 inches high planted to attain a coverage of at least 80% of the buffer area within 2 years. 4. Location of the Buffer - The applicant shall provide the required buffer along the entire common border between the subject property and the adjoining property or the street, as the case may be. 5. Multiple Buffering Regl1irement. If the subject property has more than one adjoining property along the same property line, the applicant shall provide a gradual transition between different buffers. This transition must occur totally within the area which has the less stringent buffering standard. The specific design of the transition must be approved by the City. 6. Adjoining Property Containing Several Uses - If the adjoining property contains several permitted uses, the applicant may provide the most stringent buffer required for any of these uses. d 90 - 6 90.25 2. Standards - The applicant shall provide the following at a minimum: a. Living plant material which will cover 80% of the area to be landscaped within two years. If the material to be used does not spread over time, the applicant shall plant the entire area immediately. Any area that will not be covered with living plant material must be covered with nonliving ground cover. b. One tree for each 1,000 square feet of area to be landscaped. At the time of planting, deciduous trees must be at least 2" in diameter as measured 6 inches above the top of the root ball and coniferous trees must be at least 5' in height. C. If a development requires approval through Process I, II or III the City may require additional vegetation to be planted along a building facade if- (1) The building facade is more than 25 feet high or more than 50 feet long; or (2) Additional landscaping is appropriate to provide a visual break in the facade. Buffering Standards The Chart in Section 10 of this Chapter (Chart 90-1) establishes which buffering standard applies in a par- ticular case. The following paragraphs establish the specific requirements for each standard. 1. For buffering standard 1, the applicant shall provide a 50 foot wide landscaped strip planted as follows: a. Four staggered rows of trees, each row planted eight feet on center along the entire length of the strip. No more than 30% of the required trees may be deciduous. At the time of planting, deciduous trees must be at least 2" in diameter as measured 6 inches above the top of the root ball and coniferous trees must be at least V in height. b. Shrubs, 18 inches high, planted to attain a coverage of at least 80% of the strip within 2 years. 90 - 5 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT E PARTMENT Lfirni Ischneider homes, inc. MAY 2 2 1998 6510 Southcenter Boulevard•Suite #1 •Tukwila, WA 98188•(206) 248-2471 *FAX (206) 242-4209 City of Federal Way Attention: Jim Harris, Associate Planner 33530 1" Way South Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 May 22, 1998 Dear Mr. Harris: Enclosed is the preliminary plan for the proposed landscape buffer along Military Road on the Schneider Homes' Heritage Woods project. As you will recall, the current landscape buffer is situated where the 2H:1V slope will be located when the Military Road widening associated with this project is complete. Therefore, the landscape buffer must be cleared in order to finish the road widening portion of the project. The landscape plan is a Type III buffer as you specified. The contractor on the project has asked if it would be possible to partially clear the adjacent lots as well in order to make room for the heavy machinery to work in the area. The contractor has been informed that we would need your approval before that could be done. It would be helpful and appreciated if you could remit your suggestions or approval for the landscape buffer as soon as possible. We would like to place the excess material from this part of the project into the phase 1 lot improvements (tracts H and J) that are currently awaiting your approval as well. Respectfully Submitted, Schneider Homes, Inc. Robin G. Bales Aqty V. it �, ,,e C (V • UQ 7rz1-6! ? LJ ? SC-HN-EI-245 P8 ll CITY OF PDr 33530 1 ST WAY SOUTH Mr. David Morrison Parklane Ventures 31620 - 23rd Avenue South, Suite 320 Federal Way, WA 98003 A IL I L E (253) 661-4000 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003-6210 June 2, 1998 Re: Heritage Woods — File Number UPR97-0003 PROCESS III APPROVAL TO MODIFY PRELIMINARY PLAT CONDITIONS #6 AND 7 Dear Mr. Morrison: The city has completed an administrative review of the request to modify conditions #6and 7 of the Heritage Woods preliminary plat, and hereby approves the above referenced application. This approval is based on the enclosed Findings and Conclusions for Application UPR97-0003. Criteria for Process III review is contained in Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22- 395(b)(1-5). Preliminary plat conditions #6 and 7 are hereby amended as follows: REVISED CONDITION #6 AND 7 The landscape plan prepared by Schneider Homes (January 4, 1998) must be revised to include a mixture of evergreen and deciduous trees planted at 10 to 15 feet on center in a triangulated pattern. The proposed groundcover must be planted at 18 to 24 inches on center (not 10 feet as proposed), to achieve 100 percent cover within three years of planting. Shrubs shall be planted at 5 to 10 feet on center. The landscaping plan must be revised and approved by the Community Development Services Department prior to issuance of the grading permit. 2. Futures houses for each lot (52-58) shall have a foundation designed by an Engineer Licensed in the State of Washington. A note to this effect shall be on the final plat map. 3. All recommendations in the April 14, 1998, report by Golder Associates shall be implemented through the fill and grade project, including construction observing and testing, observing removal of the loose fill, subgrade preparing, installing of drainage blanket, structural fill compaction testing, rockery construction observing, and submitting field reports to the Public Works Department. Additionally, the geotechnical engineer shall submit to the city's Public Works and Community Development Services Departments a closing report that the project was completed in conformance with approved plans and complies with the design engineer's analysis and recommendations. Mr. David Morrison June 2, 1998 Page 2 4. Any future construction behind the building envelope which is beyond minor landscaping, such as retaining walls, home addition, and shed construction, shall be designed by a geotechnical engineer at the owner's expense and approved by the City of Federal Way prior to beginning construction. The city may also require the homeowner to pay for services of the city's geotechnical consulting engineer to review any plans. A note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat map. The effective date of this decision is June 5, 1998. The decision may be appealed in the form of a letter delivered to the Department of Community Development Services (33530 1st Way South, Federal Way, WA) by June 19, 1998, by any person who receives a copy of this decision. An 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 Services disputed by the person filing the appeal, and must include the appeal fee. Any additional requirements of FWCC Section 22-397 must also be followed. Pursuant to FWCC Section 22-396, work on the project may not occur until three working days after the appeal period has expired. This decision shall not waive compliance with City of Federal Way codes, policies, and standards relating to this development. If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact Jim Harris, Senior Planner, at (253) 661-4019. Sincerely, I/Iff,V Gregor D. Moore, AICP Director of Community Development Services enc: Findings and Conclusions for Process III Review, File UPR97-0003 c: Jim Harris, Senior Planner Mary Kate Gaviglio, Building Official Stephen Clifton, Public Works Development Services Manager Lisa Read, Contract Engineering Plans Reviewer Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes K.Y. Kode, 1625 - 204th Place NE, Redmond, WA 98053 Shirley Blackburn, 28002 - 22nd Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003 L:\PRMSYS\DOCUMEYTUPR97_00.03\APPRO V AL.DOC I Golder Associates Inc. 4104 -148th Avenue, N.E. Redmond, WA 98052 Telephone (425) 883-0777 Fax (425) 882-5498 October 22,1998 Schneider Homes 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 6 Tukwila, Washington 98188 ATTENTION: Mr. Dennis Alfredson RE: CONSTRUCTION MONITORING SUMMARY REPORT HERITAGE WOODS LOTS 52 TO 58 FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON Dear Dennis: Golder Associates Our ref: 983-1216.000 OCT 2 3 1998 Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) is pleased to present this summary of our field observations and testing on the Heritage Woods project. The project involved the filling to grade of seven single family building lots, numbered 52 through 58 in Tract H and J. The geotechnical recommendations for the lot grading were presented in our geotechnical report dated April 14,1998. The civil grading plan was prepared by Jaeger Engineers. The work involved the placement of thick structural fills against a steep slope to create the building pads and yards. Significant geotechnical issues requiring our observation and testing included the following: ■ Removal of mud and debris from the area of the previous slope failure, ■ Installation of a sand drainage blanket, ■ Benching of structural fill into the native slope, ■ Compaction testing of the structural fill and, • Observation and testing of the reinforced fill rockery at the toe of lots 57 and 58. A member of our geotechnical staff was on -site throughout construction from August 25 to October 2,1998, initially on a full-time basis, and then switching to part-time observations once the contractor was able to demonstrate consistent compaction and began routine fill placement. Our construction monitor completed daily field reports of his observations and compaction test results. During the coarse of the work, copies of these reports were provided to Schneider Homes and the City of Federal Way's inspector, Mr. Jim Pryal. OFFICES IN AUSTRALIA, CANADA, GERMANY, HUNGARY, ITALY, SWEDEN, UNITED KINGDOM, UNITED STATES October 22,1998 2 983-1216.000 Our field observations and testing indicate that the contractor completed the work in substantial compliance with our geotechnical recommendations and the civil grading plan. We trust this letter meets your needs. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, GOLDER ASSOCIATES INC. ames G. Johnson Associate Engineering Geologist JGJ/sIt 1o=;gj1.da Golder Associates -) RECEIVED BY 5MUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OCT e 8 1998 ti in Ischneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard•Suite #1 •Tukwila, WA 98188•(206) 248-2471 •FAX (206) 242-4209 October 6, 1998 James Harris, Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33530 lst Way S Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 Re: Plat of Heritage Woods Division II Final Plat Approval File No. SUB98-0003 Dear Mr. Harris: Thank you for your memo (dated October 2) in which you discuss several requirements of final plat approval. The memo has been distributed in-house, as well as to our engineering consultant, and to our landscaping superintendent. I realize you would like to see the package resubmitted as a whole. However, there are three items in your memo to which we object and which may require some additional consideration and response. In regard to Final Plat Map Approval Condition No. 9; in particular, the requirement that '!fencing be placed on the back of Lots 1 through 10." I am unaware of a particular plat condition or City ordinance that requires fencing along the backs of lots 1-10. Please cite the plat condition or City ordinance that makes this requirement. In the absence of a specific plat condition or ordinance, we object to being "required" by City staff to install a fence. We have already modified, at the direction of City staff and at significant expense, the proposed landscaping plan to decrease spacing between trees from 20 feet to 10 feet. The effect of this change is to essentially construct a visual screen, as can be seen by examining the approved "Landscape Plan - Buffer." A fence is redundant, unnecessary, and expensive, especially considering the added cost of the landscape buffer. SC-HN-EI-245 PS James Harris, Senior . lanner, City of Federal Way October 6, 1998 Page 2 of 4 A compromise is proposed. We propose to comply with this portion of Condition No. 9 and install a fence along the back of lots 1-10, if in exchange the City will allow the tree spacing in the buffer to be increased from 10 feet to 20 feet. Our landscaping designer feels 10-foot spacing of trees will result in a cluttered appearance. He advises also that a 20-foot spacing will be much easier for the Homeowner's Association to maintain. Please consider this prnpasal, and let me know of your decision as soon as possible. In any case, in the absence of a specific plat condition or City ordinance, a condition requiring fencing will not be placed on the final plat. If the compromise is accepted, Schneider Homes will simply install the fence. In regard to the City's suggestion that a tract be created: The process of creating a tract entails considerable time and effort; in particular, the amendment of the plat, survey work, and building setbacks. Consequently, we prefer to leave the easement as it stands. The CC&Rs will declare the Homeowner's Association responsible for maintenance of the easement. In regard to Condition of Preliminary Plat Approval No. 3; in particular, the "request to propose a more effective method of implementing and enforcing the NGPE clearing and grading restrictions." Schneider Homes purchased the plat with the clearing and grading restriction in place. Potential homebuyers are alerted to the presence of the restriction. Buyers receive a copy of the Title Report, which clearly indicates the restriction. Buyers receive no less and no more lecturing from the sales agent regarding this restriction than they would about any other restriction on the property; e.g., septic system restrictions, utility easements, etc. The house and lot become the sole property of a new owner, to make use of what he will, to turn it into a meth lab or whatever, and Schneider Homes has absolutely zero further control or enforcement powers. Consequently, we respectfully decline to offer a proposal for a more effective method of implementing and enforcing the NGPE clearing and grading restrictions. Enforcement of city -imposed restrictions is clearly a city function. As an aside, I personally can summon little enthusiasm for enforcement of this particular restriction. It is my opinion that the alders in the NGPE present a clear danger to life and property. Trees (especially alders) that were formerly protected from the wind, and that become exposed due to clearing, frequently do not have the root systems necessary to keep from toppling in a storm. This observation is based on my experience as a former James Harris, Senio, . fanner, City vf'Federal Way October 6, 1998 Page 3 of 4 professional home inspector and a professional civil engineer having had occasion to deal with the consequences of this sort of clearing. Furthermore, the NGPE is aesthetically unappealing. We can offer little other than a commitment to bring this matter to the attention once again of our marketing agents. In regard to SEPA Condition No. 2; in particular, the requirement that "the applicant shall demonstrate how they have complied with the approved plans clearing limits plan. NGPE or buffer areas cleared andlor regraded must be revegetated in accordance with a plan to be submitted and approved by the Department of Community Development Services, and Public Works." Two distinct issues are raised in this Condition. 1. Clearing beyond the clearing limits on the approved plans. During the course of construction, because of the size of the construction equipment and the grades they were attempting to achieve, some clearing did indeed occur outside the approved clearing limits, primarily on lots 1-9. However, it should be noted that the design engineer could just have easily included this area within the land to be cleared had he simply realized the necessity. Many lots were included within the area allowed to be cleared, and some were not. The decision regarding what area was included appears to have been based on the engineer's best guess as to what would be necessary for construction. The cleared areas are all on building lots to be developed within the coming months. In the meantime, in preparation for winter, Schneider Homes will cover these cleared areas with straw mulch. This procedure is standard practice and has specifically been approved for these lots by the City's site construction inspector. 2. NGPE or buffer areas cleared andlor graded. Care was taken so that no NGPE area was cleared or graded. The landscape buffer along Military Road South was cleared in preparation for installation of the City -approved (non-native) landscaping. James Harris, Senior . lanner, City of Federal Way October 6, 1998 Page 4 of 4 I trust that you will find this response to these three items satisfactory. Please call if there is anything you would like to discuss. Respectfully, SCHNEIDER HOMES„ INC. .E. Manager & Development & Construction Cc: Murray Dick, Sales and Marketing Director, Schneider Homes Tracy Webster, Site Project Manager, -Schneider Homes Jerry Schneider, President, Schneider Homes Greg Fewins, Principal Planner, City of Federal Way Mel Daley, P.E., DMP Engineering n„" I schneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard•Suite #1 *Tukwila, WA 98188•(206) 248-2471 *FAX (206) 242-4209 August 26, 1998 Jim Harris, Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33530 1st Way S Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 Re: Plat of Heritage Woods Division II Recording of the Plat Dear Mr. Harris: The construction of the plat of Heritage Woods Division II is now substantially complete. Your inspector is expected to write a punch list today. In accordance with FWCC Section 22-131 and the date of preliminary plat approval, we have until October 20, 1998 to record the final plat. The documents necessary for recording the plat were submitted to you for review on July 31, nearly one month ago. In a phone conversation yesterday, you indicated that you had not yet begun to review these documents, nor did you expect to any time soon. City staff review of these documents is on the critical path of the process. I am concerned about the lack of a sense of urgency in completing the recording process. We have gone to considerable effort to provide a submittal as clean and complete as we can in order to keep City staff effort to a minimum. We can live with a recording date as late as October 20. However, a date any later is unacceptable and unjustified. The cost of interest on the plat construction loan will quickly put this project in the red if we cannot get houses built. Rather than wait for months, it would be cheaper for us to pay the City's costs to hire a contract person to review and expedite this recording. We have done all we can do, and in a timely manner. We have a right to demand that our public officials do likewise. Respectfully, SC ER HOMES, r D is Alfred an, P Manager of Development & Construction Cc: Greg Moore, Director of PlanningRECEIVED BY oGT°,Prh'' rQ��Nnl ]�'1T1' OEVEI nPA,MP1,tw 0- Carey Roe, Director of Public Works Ken Nyberg, City Manager The Honorable Ron Gintz, Mayor SC-HN-EI-245 PB LAKFHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT 316271st Avenue South ■ P. O. Box 4249 • Federal Way, WA 98063 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA OF: August 20,1998 ATTN: Mr. Jim Hams Senior Planner SUBJECT: Agenda Item No. 6 — Heritage Woods Division 2 — Final Plat SUB98-0003 COMMENTS: The District has not accepted the water and sewer facilities constructed for this plat. Completion of this work has not been guaranteed. F Mary E/Youn '-' Develo meat Services Supervisor Direct Line: (253) 946-5400 FAX: (253) 529-4081 Date: Q From: Greg Moore To: SMTP("Conniedoz@aol.com") Date: 7/23/98 4:29pm Subject: Continued violation of NGPE in Heritage Woods -Reply Dear Ms. Dolezal, Thank your for the E-mail. I am finding E-mail an efficient method of communication over regular mail service. I wanted to repond to your E-mail by updating you on what has transpired since you came to the City Council meeting on July 7th. 1. The next day July 8th, I contacted Martin Nordby, Code Compliance Officer who gave me the background on the situation. I then gave direction on what I wanted him to do. 2. On July 14, 1998, Martin sent letters to the three homeowners that abut your subdivison, reminding them of code requirements and plat conditions. The letter gave them two weeks (to July 28th) to respond to the tree topping issue. 3. We received letters from two ( one on July 20th and the second on July 23rd). Martin met with the third on July 22nd. We are in the process of analyizing the information they provided and are developing an appropriate response to each situation. 4. Martin recieved a complaint about cutting in the NGPE on Monday the 20th. He visited the site the same day (no one was home). He arranged a meeting with them on July 22nd. 5. Martin is in the process of consulting an arborist/landscape architect to get advice on replacement and appropriate landscaping in the NGPE. 6. Today, July 23rd, I have asked Jim Harris, Senior Planner to research the plat conditions to see if there was a violation of the grading conditions on the plat as you have stated in your E-mail. There is no specific timeline for tree replacement since final decisions have not been made on what was violated and what would be appropriate mitigation. I am hoping that decisions can be made next week. I am out on vacation next week and will return Monday, August 3rd. In the meantime, I will ask via this E-mail that Martin contact you ASAP when a decision has been made. His phone number is 661-4121. His immediate supervisor is Mary Kate Gaviglio, Building Official at 661-4112. I will also ask that Jim Harris contact you ASAP after determining if grading requirements were violated. His phone number is 661-4019. His immediate supervisor is Greg Fewins, Senior Planner at 661-4108. We are working through this process taking the appropriate steps. Thank you for your patience. Greg Moore >>> <Conniedoz@aol.com> 07/23/98 05:24am >>> Dear Mr. Moore: Thank you for the copies of the letters sent by Mr. Nordby to the homeowners in the Heritage Woods Development who have violated the NGPE dated July 14, 1998. Unfortunately, I must inform you that they have not been taken seriously. On Saturday, July 18 the homeowner at 2284 South 280th Place was once again cutting a tree in the easement, in spite of the letter sent from Mr. Nordby prohibiting any further "topping or trimming of existing vegetation" without prior approval from the city, and being told by neighbors not to cut. In fact, as I understand it, it was not until the police were called because of the disturbance he was creating with his chain saw at 9:00 pm that he finally quit. I cannot stress enough my disappointment with the city's seemingly weak response to this situation. It is obvious to me that letters are not enough to persuade the homeowners, or the developer, that the city will enforce the conditions of the easement. It wasn't until after we bought our home that we discovered there was a housing development planned and approved. However, having heard about the proposed "greenbelt" from our neighbors, we felt confident that our existing neighborhood had been fairly considered during the planning. In addition, our home was situated at the top of the hill, and (as the adage goes) our existing fence would insure good neighbors. I don't know how it was that the city allowed the new developer to break the promises my neighbors tell me the original developer made, but it was at a great disservice to the existing homeowners. We are desperately trying to stop the destruction of what is supposed to be a 15 foot easement. In reality, there is about a six foot easement with a select few trees remaining, the majority of which have been grossly damaged. As I mentioned during our discussion at the July 7th City Council Meeting, I am astonished that Schneider Homes was given permission to raise the level of the property behind us SIX TO TEN FEET strictly to create a "view" - it only set the stage for the problems we are experiencing now. I urge you, Mr. Moore, to view the situation for yourself, I mean physically come view the property along the western border of the Heritage Woods #1 where it meets the homes of Laurelwood North #4. To better put this in perspective, of the three homes in Heritage Woods #1 that have been sold and occupied bordering the western easement, 100o have violated the conditions of the NGPE Easement. You told us at that council meeting that you understood our position, but I'm not confident you do. It has been over six weeks since we first brought this matter to the city's attention, and all we have seen is the repeated destruction of the vegetation in the easement, with no consequences for those responsible. The current course of action by the City of Federal Way is not enough. Please advise me as soon as possible as to the additional measures the city is taking to curtail this illegal activity. Also, please notify me of the specific plans/time line for the offending homeowners to replace the trees. Sincerely, Constance M. Dolezal 28016 - 22nd Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 (253) 941-85B2 conniedoz@aol.com CC: Gregf, Maryg, Jimh, Martinn, Kathym, Gregm From: Greg Fewins To: CHPO.City Hall(Jimh), GREGM Date: 7/23/98 1:24pm Subject: Continued violation of NGPE in Heritage Woods -Forwarded -Reply Greg M.- this sounds like the guy who is cutting down the mature maple tree in the NGPE. Martin, Kathy, Mary Kate and I discussed how to handle this situation. We agreed that replacement of the tree with a 111 to 2" caliper tree would not be adequate. I believe at this point we are going to have a landscape architect draw up a typical buffer section that will be used by property owners that either violate or request disturbance/vegetation removal within the NGPE. We may even want to go back to the original homeowners that filled and require them to install this typical buffer section- do you have any feedback on this? CC: CHPO.City Hall(Kathym, Martinn, Maryg), CITY OF FEDERAL WAY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: August 4, 1998, TO: Community Development Review Committee (CDRC) Members Stephen Clifton, Public Works Development Services Manager (2 copies) Lee Bailey, Lead Plans Examiner Mary Young, Supervisor of Technical Services, Lakehaven Utility District Jerry 'Thorsen, IBC Fire District #39 FROM: Jim Harris, Senior Planner PROJECT PLANNER: Jim Harris PHONE (253)661-4019 PLEASE RESPOND BY: Application review August 20, 1998 FILE NUMBER: SUB98-0003 PROJECT NAME: Heritage Woods Division 2 Final Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Review application for final plat approval. ZONING: RS PROJECT CONTACT: Jim Brown (253) 849-93440 NOTE: DRCME SO.but ti„'� Ischneider homes, inc. RECEIVED BY /10MMUNITY DEVELOKIENT DEPARTMENT 6510 Southcenter Boulevard•Suite #1 •Tukwila, WA 98188■(206) 248- June 25, 1998 Jim Harris, Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33530 1st Way S Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 Re: Heritage Woods Division II Recording, Hearing Examiner's Conditions Dear Mr. Harris: • FAX(206) 242-4209 Attached for your review are the documents required to record Division II of Heritage Woods. The preliminary plat application was approved by City Council Resolution 92-122. The Resolution adopts by reference the Hearing Examiner's report RECOMMENDATION ON REZONE AND PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION, decision date June 16, 1992. Conditions of this document have been addressed as follows: 1. Subjects plat to conditions of the SEPA/MDNS dated April 8, 1992. Those conditions have been met as described: 1. All completed elements have been constructed in accordance with approved drawings that incorporate geotechnical recommendations. 2. Vegetation not within the right-of-way has been maintained to the extent possible. 3. The subject lot is within Division I. The condition was met, and the lot recorded. 4. A wetland mitigation plan has been submitted and approved. Schneider Homes has assumed the maintenance bond for the wetland, as well as the twice -yearly monitoring duties. We have retained KCS, Inc., a firm with wetland expertise and specializing in wetland delineation, monitoring, and mitigation. The first monitoring report from KCS will be forthcoming within the next few weeks. 5. The mitigation fee has been paid by Parklane for both Divisions I & II. 6. The condition statement appears as a note on the final plat documents. The condition will be implemented during permitting and construction of the houses. 7. The wetland mitigation plan submitted under Division I addresses this condition. The twice -yearly monitoring program will serve to continue its implementation. 8. This condition was altered by Council Resolution 92-122 to require three traffic lanes rather than four or five. The widening of Military Road and the construction of bicycle lanes, sidewalks, street lighting, and street trees is scheduled to take place in July of this year. SC-HN-EI-245 PB 9. See number "8." above. 10. Applies to Division I only. 11. Applies to Division I only. 12. This condition will be met with the completion of construction of the Military Road widening. 13. The TMP was submitted, approved and recorded as part of Division I. 14. The paved pedestrian path has been constructed. 2. Rezone application number RZ-92-0001 was approved by the City Council by Resolution 92-122. 3. The approved Site Development drawings by Jaeger Engineering show a 15-foot NGPE along the north, west, and south sides of the plat. These buffers remain uncleared. However, maintenance of natural vegetation in the 20-foot landscape buffer along Military Road S has proven infeasible, as confirmed by you. At your direction, we have prepared and submitted a landscaping plan showing replacement of trees and vegetation. 4. This lot is within Division I. The condition was met, and the lot recorded. 5. This condition has been met with the recording of Division I. 6. & 7. These conditions are modified by the Process III approval, File No. UPR97- 0003. 8. Street or utility work to be done under Division II is limited to replacement, within lots 64-67 (formerly Tract J), of an existing pvc sanitary sewer pipe with ductile iron pipe. Golder Associates, a qualified professional engineering and geotechnical firm, has been retained to review and inspect this work 9. Logging of the site was done concurrently with Division I. Additional necessary clearing was accomplished in August of 1997 and May -June 1998. 10. Stormwater treatment and detention facilities for both Divisions I & II were constructed, approved, and recorded with the plat of Division I. 11. Only facilities for conveyance of stormwater are to be constructed under Division II (see "10." above.) The conveyance system has been constructed, with the exception of yard drain connections. Because of the need to regrade and fill several of the lots, this work must occur concurrently with the construction of each individual house. The conveyance system as constructed should constitute "substantial completion." 12. See number "10." above. 13. See number "10." above. 14. See number "l0." above. 15. Streets were designed concurrently with those in Division I. Streets within Division I were designed based on a report by GeoTech Consultants, Inc. dated May 8, 1995. Design is shown on the approved preliminary plat map. 16. Applies to Division I only. 17. A note on the face of the Final Plat drawings reserves a 10-foot easement for utilities in the front of each lot. 18. The approved Site Development drawings by Jaeger Engineering show widening of Military Road. By the time this plat is recorded, this work will have been done. I trust this is of some help in the process of approving the final plat of Division II. Respectfully, ,R HOMES, INC. edC.. Development & Construction "'W"I IIRE� E! P T8 ARTMENT AM91, 1998 ED WHEN RECORDED, RETURN TO: REOFI�, BY Parklane Ventures, Inc. COMP►NIT1 rung P?T' Irnl� 31620 23" Ave S, #320 Federal Way, WA 98003 i 4$� HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION I DECLARATION OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS WHEREAS, PARKLANE VENTURES, INC., a Washington corporation, (herein referred to as Declarant), is acquiring certain real property in King County, Washington, may acquire other property in King County, and is the owner of the pro erty platted as HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION 1, according to the plat there of recorded at Volume iof Plats, pages Ito - ?3 , under Recording No. a- O1� in King County, Washington, and desires to establish a plan of private subdivision 1TJ7� for all of such properties. In order to provide for land use restrictions as a part of such plan, Declarant does hereby declare and establish the following restrictions, covenants and easements appurtenant: ARTICLE A Definitions Section 1. Definitions. As used herein: 1. The word "Plat" shall refer to the plat of HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION I, and any CO) other plat of real property which may hereafter be made subject to the provisions hereof by written tD instrument signed by Declarant as provided in Section 4, Article F. T4 Q 2. Tile word "Lot" shall refer to a lot as shown on any Plat as defined hereby but shall not fJ7 include a parcel designated as "Tract" on a Plat. Q 3. The word "Subdivision" shall refer to the real property included within any Plat as defined hereby. 4. The words "Community Organization" shall refer to the HERITAGE WOODS Community Organization, a nonprofit corporation formed for the purpose of enforcing these covenants and providing other things that may benefit its members. 5. The word "Committee" is defined as the Architectural Control Committee as provided in Article C. ARTICLE B Building and Land Use Restrictions Section L Inrttroventetrts. No dwellings, residences, out -building, fence, wall, building, pool or other structure or other improvement shall be erected, altered, placed or maintained on any Lot unless it shall comply with the following: 8 (a) Prior to placing any such structure or making any such improvement on the Lot, the plans and specifications for the structure or improvement and a request for approval shall be submitted to and approved by the Committee as provided in Article C. When constructed or placed on the Lot, the structure or improvement shall substantially conform to the plans and specifications as approved by the Committee. b) Prior to making any change or alteration to the external appearance of any improvement �+ on a Lot, plans and specifications for the alteration and change shall be submitted to and approved by the Committee as provided in Article C. When made, the changes or alteration shall substantially conform to the plans and specifications as approved by the Committee. c) Once started, the work of constructing, altering, repairing or reconstructing any structure or improvement on a Lot shall be diligently prosecuted until completion thereof and in any event the 9 exterior of the structure shall be completed and finished within six months after the work first commences. No structure may be placed or erected on a Lot except by a person or firm holding a valid contractor's license. (d) All buildings and improvements on a Lot shall be of permanent construction, and no temporary structure, trailer, mobile home, tent, garage, outbuilding or other similar device shall be placed S on any Lot, except with the permission of the Committee incident to and during the construction of the first permanent improvement on the Lot. (e) Accessory buildings which are appurtenant to the use of an existing permanent residential building shall be permitted on a Lot, which permitted accessory buildings shall include, without o limitation, garages, greenhouses, playhouses, toolsheds, woodsheds, doghouses and gazebos. No permitted k5 0 M1 01 ' accessory building shall be placed on a Lot unless it has been first approved as to the design and location on the Lot by the Committee. Further, no improvements shall be started without first obtaining any and all necessary permits from the proper and applicable governmental agency or agencies. The Committee may refuse to approve a permitted accessory building if, in the exercise of the discretion of the committee, the structure detracts from the general visual appearance of the neighborhood as seen from the streets. The location of a permitted accessory building, other than garages, shall be at a place which minimizes the visual impact and as a general guideline shall be in the side or rear yard behind the front of the house. The Committee shall not be bound by the guidelines, but may exercise its discretion in that respect. (g) No building or structure shall be located within any building setback line shown on the Plat. All structures and improvements shall comply with the City of Federal Way setback requirements, as amended from time to time, provided that nothing herein shall require removal of a building originally placed in conformity with such Code because of change in the Code. (11) No fence, wall or hedge shall be permitted to exceed three (3) feet in height if it is nearer to any street than is a building permitted under paragraph (g) of this Section 1, except that nothing shall prevent the erection of a necessary retaining wall, the top of which does not extend more than three (3) feet above the finished grade at the back of said retaining wall, except for Tracts H & J which may have retaining walls in excess of 14 feet. No fence, wail, hedge or mass planting shall at any time, where permitted, extend higher than six (6) feet above the ground. No chain -link fence shall be permitted on a Lot. (i) No exterior aerials, antennas or microwave receivers (satellite dishes) larger than 18" in diameter for television or other purposes shall be permitted to be installed on any lot in the plat. Permitted exterior aerials, antennas or microwave receivers (satellite dishes) may not be installed on the front side of any home or lot in a location where it can be viewed from any street or other home. Homeowrtcrs desiring to install any such exterior equipment must obtain prior written approval from the Archi[eciural Control Committee, which permission may be refused for any reason deemed appropriate by the Committee. Q) No lines or wires for the transmission of electric current or television or telephone signals shall be constructed, placed or permitted to be placed outside of the buildings of a Lot, unless the lines and wires shall be underground or in conduit attached to a building. Section 2. Attimais. No animals, livestock or poultry of any kind shall be raised, bred or kept on any Lot except that dogs, cats or other household pets may be kept, provided that they are not kept, bred or maintained for commercial purposes. Pet dogs shall be restrained to the owner's property and shall not be allowed to roam the development. Dogs shall be under the control of the owner and attached to a Q 0 lead when off the owner's property. CD A Seetian 3. Signs. No sign of any kind shall be displayed to the public view on any Lot S7 except entry signs identifying the neighborhood, one professional sign of not more than one square foot, 0 one sign of not more than five (5) square feet advertising the property for sale or rent, and signs and other marketing displays used by the Declarant or builder of a residence on the lot to advertise and identify the 0: property during the construction and sales period. Section J. Nuisances. No lot shall be used or maintained as a dumping ground for rubbish; and trash, garbage or other waste shall not be kept except in sanitary containers. All equipment for the storage or disposal of such material shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition and put out of sight. Nothing shall be done on a Lot which may become a nuisance to the neighborhood. Section 5. Businesses. No trade, craft business, profession, commercial or manufacturing enterprise or business or commercial activity of any kind shall be conducted or carried on upon any Lot or within any building located in this Subdivision in violation of any zoning codes applicable for this plat. This paragraph, however, should not be constrtied to deny the right to have a "home office" to conduct passive or intermittent business activities so long as such business activities do not constitute a nuisance. 5eetion 6. Stora-e. No goods, equipment, vehicles (including busses, boats, motor homes and trailers of any description) or materials or supplies used for private purposes shall be kept, stored, dismantled or repaired outside of any building or approved fence or permitted accessory building on any Lot, or on the street adjacent to a Lot. Nor will vehicle or equipment storage be allowed on any Open Space Tract except in such areas as may be specifically designated for such storage by Declarant or Directors of the HERITAGE WOODS Community Organization through its Rules and Regulations. Section 7. Firearms and Related Activity. No firearm, crossbow, bow and arrow, or air gun, including without limitation, BB type or pellet guns, whether for purposes of hunting or target practice, shall be discharged within the Subdivision. Section 8. Clothes Drying Area. No portion of any Lot shall be used as a drying or hanging area for laundry of any kind where it can be viewed from any street or adjacent house. ARTICLE C Architectural Control Section 1. TileCommll3ce. The directors of the Community Organization shall comprise the Committee herein referred to, except that during the period that Declarant owns one or more lots in the subdivision, Declarant shall reserve to itself all rights and responsibilities of the Architectural Control Committee. During this period, the directors of the Community Organization may act in a purely advisory capacity to the Declarant with regard to issues relating to Architectural Control, but will have no authority to overrule Declarants' judgment on these matters. The address of the Committee shall be the registered office of the Community Organization. "1 Section 2. Submission or Plans. All plans and specifications or information required to be submitted to the Committee for approvals shall be submitted by mail to the address of the Committee in duplicate, shall be in writing, shall contain a written request for approval and the name and address of the person submitting the same and the Lot involved, and shall set forth the following with respect to a proposed stricture: The location of the structure upon the Lot, the elevation of the structure with reference to the existing and finished lot grade, the general design, the interior layout, the exterior finish materials and color including roof materials, the landscape plan, and such other information as may be required to determine whether such structure conforms with these restrictions. Section 3. Standards. The Committee shall have the authority to determine and establish standards involving esthetic considerations of harmony of construction and color which it determines to be in the best interest of providing for attractive development of the subdivision, which authority shall include but not be limited to the height, configuration, design and appearance of the dwelling and fences, walls, outbuildings, pools, and other structures and improvements appurtenant to the use of a dwelling. Such determinations may be amended and shall be binding on all persons. Section 4. Approval or Disapproval. Within thirty days after the receipt of plans and specifications or information with a request for approval, the Committee shall, by majority vote, approve or disapprove the request and may disapprove the request which in its opinion does not conform to these restrictions or its esthetic or other standards. Approval or disapproval of a request shall be made upon one of the copies thereof and returned to the address shown on the request. In the event that no disapproval of a request is given within thirty days of submission in compliance herewith, the request shall be deemed approved. Section 5. Advisors. The Committee may appoint advisors or advisory committees from time to time to advise on matters pertaining to the Subdivision. No person on the Committee or acting for it shall be responsible for any defect in any plan or specification submitted or approved nor for any defect in any work done according to such plans and specifications. Section G. Variations. The Committee shall have the authority to approve plans and specifications which do not conform to these restrictions in order to overcome practical difficulties or prevent hardships in the application of these restrictions; Provided that such variations so approved shall not be materially injurious to the improvements of other Lots and shall not constitute a waiver of the restrictions herein contained but shall be in furtherance of the purposes and intent of these restrictions. ARTICLE D Easements and Open Space Section 1. Drainage Ensetnenis Structures, fill or obstructions (including but not limited to decks, patios, outbuildings, or overhangs) shall not be permitted beyond the building setback line or within drainage easements. Additionally, grading and construction of fencing shall not be allowed within the drainage easements shown on this plat map unless otherwise approved by the City of Federal Way. All building downspouts, footing drains and drains from all impervious surfaces such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the approved permanent storm drain outlet as shown on the approved construction drawings. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection approval. Individual lot infiltration systems, where permitted, shall be constructed at the time of the building permit and shall comply with code requirements of the City of Federal Way. All individual storm drain stub -outs shall be privately owned and maintained by the lot owner. Section 2. — Tracts C, Q, & F and Sensitive Area Tracts No building shall be constructed or located in tracts C, D, or F and such tracts shall not be further subdivided or used for financial gain. Any vegetation removal, maintenance or other activity in tracts C, D, or F requires the prior approval of the City of Federal Way Community Development Services Department. Tracts C, D, and F are environmentally sensitive areas and are permanent open space tracts. The tracts are set aside and reserved for permanent open space for the benefit of present and future owners of lots in this subdivision. An educational brochure on the value and function of neighboring wetlands and native growth protection easements shall be provided to each purchaser of a lot within this plat by the seller and shall be filed for record with each lot. Section 3. Sensitive Area Tracts C, D. & F . Declarant shall cause Sensitive Area Tracts C, D & F of the Plat to be quit claimed and conveyed to the Heritage Woods Community Association. The owners of interest in the land hereby do grant and convey a perpetual easements in Tracts C, D & F for the use and benefit of all present and future owners of the lots in this subdivision. Such Tracts shall not be used for any other purpose than for Open Space consistent with (lie applicable regulations of the City of Federal Way in effect from time to time and for recreational use by the owners and residents of Lots. As a condition of approval, the declarant(s) of interest in the land hereby subdivided do grant and convey a perpetual easement in Tracts C, D & F for the use and benefit of all present and future owners of the lots in this subdivision. Except as shown on the plat, no building shall be placed on Tracts C, D & F and such Tracts shall not be further subdivided or used for financial gain. No over -the -slope dumping of soils, vegetative waste or debris is allowed in the Open Space Tracts. The HERITAGE WOODS Community Organization shall be responsible for the perpetual maintenance and protection of these Sensitive Area Tracts. Section 3.1 Maintenance - Tracts A. 13. C.1), & E. Tract "A" is designated as Open Space and is hereby dedicated to the City of Federal Way. Tract "B" is designated as Open Space/Pedestrian Pathway and is hereby dedicated to the City of Federal Way. Tracts "C" and "D" are designated as Sensitive Area and Open Space, and are owned and maintained by the Heritage Woods Community Organization, who shall be responsible for perpetual maintenance. Tract "E" is a drainage tract and shall be dedicated to the City of Federal Way for ownership and the construction, maintenance, upgrading, etc., of the storm drainage facilities located thereon with the recording of Division 2. In order to preserve the natural infiltration characteristics of the area, there shall be no development of any organized recreational activity facility without the prior written approval of the City of Federal Way Department of Public Works, or its' successor agency. Tract "H" has been developed for the further subdivision and use as two single family lots, upon approval by the city of Federal Way of an acceptable grading plan. Tract "1" has been developed for the further subdivision and use as four single family lots, upon approval by the city of Federal Way of an acceptable grading plan. 0 Settiott A. Landscaping ,& Maintenance In public right-of-way areas. CDPrior to occupancy, the property owner shall install street trees between the street curb and sidewalk, along e7 the lot frontage as per the approved landscape plan filed with the city of Federal Way, and as set forth in Schedule A — Boulevard Street Trees, hereto attached. The specific planting locations shall be shown by the property owner, and approved by the city, on the building permit site plan for each lot. Maintenance of landscaping in planter islands located in road right-of-ways shall be the responsibility of adjacent lot owners. Section 5. Maintenance of Common Landscape arras , Entrance Area landscape features and associated lighting and irrigation systems in easements, shall be owned, operated and maintained by the HERITAGE WOODS Community Organization. Section 5.1 Perimeter Fencing. Perimeter Fencing shall be maintained by the owners of adjoining lots, however, the Community Organization shall have the right to assume such responsibility for maintenance should they elect to do so. Section 5. Sensitive Arca & Open Space & Wetland - Tract D and E , Annual monitoring of the wetland areas located in Tracts "D" and "E" shall be the responsibility of the Declarant for a period of five (5) years after acceptance by the Federal Way. ARTICLE E Liens Section I. Community Organization Membership. There shall be one membership in the Community Organization for each Lot in the Subdivisions subject hereto and no more. The fee title owner of each Lot which is not subject to a recorded contract for purchase and sale of the Lot or the holder of the vendee's interest under a recorded contract for purchases and sale of each Lot shall hold a membership in the Community Organization. Such membership shall be appurtenant to and not severable from such fee ownership or vendee's interest and shall transfer with the transfer of the fee title or vendee's interest without further action on the part of the Community Organization or its several members. Membership shall stand in the name or names of the persons or parties who have such interests from time to time as they may appear in the public record. 1.1 Section 2. Liens. In order to provide for (lie proper operation of the HERITAGE WOODS Community Organization and the maintenance and improvement of any property which the Community Organization acquires for the benefit of the Lots, each grantee and vendee of Lots, their heirs, successors and assigns shall and do, by the act of accepting a deed or entering into a contract of sale as vendee, jointly and severally agree that they and each of them shall be members of the Community Organization and shall pay to the Community Organization the dues and charges levied according to the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws of the Community Organization against them as members of the Community Organization. In the event that any such dues or charges remain unpaid to the Community Organization for a period of sixty (60) days after the due date, then the Community Organization may place a written notice of public record in King County, Washington, that the Community Organization claims a lien against the Lot to which the membership is appurtenant for the amount of delinquent dues and charges together with interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum from the date due until paid and attorney's fees as herein provided. From and after recording such notice, and not prior to such recording, the Lot to which the membership is appurtenant shall be subject to a lien to the Community Organization as security for all unpaid dues and charges in the amount designated therein with interest and attorneys' fees, together with all future unpaid dues and charges accrued until the lien arising because of the notice is released by the Community Organization. The lien herein granted to the Community Organization shall be subordinate to the lien of any bona fide mortgage or deed of trust given for value recorded prior to the recording of the notice of claim of lien. A release of a lien shall only release the lien arising because of the notice but not rights under this Article to file a subsequent notice of claim of lien for subsequent delinquencies after a notice is released. Such lien may be foreclosed in the manner of a mortgage of real property and in such foreclosure action the Community Organization shall recover a reasonable sum as attorney's fees therein and the reasonable and necessary costs of searching and abstracting the public record. Notwithstanding any provisions hereof appearing to the contrary, the sales or transfer of title to a Lot pursuant to a mortgage foreclosure or any proceeding in lieu thereof, shall extinguish the lien created hereby for any unpaid dues and charges which became due prior to such sale or transfer; provided that no sale or transfer sliall relieve such Lot from a lien for dues and charges thereafter becoming due and provided further that "mortgage" as used in this sentence means a mortgage, deed or trust or other security given for a debt which is guaranteed by the Veterans Administration or insured by The Federal Housing Administration as agencies of the United States government. ARTICLE F Application and Enforcement Q f,() Section 1. Effect. The covenants, restrictions, easements, rights, liens, and encumbrances Q herein provided for shall be covenants running with the land and shall be binding upon the Subdivision and �7 any and all parts thereof, the parties in interest thereto and their heirs, assigns, personal representatives and successors in interest. Accepting an interest in and to any portion of the Subdivision shall constitute an agreement by any person, firm or corporation accepting such interest, that they and each of them shall be bound by and subject to the provisions hereof. Section 2. Severability. In the event that any provision hereof shall be declared to be invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, no other provision shall be affected thereby and the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect. No waiver of the breach of any provision hereof shall constitute a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same provision or of any other provision. No right of action shall accrue for or on account of the failure of any person to exercise any right hereunder nor for imposing any provision, condition, restriction or covenant which may be unenforceable. Section 3. Enrorcement. The parties in interest in and to any part of the Subdivision and the Community Organization, for the benefit of the owners of the Subdivision, and each of them shall have the right and authority to enforce the provisions hereof and in addition to any other remedy for damages or otherwise, shall have the right to injunctive relief. The prevailing party in any action to enforce any provision hereof shall recover a reasonable sum as attorneys' fees together with the reasonable costs of searching and abstracting the public record which sums shall be paid by the unsuccessful party. Section 4. Additional Property. In addition to the real property which is platted as HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION I from time to time, but not after December 31, 2005, the Declarant, Parklane Ventures, Inc., may subject additional adjacent real property in Section 33, Township 22N, Range 4E, W.M., in King County, Washington, to the provisions of this instrument as a part of the plan of subdivision of real property by filing of record a declaration expressly setting forth such intent signed by Parklane Ventures, Inc., as the subdivider thereof. Parklane Ventures, Inc. may assign its rights under this Section 4, but only by written instrument which contains an express reference to this Section 4. Except for the foregoing no other properties may be made subject hereto. ARTICLE G Amendment Seeti n 1. Amendment of Use Restrictions. Articles B and C of this instrument which relates to use of the Lots in the Subdivision may be amended and changed by the written consent of the k"97 0 owners of the fee title (in the case title is subject to a real estate contract, the vendees under the real estate contract shall be deemed to be owners of the fee title) of not less than sixty (60%) of all of the Lots in all of the Subdivisiuus which have been made subjcct to the provisiams ur this Oeclamlion. For the purpose of amandmeut, cmiscnt to an nmendmcnt by a roc owilcr shall W binding upun Ilic owner and or any SUCCeSSM to [lie fee title fur a period or six months alter it is given for lire purpose or calculating the perceninge required fur adnption orthe cflnscnt. Consems rcquircd under dais Section shall be delivered to the Community Organization which shall tabulate them. Its determination of the sufficiency of the consent shall be conclusive, and an amendment to Articles B and C shall be effective when a written Notice of Ancudmem signer) mud acknowledged by the president and secretary of the Community Organization is recorded in King County, Washilsgion, staling that the requisite consent has bccn obtained and setting forth the amendment in its entirely. EXECUTED THIS J� day of 199;% Aar PARKLANE VENTURES, INC. BY: STATE OF WASHINGTON ] ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) David Morrison, General Manager 1 certify that 1 know or have satisfactory evidence that DAVID MORRISON signed this instrument, on oath staled that lie was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the GENERAL MANAGER OF PAItKLANE VENTURES, INC. to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. DATED:/ Gig6 5 , 199(R AD C) (SEAL) Notary Public ' `5 yWp� rrnr Residing Myappoinlmentexpires 6�a�_ tll3 10 ti 01 - t 'Wf irr �� �� 29„++•''tie= 00WA 6 SCHEDULE Boulevard Street .,ues i I Each properly owner shall install street trees as noted below, within the Boulevard section fronting the street in front of their lot, prior to any building occupancy. The specific planting locations shall be shown and approved on [lie Building Permit Site Plan for each lot. LOT # NO. OF TREES SIZE SPECIES 1 3 Z-1/2" Red Oak 2 3 "_ Red Oak 3 3 Red Oak 41 3 Red Oak 5 3 Red Oak 6 3 Red Oak 7 6 4 Red Oak, 2 Little Leaf Linden 8 2 Little Leaf Linden 9 2 Little Leaf Linden 10 2 Little Leaf Linden 11 2 Little Leaf Linden 12 2 Little Leaf Linden 13 2 Little Leaf Linden 14 2 Little Leaf Linden 15 2 Little Leaf Linden 16 1 Little Leaf Linden 17 1 Little Leaf Linden 18 5 Little Leaf Linden 19 3 Little Leaf Linden 20 6 4 Red Oak, 2 Little Leaf Linden 21 3 Red Oak 22 3 " Red Oak 23 3 Red Oak 24 3 Red Oak 25 2 Red Oak 26 5 2 Red Oak, 3 Scarlet Ma le 27 1 2-1/2" Scarlet Maple 28 1 Scarlet Ma le 29 1 Scarlet Maple 30 1 Scarlet Maple 31 1 Scarlet Maple 32 5 _ 2 Scarlet Maple, 3 Red Oak 33 3 Red Oak 34 4 _ 3 Red Oak, 1 Scarlet Ma is 35 2 " 2 Scarlet Maple 36 1 If Scarlet Maple 37 1 38 " Scarlet Ma Ip a ^i 5 1 Scarlet Maple, 4 Red Oak 39 8 40 4 Red Oak, 4 Scarlet Ma Ie 3 Scarlet Maple 41 3 Scarlet Maple 42 3 " Scarlet Ma ie 43 3 Scarlet Ma le 44 2 Scarlet Ma le Trct. J 5 Trct. 2-1/2" Scarlet Maple H 12 _ 5 Scarlet Maple, 7 Red Qak 45 3 Red Oak HERITAGE WOODS - COMMUNITY OxGANIZATION CONTACT 1 1 Until such time as a board of directors has been elected from among the homeowners at HERITAGE WOODS to handle association functions for the HERITAGE WOODS Community Organization, the Declarant, Parklane Ventures, Inc., will handle all concerns with respect to covenant enforcement and architectural approval for the community of HLRITAGE WOODS. Parklane Ventures, Inc. may be reached at (206) 946-3652 or FAX# (206) 946-3580 or by mail at: 31620 23n° Ave S, 0320, Federal Way, WA 98003. As per Article B of the Declarations, Building and Land Use Restrictions, requests for Architectural Approval shall include, but not be limited, to the following in duplicate: Plans, material spccifications, plot plan showing location of the proposed improvement, architectural drawings, illustrations, paint samples, etc. Submittals for Architectural Approval should be mailed to their office at: Parklane Ventures, Inc. 31620 23'd Ave S, #320 Federal Way, WA 98003 M CD rl CD L'a C7 O 7 WHEN RECORDED, RETURN TO: Parklane Ventures, Inc. 31620 23`" Ave S, #320 Federal Way, WA 98003 DECLARATION ADDING PROPERTY TO DECLARATION OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS FOR HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION I WHEREAS, PARKLANE VENTURES, INC., a Washington corporation (herein referred to as Declaramt), is the owner and subdivider of the property platted as HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION I, according to the plat thereof recorded at Volume 114 of Plats, pages -& &�, in King County, Washington (herein called the Plat), and pursuant to the authority reserved under Section 4 of Article F of that certain Declaration of Protective Covenants for HERITAGE WOODS DIVISION I as recorded under Recording No. q+ov � of in King County, Washington (herein referred to as the Covenants, all as a part of the plan of private subdivision referred to in the Covenants. THEREFORE, Declarant intends to subject the real property encompassed by and platted as HERITAGE WOODS Div. 11, as described above, to the terms, conditions, covenants and provisions of the Covenants and the covenants, easements, rights, liens and encumbrances as therein provided shall be covenants running with the land encompassed by the Div. I Plat and any and all parts thereof all as more particularly provided for in the Covenants. DATED: A-61W. S , 19 97 C7 Cd f"+ Q {7 0 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING PARKLANE VENTURES, INC. David Morrison, Its' General Manager I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that DAVID MORRISON signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the General Manager of PARKLANE VENTURES, INC. to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. DATED: FEci $ 1991. / p- �.��� O i 5 , t� t tr' ►►► No�tary�lic .a`�oz Rrsiding in 14,44dw2,1 70 $ My appointment expires -00 G rr tilt' E,29,3 x 0 S hit OFWA011 HERITAGE WOODS COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION BYLAWS Pursuant to Article E of the Declaration for HERITAGE WOODS, as recorded under King County Recording No. gJ0306-01W , Washington, the following constitute the Bylaws of the HERITAGE WOODS Homeowners Association (the "Association") which the Declarant hereby adopts: ARTICLE 1. MEETINGS Section 1. Annual Meeting of Association. Unless a majority of the homeowners present at a meeting of the Association determine otherwise, the annual meeting of the members of the Association shall be held each year at 7:30 p.m. on a day and at a place designated by the Directors in the same month in which the initial meeting of the Association is held commencing with the year following such initial meeting. The purpose of the annual meeting shall be to elect Directors and to consider such other business as may come before the meeting. Section 2. Special Mectino of the Ass_ocialion. Special meetings of the members of the Association shall be held on call of the Chairman, any Director or the owners of lots having combined more than twenty votes. Special meetings shall be held for such purposes as may be set forth in the notice thereof, which notice shall be given by the Secretary of the Association when requested by the persons entitled to call the meeting. Section 3. Notice. Notice of each meeting of the Association shall be given in writing and shall state the date, time, place and purposes of the meeting. Notices shall be deposited in the United States mail, postage paid, addressed to each owner at the :D address of the owner shown on the records of the Association. Notices of meetings of the V-4 Association members shall be mailed not less than 10 days nor more than 30 days prior to Q the date for the meeting. Any member may waive notice of any meeting at any time in Q writing. Section 4. Conduct of Mceling. Conduct of meetings of the Association shall be governed by the Roberts Rules of Order, current edition. No quorum shall be required Oi at any meeting of the Association. Section 5. Proxv. Members of the Association may exercise heir votes by proxy which shall be in writing and delivered to the Secretary before the meeting is convened. Section G. Voting. The owner or owners of a lot shall have one vote per lot. Such vote shall be exercised by only one person on behalf of the owner or owners. Owners of each lot may not divide votes between persons who are owners of one lot. At the request of the Chairman at a meeting the owners of each lot who are present shall identify who is to exercise the vote for the owners of the respective lot. The Chairman will recognize the right of any person present who is one of several individuals owning a lot, a partner of a partnership owning a lot or a corporate officer of a corporation owning a lot, as a person entitled to exercise the vote for the owners of the lot. Section 7— Balloting_ In order to facilitate counting and verification of votes cast on each written ballot, if requested by the Chairman, the person exercising the vote shall identify on the ballot the lot number to which the ballot is entitled, provided that after the ballot is tabulated, received and accepted, the ballots shall be destroyed and the persons who conducted the ballot count shall treat as confidential the manner in which the vote of each lot was cast. Other methods of facilitating verification of votes cast may be required to be complied with by the Chairman. The Chairman shall have the right to designate the person or persons who shall count ballots and report the results to the Chairman. ARTICLE II. OWNERS' COMMITTEE Section 1. Annointment.Until the Directors are elected, the Declarant may, in its discretion, appoint a committee from the various owners of lots to constitute an Owners' Committee. Insofar as possible, the Declarant shall endeavor to select members for the Committee from residents of each of the several lots as such residents become available. Section 2. Duties and Status. During its existence, if requested by the Declarant, the Owners' Committee shall act as advisor to the Declarant in management of the property, shall provide liaison between the owners and the Declarant, shall assist in assembling a slate of nominees to present at the initial meeting of the Association and shall do such other appropriate things as the Declarant may request to assist in the management of the property and the organization and operation of the Association during the initial period preceding election of Directors. When the first Directors are elected, the Committee will terminate and no longer exist. ARTICLE III. DIRECTORS Section 1. Election of Directors. If more than one Director is to be elected at a meeting, then each Director shall be elected separately so that, for example, the first vacancy shall be filled by election before the nominations are closed and election is held for the second vacancy. The nominees for each vacancy who receive the most votes at t') the election shall be elected regardless of whether such nominee receives a majority of votes cast. The Directors shall have the authority set forth in the Declaration and as A granted by the Association from time to time. The remaining Directors shall elect a Cl9 person to fill any vacancy in office for the balance of the term. Q Section 2. Nominntions. Nominees for director may be proposed by committee, and nominations may be received from the floor. O Section 3. Removal. Any one or more Directors may be removed by the O affirmative vote of more than 60% of votes cast for removal at a special meeting called for that purpose. 5cctivn 4. NleetinLFs. The Directors shall hold regular meetings from time to time as they deem advisable. A special meeting may be called by any Director or by the Chairman. Notice of a meeting may be written or oral and shall be delivered to each Director at least 24 hours prior to the time of the meeting stating the time and place of the meeting, and if it is notice of a special meeting, its purpose. Any business may be conducted at any regular meeting. Notice of a meeting may be waived in writing by any Director at any time. Section 5. Maintenance and Additions. Subject to such limitations and authorization as may be contained in the Declaration, at their meetings the Directors shall determine how the necessary work of maintenance, repair and replacement of the common areas and facilities shall be carried out. In this respect, the Directors may delegate authority 'to third persons, contract for such work, cause the same to be performed by employees of the Association or use such methods as the Directors deem best and most convenient. Subject to approval by vote of the owners as required by the Declaration, the Directors shall have the same discretion in making any addition or improvement to the common areas and facilities as they have in determining how the necessary work of maintenance, repair and replacement of such areas and facilities is to be carried out. ARTICLE IV. OFFICERS AND AGENTS Section 1. Officers and Committees. The Directors shall elect a Chairman, a Secretary and a Treasurer of the Association. In addition, the Directors may create such other offices and committees as they deem advisable for the caretaking management of the property. All of the officers and committee members shall be responsible to the Directors who may define their authority, duties and responsibilities from time to time. Section 2. Agent. The Directors may appoint a manager authorized to conduct all or any part of the day-to-day management of the property and delegate to such to manager such duties and authority as the Directors deem advisable. The Directors may compensate the manager and any officer for services performed. The fact that a person is elected to office shall not give rise to any contract for compensation without an express written agreement for payment of compensation which agreement has,been approved in advance by the Directors. Each manager, officer and Director shall be entitled to reimbursement for reasonable and necessary expenses incurred in the business of the Association. ARTICLE V. REGULATION OF PROPERTY AND RULES Section 1. Authority. Within the limitations contained in the Declaration, the Directors shall manage the property. Section 2. Roles. Subject to the limitations contained in the Declaration, rules governing the use of the property may be adopted, changed, amended and repealed by the Directors on behalf of the Association. When so adopted and communicated to the owners, such rules shall be complied with and may be enforced by legal action as provided for by law. Communication of a rule shall be deemed complete upon all of the individuals who are owners of any lot when a copy thereof is either mailed to the owner of a lot at the owner's address shown on the records of the Association or is delivered to one or more of the individuals who are owners of a lot. Any part of all of the rules' may be amended, altered, changed or repealed at any meeting of owners called for that purpose. ARTICLE VI. AMENDMENT Cj Section 1. Amendment. These bylaws may be amended at any meeting of the members of the Association called for that purpose or at any annual meeting. t7 Proposed amendments shall be read at two consecutive meetings before they may be q adopted and no proposed amendment may be voted upon or considered unless it has been reduced to writing before the first reading. The foregoing comprise the Bylaws of HERITAGE WOODS Community Organization adopted by the Declarant on Ff.13 . 5 , 199V' AtG' PARKLANE VENTURES, INC. a Washington corporation David Morrison, General Manager HERITAGEWOODS HOMEOWNER'S SENSITIVE AREA & WETLAND BROCHURE The following verbage is incorporated into a Wetland and Sensitive Area Brochure to be distributed to each houlcowuer iH heritage Woods. IIOME TIPS FOR CLEAN STREAMS AND wfr1T.AND9 when cult falls on Andeveloped Inbd, the r ...1. end &BJo lot 111e11 al that mlnre$ suck Into the ground. Same .valor Dow- ovsttand to slrmmhc, lakes or uretlftr t most Ruwe dewy uo-khgt unnJ to reed alrcam. and lake$ sa trnundwsler. Hoor000r, when erbnn and suburbia development covers The land with balldlnss, huusae and streak, the Irene, shrubs, grain And topsoil we replaead by nortpooma concrete and Arph.11. Lea rain can took Into [be sell and ills -es-If IA Umbers runoff"; water stay& con the carafe alld Qslckly rues off Into slolol dnlns, ditehea or stsoalno and she. directly Into e.r lakes and Puget Sound. Ulban annoff pnllulol and Roods an."u". Runoff emlw with It filler, cu. F.& fertilizer, pesticides and aeything she that will no.t, ditsolee or be moved aleng. The dare Jlnills That carry moat of Ih11 MRalT Umdly how unuenled Into llroarea Or lake., As rate&omof III forced to In. off, dow7Dlrram Deadklg bc.9mes worse A3 well at more fredUint. 10Reated no,diml washes sway Roam betake sod destroys salmon 1pawahlt back, not to Menton provelly. Nil all of am meter rcr lA ma haw their nodim In the mb.a okeaf. RwAI aVliriuta mach as feunlna. ranching and limber harvesting also alket the quality of water In our attemnl, lake? otd Puget Sound. None of Main poblcros ore In.usmonnlnbl& — ter Iron It. with proper management end coalition maw we sou all erduy Benner, Inrer water. Evelyone must help 10 .I,p it., pollution. It's easy to put All the blame for Jbly 11bler an governmerd and big beriherr, but a very JILAMeARI p011101i of IBa problem Naas$ &Tgbl .f Span.. tndtn Dy on.d S—Iorfd am snkting to do rbelr shoe, We pamphlet w10 help you to yoera. T IPS FOR LAWN AND GARDEN resaclJa and weed killer —AM seclous 1,Ahnq wlrnl they enter Iakn, wellvsls or sltnna Soma d--UkO hstay ad4w for a long Yana ..)Wild np in 11.6 mvirmRml. Ouann III litAknblr Inxcv, , ufnds mad pl.na As ne11 As pills. F.ndtre;s. bndt tiwnnled t11d w 1gslit - tkuse mega weld>,d algae glowua whrn Ikry wet water. This gtntAlk not only knF.c .ad smVll. had, but 4 4L-*Ico 16r .Net of aaywa and thoker wl rich and wlYfsfe, ENCUVIIACE INSECT.EATING IfIRDS AND '1lUENDLY' INSE M. IN YOUR YARD. Attract birds by providing he cover end food prm.ghma the your. 9pide2, Indybrg., henvMeo and mr R112zs all ra pot Imcch. LcVm an rccogal cc and mtped Ihoo inswic You cast aura polekase And mkwo IN=onto roarIRod- CARE FOR YOUR PLANTS — AND YOUR ROIL Ikdlhy loll means hcahhler plants Wet will fagnire lays pesticide, ratillter, wnlar and work. Locally ndoptcd plants qra more re&lablal to local pests and dlscolfs. Cuod saellaton (wceding), I.. oovec rcrncflFhg, crop rolrtfum and rmsleltog &ley dfallnale all Read far Pei [Saida sitvgetkne. DON'T vOVFRSPRAV' PESTICIDES OR IIERUICIDES Apply these eheudoals ody so dheded oil the label and NEVER spray Rorer Am defected TIPS FOR SIDE\VALK AND DRIVEWAY Won that ream eD your driveway and sidewalk atwoll nets doers dto pour, faroagh die hedllm neral Inning Ind tlnm o hlran drsin. Smlmdl nyblj R.q ►,d henret do reeferthey wry I- k1ol whim Fetus. ,Ind aJi—.I Kged into a l0ke.%vol W, ylregm or IN P" Se-md. Encehs all, Risen. as arhydning else you walk off you& dhlnwtp er pner Into a guae to mwnn Jnib gory directly - eRl"Asof . Inlu ate nahval water rycic. ItE(.'YCLE YOUR USUD p1OTOR OIL AND ANTI-MI;FZS Take it to year local ytt fallen- Arcld all drdnint eeoryesslcc thN use `u6:Sr11N Ms' well at rewdual a rsl l3nee, }$hue Is no ray to ecx)ok araraly dsnmc e[Ihe o/ono It Ids bear 461dbed Clem up *11A lal-Dena nd DUN'T Nov h 1in]og tufted apse. If ere rill and not wart lu 4, Ildn-I. Lumbada pets And Wlkel anlnkalt and la tkadly If Ieaesied Call I -add -RECYCLE for mac larornadon eboul eeeycling. FIR THAT LEAKY CRANKCARZ OR TRANSMISSION If mp.ir Is not pn$stble, pot a drip Uay order rite am Rod fWyeb the collected f ldi. SWEEP YOUR W ALN9 AND DRIVEWAY Rainslormn and gedca hues Jeri wash the Suter and dirt Imo the tulle, and then Im. fan skrnms. KNLIP YOUR EXHAUST CLEAN nocup. and apli pollution dcviors net Orly kelp to keep the df teen\ dhry redder die fallout Ram yavt e.hauel aNrlrh Is plAked Tp by fuddron -Ueda end parkins Iws. DE-ICE WITH SAND OR CINDERS RmaR'cArrkl doper; 1RIM mJ dlanlesle Inb yarn .aewad and fiwra Sweep vp..Tul wti.rde-s herore We Rai tdmlotm of they will sesueptoblau ordklr oath. 1[F.EP SUDS UUI' OF TTIS GUTTERS UIV low pha.pim. Aeeps err elfar.ingrwax beg comp-WiA who yeu wads 701I ell. Toy to direct ilea red- onto Per Ill*n irrtw err km the garter, weelogf yeid on wa tba low, raj... du aood far lawn watering Is, die some title. TIPN FOR LOT CUVERAGS nnd,lag IwIick, tmdr end alms Hume Mmeving re grinllua tad pavhnp kuge ce ran A& we pave and seal rare tvd moo Imd, ua aVtow less And feu (Ala to (ahtUatt the $ot And rwlwTge yo.nlwaeaf srlpsfl. Ttlla Inllltrailm Ill raagk Ibc So®d does IN. wltr fac an extent)MA fredl "Jelgrwnd wrttr Ifowe - mpdrras' which supply oar Jtioknnj vate ArJWepdre-Rs Rowinpdamhg Ihesmnmer, PLANT ANOTIIER TREE Too- and Illwhbe eeptim W hold n lot or -in balhm It rtxhu the }ymad. Wlimcm pom@Ic, kcrp the Imrursl, al. hog. trees and drab$ $ad pl.n1 fella AVOID PAVING YOUR LOT Leave im mush of year let or yell can N natard tegelellon Ind trca • even law" laelense the palatal naDlf fsw. Ifym mail pave, &NI -Ida adng am new modular asplmhs. Water amps through Illemi RECHARGE CROUNDWNII'll SUPPLIES - INSTEAD OF STORM DRAINS Check the ONlowd draloogr pith fbr your plat. If you tre net Iegrhed le d;nen your mere duwyrpoul- dkrelly fare file damn dr'o rylw". teen -edited Ikem away Man sarett,gmtnland IIWM flier. FreottAdnl, -ban tuned Illsh Scldr or anima min sit hold Idd fmcly Nltm valor late the growd &7V fldr Itaadd notdA devre lrruae temer telmN_la r+ hrRur wh R IV., I —(or w 1. awr Nhoys ern ark r+rluk &ou DON'T STRIP AWAY GROUND COVER Unprotected dlrl will wash off year lot ■nd fill catch hntlw., pipes and $tr.ambedo wIlk a.dimen U. Control erusion with Jute matting, straw, ►ey bales, ale. AVOID LANDSCAPING PLASTIC AND USE DARK WISELY Laedse.plag plastic areatar Just ■& muob runoff as Bisects or ounerole Bed built or&alas additional problems. Reek stage up ■torah drains, lowers the pH or streamwatcr old bre&k■ down Into fibers whloh harm fish OR-. }Iowerer, An— landsenplas bark la usually a ' prodeol of reoyoling, wa do enacuroas Its' proper call (without plastic): 1) don't spray oheutioal■ on or around bark; 2) don't use bark on &loop slopes; 3) surround buck vollk a b..rlor, •ash as lawn edging; 4) kasp bark array from Atrasms, driveways and street puller.. TALK TO YOUR CIa11.DREN Teaal, 1110.1 to value and respect ■Ire.hnt and wollsn d. ■ad their fahabllaala. X146 need to understand flint they cause harm If they build Jam-. &ter up bottom mud, tramples banks and plants or hdras■ fish ■ad wlldlire. FENCE LIVDSTO(!X AND LARDS PETS AWAY FROM STREAMS AND WETLANDS Aulmal wastes degrade -star quallly and their hooves cause 0I tmbnnks to collapse, lending to heavy Ailcatlon and dlareplion of fish habitat. KEEP LITTER OUT OF STREAMS dl WETLANDS This Includes grass ellppl-91 nAd other yotd waste as wa11 a trash red Inorganic wastes, TLI. just of eon aamlrr,n: r.a not only luoka and smells + fv1, bat It reducer rho oxygen cement or life w Atcl and kills flab and other wildlife And lltolr eggs. DON'T REMOVE LARCS ORGANIC DEBRIS SUCH AS TREE STUMPS AND BRANCHES PROM THE STREAM OR WETLAND This provldet vAluttic booltnl and food o.rove fur wattend wildlife, CONTACT THE STATE DEPARTMENT OD FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE FOR ADY)CS AND APPROVAL Although wall latentloned, any changes you make to the cascade or reflood aoald dealray spawning bode and (Ilb agga (eves way downstream) or kiosk rich migration. Frafe Iff I afeeit ant roar fh Nri eX�c[fslaT any erdtrr,L it a afrsnm, Iz RECEIVED B ,' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT COMMITMENT FOR TITLPINSU�iANCE ISSUED BY i U L 3 J 1998 PACIFIC NORTHWEST TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., a Washington corporation, herein called the Company, for a valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. Signed under seal for the Company, but this Commitment shall not be valid or binding until it bears an authorized Countersignature. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Pacific Northwest Title Insurance Company, Inc. has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. PACIFIC NORTHWEST TIMF, �5�•,■,•Mp•..V 7 % r OORPORAtr • a� cc : ►•� ; SEAL:� Z: ��raar, a�tflKf�t� � S Insurance Company, Inc. 0-1 President C ntersig by: Authorized Signatory PACIFIC NORTHWEST TITLE Company 1201 Third A"rm QM Seaftle, WA 96101%-"S City, State American Land Title Association Commitment - 1966 (Rev. 3/78) CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions, the Conditions and Stipulations, and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. All notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be furnished the Company shall be addressed to the Company at 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800, Seattle, Washington 98101. American Land Title Association Commitment - 1966 (Rev. 3/78) PACIFIC NORTHWEST TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON, INC. 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 Seattle, Washington 98101 Senior Title Officer, Mike Sharkey Title Officer, Diana L. Cardenas Unit No. 12 FAX Number 206-343-1330 Telephone Number 206-343-1327 Daley, Morrow, Poblete, Inc. Order No. 340744 1215 South Central, Suite 133 Kent, Washington 98032 CERTIFICATE FOR Attention: Jim Brown FILING PROPOSED PLAT SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE A GENTLEMEN: In the matter of the plat submitted for your approval, this Company has examined the records of the County Auditor and County Clerk of King County, Washington, and the records of the Clerk of the United States Courts holding terms in said County, and from such examination hereby certifies that according to said records the title to the following described land: Tract G, Heritage Woods Division 1, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 179 of Plats, pages 76 through 83, inclusive, in King County, Washington. IS VESTED IN: SCHNEIDER HOMES, INC., a Washington corporation SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS: As on Schedule B, attached hereto. CHARGE: $200.00 TAX: 17.20 TOTAL CHARGE: $217.20 RECORDS EXAMINED TO: April 10, 1998 at 8:00 a.m. PACIFIC NORTHWEST TITLE COMPANY OF QWASHINGTO INC. ike Sharkey Senior Title Officer Unit No. 12 SHORT PLAT CERTIFICATE Schedule B GENERAL EXCEPTIONS: Order No. 340744 1. Rights of claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Public or private easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public record. 3. Encroachments, overlaps, boundary line disputes, or other matters which would be disclosed by an accurate survey or inspection of the premises. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records, or Liens under the Workmen's Compensation Act not shown by the public records. S. Any title or rights asserted by anyone including but not limited to persons, corporations, governments or other entities, to tide lands, or lands comprising the shores or bottoms of navigable rivers, lakes, bays, ocean or sound, or lands beyond the line of the harbor lines as established or changed by the United States Government. 6. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 7. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance, capacity, or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity or garbage removal. 8. General taxes not now payable or matters relating to special assessments and special levies, if any, preceding the same becoming a lien. 9. Indian tribal codes or regulations, Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including, but not limited to, easements or equitable servitudes. I Order No. 340744 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 2 SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 1. EASEMENT AS DELINEATED AND/OR DEDICATED ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT: PURPOSE: Twenty foot permanent sanitary sewer and water AREA AFFECTED: Portion Tract of G 2. EASEMENT AS DELINEATED AND/OR DEDICATED ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT: PURPOSE: AREA AFFECTED: Fifty foot temporary water and sewer Portion of Tract G 3. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REFERENCED THEREIN, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE FOLLOWING: 4. GRANTEE: Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company PURPOSE: Right to erect and maintain poles, wire and fixtures appurtenant to electric power transmission lines AREA,AFFECTED: Portion of Tract G RECORDED: April 15, 1924 and August 4, 1924 RECORDING NUMBER: 1857062 and 1901219, respectively EASEMENT PROVISIONS AND RESERVATIONS CONTAINED IN SAID PLAT AS FOLLOWS: A non-exclusive easement is hereby reserved for and granted to any public and/or franchise utility and their respective successors and assigns, and the City of Federal Way, under and upon the front 10 feet parallel with and adjoining the street frontage of all lots and tracts in which to install, lay, construct, renew, operate and maintain underground pipe, conduit, cables, wires, water meters and fire hydrants with necessary facilities and other equipment for the purpose of serving this subdivision and other property with electric, cable T.V., telephone, gas, and other utility services together with the right to enter upon the lots and tracts at all times for the purposes herein stated. (continued) Order No. 340744 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 2 These easement entered upon for these purposes shall be restored as near as possible to their original condition. No utility lines shall be placed or permitted to be placed upon any lot or tract unless the same shall be underground or in conduit attached to a building. 5. LAKEHAVEN UTILITY EASEMENT DEDICATION CONTAINED IN SAID PLAT AS FOLLOWS: A non-exclusive easement is hereby irrevocabl reserved for and granted to Lakehaven Utility District for so long as it, or any assign or other successor in interest, shall own and maintain the utilities referenced herein under and upon the area shown on the plat and described herein as "water easement" or "sewer easement" to install maintain, replace, repair and operate water and sewer mains and appurtenances for this subdivision and other property, together with the right to enter upon said easements at all times for the purpose stated. No building, wall, rockery, trees or structures of any kind shall be erected or planted. No fencing shall be installed within said easement unless approved by the Lakehaven Utility District, nor shall any fill material be placed within the boundaries of said easement area. No excavation shall be made within three feet of said water or sewer service facilities and the surface level of the ground within the easement area shall be maintained at the elevation as currently existing. Grantor additionally grants to the grantee, the use of such additional area immediately adjacent to said easement area as shall be required for the construction, reconstruction, maintenance and operation of said water or sewer facilities. The use of such additional area shall be held to a reasonable minimum and the easement area and the additional area shall be returned to the condition existing immediately before the property was entered upon by grantee or its agents. 6. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT RESTRICTIONS CONTAINED IN SAID PLAT AS FOLLOWS: Structures, fill or obstructions (including but not limited to decks, patios, outbuildings, or overhangs) shall not be permitted beyond the building setback line or within the drainage easements. Additionally, grading shall not be allowed within the drainage easements shown on this plat map unless otherwise approved by the City of Federal Way Public Works Department. (continued) Order No. 340744 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 3 7. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REFERENCED THEREIN, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE FOLLOWING: GRANTEE: Puget Sound Power & Light Company, a Washington corporation PURPOSE: An underground electric distribution system AREA AFFECTED: The centerline of Grantee's facilities as constructed or to be constructed, extended or relocated DATED: August 31, 1996 RECORDED: August 2, 1996 RECORDING NUMBER: 9608020828 8. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REFERENCED THEREIN, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE FOLLOWING: GRANTEE: PURPOSE: Washington Natural Gas Company, US West Telephone Company, and TCI Television Cable Company Utilities AREA AFFECTED: A Right -of -Way 10 feet in width having 5 feet of such width on each side of a centerline described as follows: The centerline of Grantee's facilities as constructed or to be constructed, extended or relocated RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: August 2, 1996 9608020829 9. RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS AND LIABILITY TO ASSESSMENTS CONTAINED IN DECLARATION OF PROTECTIVE RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS AND ASSESSMENTS, AS HERETO ATTACHED: DECLARATION DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: February 5, 1997 March 6, 1997 9703060163 (continued) Order No. 340744 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 4 10. DOWNSPOUT NOTE CONTAINED IN SAID PLAT AS FOLLOWS: All building downspouts, footing drains and drains from all impervious surfaces such as patios and driveways shall be connected to the approved permanent storm drain outlet as shown on the approved Construction Drawings on file with the City of Federal Way Public Works Department (F.W.P.W.D.) under Project No. SUB92-0005 and also see 91-0001. This plan shall be submitted with the application for any building permit. All connections of the drains must be constructed and approved prior to the final building inspection approval. All individual stub -outs shall be privately owned and maintained by the lot owner. All stormwater conveyance facilities from individual lots to the catch basins in the streets shall be owned and maintained by the individual lot owners. 11. NOTES CONTAINED IN SAID PLAT AS FOLLOWS: A geotechnical/soils report shall be submitted with each building permit application for any lots containing slopes in excess of twenty percent. During the course of construction of any lot within this subdivision, stub -out invert elevations for storm drainage and/or sanitary sewer shall be verified by the individual lot builder or owner to provide the necessary slope from the proposed house. All front and rear lot and tract corners have been staked with a 1/2-inch by 18-inch rebar and plastic cap marked "LS 6228". Corners abutting streets have also been marked at the back of the concrete curb with a drilled hole and a "P-K" brand masonry nail or lead and tack set at the streetward projection of the lateral lot line between the lots. Plat boundary staked with 2" dia. pipe filled with concrete and topped with brass plug. Addresses shown hereon were provided by the City of Federal Way prior to this plat recording and are subject to change. Each lots address will be confirmed by the City prior to the occupancy of the dwelling on that lot. In some cases, two property address notations have been shown for one lot. The address that will be used will be dependent on the location of the driveway. All homes located within this subdivision shall be properly sound insulated to achieve a level of 45-LDN within general habitable space and 40-LDN within bedrooms consistent with the uniform building code and other regulations, as required by the building official. (continued) Order No. 340744 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 5 Tract "A" is designated as Open Space and shall be conveyed to the City of Federal Way via Statutory Warranty Deed. Tract "B" is designated as Open Space/Pedestrian Path and shall be conveyed to the City of Federal Way via Statutory Warranty Deed. Tracts "C", "D" and "F" are Environmentally Sensitive Areas and are permanent Open Space Tracts. The tracts are set aside and reserved for permanent open space for the benefit of present and future owners of lots in Division 1 and Division 2 when recorded. No building shall be constructed or located in Tracts 'rCrr, "D" or "F" and such tracts shall not be further subdivided or used for financial gain. Any vegetation removal, maintenance or other activity in Tracts "C", "D" or "F" requires the prior approval of the City of Federal Way Community Development Services Department. Tract "E" is a Drainage Tract and shall be conveyed to the City of Federal Way via Statutory Warranty Deed upon completion of the last division of the preliminary plat of Heritage Woods, for ownership and the construction, maintenance, upgrading, etc. of the storm drainage facilities located thereon. In order to preserve the natural infiltration characteristics of the area, there shall be no development of any organized recreational activity facility without the prior written approval of the City of Federal Way Department of Public Workds or its successor agency. "Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) are areas where no vegetation and/or trees are to be cut and/or removed except those which are dead, dying, diseased, or considered a potential safety hazard. Any vegetation and/or tree removal in the NGPE requires the prior approval of the City of Federal Way Community Development Services Department. No structure shall be constructed and/or located in a NGPE except as authorized by the Department of Community Development Services." Tracts "G", "H" and "J" are designated for future development for single family lots (Division 2). The minimum finished floor elevations shown for Lots 28, 29, 30, 36, 37, 43, 44 and 45 were specified on the approved sanitary sewer engineering plans on file at Lakehaven Utility District. Depending on the final design and location of the house on the lot, the minimum finished floor elevations may be adjusted by the builder to obtain gravity sanitary sewer service (i.e. If the house is closer (continued) Order No. 340744 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 6 to the side sewer it may actually be able to have a finished floor lower than that specified). In the event the builder chooses to build the house at a lower finished floor, and drainage to the sanitary sewer system by gravity is not possible, then the house will be required to utilize a private grinder pump station approved by the Lakehaven Utility District. LOT MIN. FF LOT MIN. FF LOT MIN. FF 28 483.5 36 466.0 44 427.5 29 484.0 37 466.0 45 441.0 30 483.5 43 428.0 The Vertical Datum for this plat is based on King County Aerial Survey (K.C.A.S.) Benchmark used: Brass cap monument located west of the intersection of South 288th Street and Military Road B.M. #125 Elevation = 483.761. A 10-foot non-exclusive drainage easement adjacent to any road frontage and a 5-foot non-exclusive drainage easement on each side of all property lines shall be created with recording of Division 1. Maintenance of the drainage easement facilities shall be by the lot owner. A non-exclusive drainage easement across the rear portion of Lots 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 36 and 42 as shown on the plat map sheets 3 and 4, shall be created with recording of Division 1. Maintenance of the drainage easement facilities shall be by the lot owner. Prior to Federal Way Public Works Department approval of final punch list items for Military and Star bake Road construction, no more than 12 single family permits may be issued, and neither final inspection sign -off nor approval for occupancy for any single family structure may occur. The temporary turnaround easement to the City of Federal Way shall be removed upon the dedication of 25th Place South to the west of this plat. This easement removal shall be concurrent with the City of Federal Way's acceptance of the road dedication. (continued) Order No. 340744 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 7 Prior to occupancy, the property owner shall install street trees between the street curb and sidewalk. Along the lot frontage, as specified in the recorded covenants, conditions and restrictions (C C & R's) for this plat. The specific planting locations shall be shown and approved on the building permit site plan for each lot. Article D, Section 4 of the C C & R's may not be amended modified or deleted without the approval of the Federal Way Community Development Department. A 30 foot drainage easement to the City of Federal Way as shown on Sheets 2 and 4 through Tracts D and E shall be created with the recording of Division 1. 12. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BY AND BETWEEN: Federal Way Water and Sewer, King County, a municipal corporation; and Parklane Ventures Ltd. DATED: January 25, 1993 RECORDED: February 3, 1993 RECORDING NUMBER: 9302031231 REGARDING: Developer extension agreement for sewer and water service Said Agreement was modified and/or amended by instruments recorded under Recording Numbers 9311290247, 9510040430 and 9703051471. 13. LICENSE AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BY AND BETWEEN: City of Federal Way and Parklane Ventures, Inc. DATED: August 1, 1995 RECORDED: November 3, 1995 RECORDING NUMBER: 9511030734 (continued) Order No. 340744 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 8 14. LICENSE AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BY AND BETWEEN: The City of Federal Way and Parklane Ventures, Inc. DATED: February 21, 1997 RECORDED: March 6, 1997 RECORDING NUMBER: 9703060212 AFFECTS: The description contained therein is not sufficient to determine its exact location within the property herein described. 15. LICENSE AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BY AND BETWEEN: The City of Federal Way and Parklane Ventures, Inc. DATED: February 21, 1997 RECORDED: March 6, 1997 RECORDING NUMBER: 9703060213 AFFECTS: The description contained therein is not sufficient to determine its exact location within the property herein described. 16. LICENSE AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BY AND BETWEEN: The City of Federal Way and Parklane Ventures, Inc. DATED: February 21, 1997 RECORDED: March 6, 1997 RECORDING NUMBER: 9703060216 AFFECTS: The description contained therein is not sufficient to determine its exact location within the property herein described. (continued) Order No. 340744 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 9 17. LICENSE AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BY AND BETWEEN: The City of Federal Way and Parklane Ventures, Inc. DATED: March 5, 1997 RECORDED: March 6, 1997 RECORDING NUMBER: 9703060222 AFFECTS: The description contained therein is not sufficient to determine its exact location within the property herein described. 18. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BY AND BETWEEN: Lakehaven Utility District, King County, a municipal corporation DATED: August 1, 1997 RECORDED: September 22, 1997 RECORDING NUMBER: 9709220732 REGARDING: Sanitary sewer and water distribution system including costs 19. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BY AND BETWEEN: DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: REGARDING: Latecomer Agreement Lakehaven Utility District, a municipal corporation and Parklane Ventures, Inc. November 21, 1997 February 11, 1998 9802110375 20. RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS CONTAINED IN DEED FROM NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY: Reserving and excepting from said lands so much or such portions thereof as are or may be mineral lands or contain coal or iron, and also the use and the right and title to the use of such surface ground as may be necessary for mining operations and the right of access to such reserved and excepted mineral lands, including lands containing coal or iron, for the purpose of exploring, developing and working the same. RECORDING NUMBER: 209726 and 286278 (continued) Order No. 340744 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 10 NOTE: No examination has been made to determine the present record owner of the above minerals, or mineral lands and appurtenant rights thereto, or to determine matters which may affect the lands or rights so reserved. AFFECTS: Portion of Tract G and other property 21. RIGHT TO MAKE NECESSARY SLOPES FOR CUTS OR FILLS UPON PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED AS GRANTED IN DEED: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: GRANTEE: March 15, 1939 3035989 King County 22. DEDICATION CONTAINED IN SAID PLAT AS FOLLOWS: Know all people by these presents that we, the undersigned owners of interest in the land hereby subdivided, hereby declare this plat to be the graphic representation of the subdivision made hereby, and do hereby dedicate to the use of the public forever all streets and avenues not shown as private hereon and dedicate the use thereof for all public purposes not inconsistent with the use thereof for public highway purposes, and also the right to make all necessary slopes for cuts and fills upon the lots shown thereon in the original reasonable grading of said streets and avenues, and further dedicate to the use of the public all the easements and tracts shown on this plat for all public purposes as indicated thereon, including but not limited to parks, open space, utilities and drainage unless such easements or tracts are specifically identified on this plat as being dedicated or conveyed to a person or entity other than the public, in which case we do hereby dedicate such streets, easements or tracts to the person or entity identified and for the purpose stated. Further, the undersigned owners of the land hereby subdivided waive for themselves, their heirs and assigns and any person or entity deriving title from the undersigned, and any and all claims for damages against the City of Federal Way, its successors and assigns which may be occasioned by the establishment, construction, or maintenance of roads and/or drainage systems within this subdivision other than claims resulting from inadequate maintenance by the City of Federal Way. (continued) ' Order No. 340744 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 11 Further, the undersigned owners of the land hereby subdivided agree for themselves, their heirs and assigns to indemnify and hold the City of Federal Way, its successors and assigns, harmless from any damage, including any costs of defense, claimed by persons within or without this subdivision to have been caused by alterations of the ground surface, vegetation, drainage, or surface or subsurface water flow within this subdivision or by establishment, construction or maintenance of the road within this subdivision. Provided, this waiver and indemnification shall not be construed as releasing the City of Federal Way, its successors or assigns, from liability for damages, including the cost of defense, resulting in whole or in part from the negligence of the City of Federal Way, its successors, or assigns. 23. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, IF UNPAID: SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1, IF UNPAID: YEAR: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: CURRENT ASSESSED VALUE: GENERAL TAXES: AMOUNT BILLED: AMOUNT PAID: AMOUNT DUE: SPECIAL DISTRICT: AMOUNT BILLED: AMOUNT PAID: AMOUNT DUE: 1998 326080-0490-09 1205 Land: $14,000.00 Improvements: $ 0.00 $195.01 $ 0.00 $195.01 $5.00 $0.00 $5.00 24. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: Schneider Homes, Inc., a Washington corporation TRUSTEE: PSM Financial Management Corporation, a Washington corporation BENEFICIARY: Keybank National Association, a national bank (continued) AMOUNT: DATED: RECORDED: RECORDING NUMBER: PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Page 12 $10,000,000.00 July 22, 1997 July 25, 1997 9707251009 Order No. 340744 The amount now secured by said Deed of Trust and the terms upon which the same can be discharged or assumed should be ascertained from the holder of the indebtedness secured. 25. The following matter(s) disclosed by survey recorded under Recording Number 9306049008: A fence does not appear to follow the westerly boundary line and southerly boundary line of Tract G A copy of said survey is hereto attached. END OF SCHEDULE B Title to this property was examined by: Mick Foley Any inquiries should be directed to one of the title officers set forth in Schedule A. CC: Schneider Home, Inc./Tukwila/Attu: Dennis Alfredson MCF/rag/5051V A % • I . °,ir3 S.F _; y'�• 183,327 SF. �� 403, a `• 4.3 $ • INM A b S © 00: J C. BY A so 1 �y 42 a� 4 Kok °55-t 4d00 STORM T 09 � -DETENTION _ � Ati gZ S.&I.'s FACYEI:IES 51 sa IS3� 6 j s �sB s9 °� 41 TR HD �3 �Ts° Av De oEn r11 o p^?� 5�� _ S880 3'2 "E 411.28' `�� tttr pF ED Is l- CONC. 35- 3T `�40— — — s� y. AFR6' ER _ _a 2� 30 31 MDN. 34 38 s� "�°ao❑42 f ate' . . �1�~ 28 32 3�—r S. 2Bp. PLACE _ 39 ` ��e�49s� �'�Q �ry s0, 13 20 u; 7 �'S TR. OWNF� AND AIA1 AlNI I , �ry� I `\\ 27 21 BY HOME OWNERS 145SOC,� IMP• 12 f 26 23 22 119 8 6 �N♦ TRACT ff P� �( II 25 / 17 I _ i98.971 •SF. V AREA �d ti6 i 1 5 ti 24 1B J !B w O _ .4_ �� 4_ . _ �'ANDSOPEN SPA E eq0 O�M1r 10 9 \ 1 �s I f / j,. OPEN SPACE l" .3 OLD MILITARY q� 15 ROADIVACATED TRACTE 12 AF. -77021403251 y* 6/ s Nlea°s6.17"w E4 I 13 t 2 R•� I my Q �4 a ilk 00, OPEN t a4�•p: ST3 + v a . ry7 SPACE I H92. 4 N24 59, m mm v SWDETO .L9 'a ss*o 7 N CITY OF 1569°36'02"E 69.27' a - h, 2 1� FEDERAL WRY 4r7°3I'41 "5V 00.62' �O \ / A 110.00, 46 / m 568°56'i7"E _C.+50.10'• OS 7 S74°56'2r'E J p.5TnW46" 04 109.74' 1 $.H430 45'56.0"E 'r J NI X 634.034;51_ V �.y4 p / �A. d T I V , a RO. r I 440 D/ 2 \ 43 FUTU09. � " / f DEVELOPMENT \7-- -- R.230.00' 1 J SEWER TO BE 3C L. 7.41' 1 yY �.�- p :µ'AZ °+T BECOt Y RECr 20' PERMANENT SANITARY L8�61• �35 SEWER L WATER EASEMENT 1 I 1 258.74' d 86.0 �_� 258.74' 411sr l aT.o3' 88018'51"W 34 N88036'23"W 411.27' S08055'53"E 20 ; 19 r Is + 66.13' N88018'51"W 87.03' iED �T 17 OF 21 20 OLD MILITARY ke,r&19e_, weds Div. I Vol. I-lq pgs Ili -1�'�) PACIFIC NORTHWEST TITLE COMPANY Formerly Stewart Title Company Order No. Dg,*< [IMPORTANT: This is not a Plat of Survey. It is furnish,j as a convenience to locate the land indicated hereon with reference to streets and other land. No liability is assumed by reason of reliance hereon. NORTH 11 SOUTH CRY OF 1 MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION ED_BBY TMENT 4F COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES J - 33530 First Way South, Federal Way, WA 98003 (253) 661-4000 — Fax (253) 661-4129 APPLICATION NO Project Name Property Address/Location U. Date r Applicant Name: Agent Name: Owner Name: Address: % C% �,,,.��� Address: � �� y Address: 5?�W C Phone: (2,06.) 4248 L- V .- I Phone: (2S3} CpVy 934 Y Phone: ( ) Fax: ( ) Fax: (2 j) Fax: ( ) Email: Email: Email: Signature: Signature: f Signature: Zoning Designation Project Description Parcel Number(s) Type of Permit Required: CoP Plan Designation 1 SEPA Checklist Notice Mailed Sign Board (Refer to Development Submittal Requirements Handout) Annexation R R Binding Site Plan R R R Boundary Line Adjustment Comp Plan/Rezone Land Surface Modification Lot Line Elimination Preapplication Meeting Process I (Director's Approval) Process II (Site Plan Review) Process III (Project Approval) Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision) Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone) SEPA Only Shoreline Variance Conditional Use Short Subdivision Subdivision Variance R R R R R* R R R R R Rx2 R R R R R R R R R R R * R R R R R* R R R = Reauh-ed * = On, MASTERLA FRM REvism 6/ 1 /98 F JYODOOOF 33530 1 ST WAY SOUTH August 25, 1998 Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Ste. 1 Tukwila, WA 98188 RECEIVED AUG 2 G 1998 CITY CLERKS OFFICE (253) 661-4000 CITY OF ��9� WXY, WA 98003-6210 RE: Heritage Woods, FWHE# UP498-0003, FILE# UPR97-0003 Dear Applicant: Transmitted herewith is the report and decision of the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner relating to the above -entitled matter. Very truly yours, STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR. Hearing Examiner SKC/md cc: Parties of record City of Federal Way, c/o Chris Green, 33530 1st Way S„ Federal Way, WA 98003 C(Opy CITY OF FEDERAL WAY OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER ►4J�-Czfv8n cf cG 4 0 �9 � CIiYoF Ep RO F�C� 'AY IN THE MATTER OF: ) FWHE#UP498-0003 HERITAGE WOODS, VARIANCE REQUEST ) FILE # UPR97-0003 PROCESS IV ) I. SUMMARY OF APPLICATIQN The applicant has requested a variance from the calculation method for determining the maximum height allowable for a building, based on the Average Building Elevation, as defined by the Federal Way City Code (FWCC) in Section 22-1. The applicant's building sites are located in an RS 7.2 (Residential Single Family) zoning district. Pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1, Average Building Elevation (ABE) is taken prior to any development activity or at finish grade, whichever is lower. The slopes of the previously platted lots average approximately 29%, partially due to the approved road design and construction. Parkland Ventures is proposing to add significant amount of fill to the lots in question and re -grade them to yield suitable building lots, under a separate grading permit application. Up to 18 feet of fill will cover the existing grade in the area of the proposed buildings. If the ABE is measured from the existing grade, the applicant will be unable to construct houses which match the size and character of the existing homes both adjacent to the subject property and within the subdivision. II. PR ED L INF R ATION Hearing Date: August 11, 1998 Decision Date: August 25, 1998 At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: David Graves, Associate Planner Madrona Planning and Development Services 651 NW 78`" Street Seattle, WA 98117 2. Dennis Alfredson 6510 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Page - 2 At the hearing the following exhibits were admitted as part of the official record of these proceedings: 1. Staff Report with all attachments 2. Letter to the City of Federal Way from Tim Hancock, dated August 8, 1998 3. Letter dated August 7, 1998, to Jim Harris of the City of Federal Way from William & Melissa Boutelle 4. Area map 111. FINDINGS The Hearing Examiner has heard testimony, admitted documentary evidence into the record, and taken this matter under advisement. 2. The Community Development Staff Report sets forth general findings, applicable policies and provisions in this matter and is hereby marked as Exhibit "1" and incorporated in its entirety by this reference. 3. All appropriate notices were delivered in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Way City Code (FWCC). 4. The applicant has a possessory ownership interest in Tracts H and J of the Heritage Woods single family residential subdivision. Tract H is approved for development into two single family residential lots (Lots 52 and 53), and Tract J is approved for development into five single family residential lots (Lots 54 through Lot 58). Tracts H and J are located on the east side of 251 Place S. and 26°i Ave. S. in the northern portion of the subdivision near Military Rd. S. _ 5. Steep topography in the area required the applicant to construct 25' Place S. and 26' Ave. S. along the edge of a steep bank descending to a wetland area which separates the lots from Military Rd. S. While the City previously approved the lots as building sites, the steep topography requires substantial fill to bring the lots to the grade of the access road. 6. Section 22-1 of the Federal Way City Code (FWCC) defines average building elevation (ABE) as follows: Page - 3 Average buildin eg levation-A reference datum on the surface topography of a subject property from which building height is measured. The reference datum shall be a point no higher than five feet above the lowest elevation taken at any exterior wall of the structure either prior to any development activity or at finished grade, whichever is lower, provided that the reference datum is equal to or lower than the highest elevation at any exterior wall of the structure prior to development activity. Both tracts are located within the RS 7.2 zone classification, and Section 22-631 FWCC limits the maximum height of detached dwelling units within the RS classification to 30 feet above the ABE. 7. The applicant must fill lots 52 through 58 with approximately 18 feet of material to match the existing grades of 25' Ave. S. and 26' Ave. S. The lots presently have an average slope of 28.8%, and homes could not be constructed on the lots and still have access from the internal plat roads. When the lots are filled and homes equivalent to those built on the west side of said roads are constructed, the homes will exceed the 30 foot height limit based upon the definition of ABE as set forth above. However, the homes will be consistent in both height and square footage with homes across the street and elsewhere in the subdivision. 8. The applicant is requesting a variance to the calculation method for determining the maximum height allowable for single family dwellings within the RS 7.2 classification. The variance will allow the applicant to fill the lots to the road grade and construct homes equivalent to those on the opposite side of the road. Prior to obtaining a variance, the applicant must establish that the request satisfies the criteria set forth in Section 22-198 FWCC. Findings on each criteria are hereby made as follows: A. Approving the variance will not constitute a grant of special_ privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon uses of other properties in the same vicinity. Granting the variance simply allows the lots previously approved for single family residential homes to be developed with homes consistent with those in the immediate area and directly across the street Once the lots are filled and graded, homes equivalent to those on the west side of 25'' Place S. and 26' Ave. S. will be constructed on the east side of said roads. B. The variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the topography and location of the lots and is necessary to provide the lots with use rights and privileges allowed to other properties in the vicinity. Homes constructed on the existing grade and meeting the front yard setback requirements would not be able to Page - 4 access internal plat roads due to slopes greater than 28%. Due to the topography, filling and grading the lots is the only way to provide adequate building sites for homes that will match the size and character of the existing homes in the surrounding neighborhood. C. Granting the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvement in the vicinity. Potential injuries to public welfare, the property, or improvements were fully addressed in the filling and grading permit process which was issued on July 1, 1998. Slope stability and safety issues were also addressed, and the City review found that the design principles protected the public health, safety, and welfare by providing an engineered design for conventional building pads. Filling the lots to allow construction of single family homes consistent with those in the area and as authorized by plat approval is not materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvement in the area. D. The special circumstances of the subject property are not the result of the actions of the owner. The road was constructed in accordance with City standards and the plat approved by the City, designated the lots as appropriate for single family residential homes. The grade was necessary to provide support for the adjacent 25' Place S. and the grading plan was approved by the City. Furthermore, the applicant had no interest in the subject properties at that time. 9. In accordance with the FWCC, variances may be approved by the Hearing Examiner in accordance with Process IV procedures. Prior to granting Process IV approval, the Examiner must find that the request satisfies the criteria set forth in Section 22-445(c) FWCC. Findings on each criteria are hereby made as follows: A. The proposed variance is consistent with the City of Federal -Way Comprehensive Plan. The plan designates the site and area as High Density Residential and contemplates it for development with single family dwellings. Land Use Policy 19 encourages the consideration of special development techniques in single family areas if they result in residential development consistent with the quality and character of the existing neighborhood. The purpose of the variance is to allow the applicant to construct houses which will match the size and character of those within the area and on the opposite side of the road. The requested variance allows the height of the structure to be calculated from the post development topography and not the existing grade, thus authorizing a house at a consistent height above street grade with those already constructed. Page - 5 B. The variance is consistent with all applicable provisions of the FWCC. The proposed homes will comply with all bulk regulations of the RS 7.2 zone classification and other applicable sections of the FWCC. C. As previously found, granting the variance is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. D. These factors address the suitability of access to the property and the availability of public utilities and streets. All lots front on dedicated and constructed public roads and are served by all public utilities to include water and sanitary sewers. The lots are located within Division I of the subdivision and are some of the only lots remaining unimproved. 10. Concerns were raised by residents abutting the Heritage Woods subdivision regarding the placement of fill adjacent to their properties and over an existing spring. These parties abut the southwest corner of the Heritage Woods project, while the variance is requested for lots in the northeast portion of the project. The applicant, Schneider Homes, Inc., acquired an ownership interest in the lots during the past year, but has not owned the subdivision for three years. No filling has occurred as yet, and the citizen concerns are best addressed through an enforcement action with the City or a meeting with the property owner. IV. CONCLUSIONS From the foregoing findings the Hearing Examiner makes the following conclusions: The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to consider and decide the issues presented by this request. 2. The applicant has established that the request for a variance from --the calculation of the average building elevation satisfies the criteria set forth in Sections 22-198 and 22-445(c) of the Federal Way City Code and therefore should be granted. Page - 6 DECISION: The request for a variance to allow the average building elevation to be calculated from the post development topography as opposed to the pre -development topography for Lots 52 through 58 in the Heritage Woods subdivision is hereby granted. DATED THIS 2S'4AY OF August, 1998. An STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR. Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS DAY OF August, 1998, to the following: APPLICANT: Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Ste. 1 Tukwila, WA 98188 OWNER: Parklane Ventures 31620 23' Ave. S. Federal Way, WA 98003 OTHERS: Dennis Alfredson, 6510 SouthCenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 William & Melissa Boutelle, 2312 S, 284' Place, Federal Way, WA 98003 Tim Hancock, 2220 S. 2841 Street, Federal Way, WA 98003 City of Federal Way c/o Chris Green, 33530 11 Way S. Federal Way, WA 98003 PROCESS IV Right to Appeal Decisions of the hearing Examiner may be appealed by any person who is to receive a copy of that decision under FWCC Section 22-443. The appeal, in the form of a letter of appeal, must be delivered to the Department of Community Development Services within fo=een 14 calendar a s after the issuance of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The letter of appeal must contain: 1. A statement identifying the decision being appealed, along with a copy of the decision; 2. A statement of the alleged errors in the Hearing Examiner's decision, including specific factual finds and conclusions of the Hearing Examiner disputed by the person filing the appeal; and 3. The appellant's name, address, telephone number and fax number, and any other information to facilitate communications with the appellant. The person filing the appeal shall include, with the letter of appeal, the fee established by the City of the costs of preparing a written transcript of the hearing (or in the alternative, the appellant may prepare the transcript at his or her sole costs from tapes of the hearing provided by the City).The appeal will not be accepted unless it is accompanied by the required fee and cost (or agreement of the appellant to prepare the transcript). Appeals from the decision of the Hearing Examiner will be heard by The City Council. The decision of City Council is the final decision of the City. The action of the City in granting or denying an application under this article may be reviewed pursuant to RCW 36.70C in the King County Superior Court. The Land Use Petition must be filed within tw n - n 21 calendar days after the final land use decision of the City. j 10 19-98- Mr. Jim Harris, Associate Planner City of Federal Way 33530 1st Way South Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 Subject: Notice of Public Land Use Hearing Heritage Woods -Height Variance File Number: UP498-0003 Dear Mr. Harris: 2312 South 284th Place Federal Way, WA 98003 August 7. 1998 We are writing in response to the Notice of Public Land Use Hearing for the variance submitted by Dennis Alfredson of Schneider Homes, Inc. We would like this letter to be submitted to the Hearing Examiner since we are unable to attend the public hearing on August 11, 1998. It has been brought to our attention that significant amounts of fill have already been brought into this site to cover the existing grade to.construct lots with a view. Due to this alteration flooding of the existing adjacent homes has occurred. What will happen when additional significant amounts of fill are brought in? With the increase height to the elevation the new owners have found the trees in the green belt to be obstructive to their views. This has resulted in the owners cutting down trees that are protected in the original agreement concerning the green belt. We find this variance request to be very strange since the builder has already built homes on lots that he has elevated. Is this a new variance for different lots or will this variance be retroactive to the existing one? Thank you for your time. Sincerely, William & Melissa Boutelle RECEIVED Office of the Pederal Way Lend Use Hesriag &Mbw August 8, 1998 / / '9 ep AU6�I City of Federal Way ci /rYC' R 1998 Land Use Hearing Examiner FW QF�EQSC1 Federal Way City Council Chambers WqY 33530 15` Way South Federal Way, WA 98003 Tim Hancock 11 2220 South 2840' Street Federal Way, WA 98003 (425) 251-3900 (Work) (253) 529-1391 (Home) Dear Land Use Hearing Examiner. My name is Tim Hancock and I live behind the Schneider Homes development, Heritage Woods. I am unable to attend the hearing on August 11 regarding File Number UP498-0003 but I wanted to take a moment to express my opinion on the subject. I have serious concerns about the methods Schneider Homes uses in developing property, as well as their need to add additional fill to make 7 more lots in a development that is slated to have over 110 home sites. Let me give you a little background as to what I have witnessed over the last 3 years. Approximately 3 years ago the Heritage Woods land was cleared and sat dormant for a period of time. There was a natural spring at the top of the hill behind my house that ran behind the house of my neighbors to the south as well. In the fall when the water table rose there was constant water flowing out of the spring into my yard and into the basement of my neighbors' home. The developer made a dike to retain the water that was approximately 8 to 12 feet high, 25 feet wide, and about 1/4 mile long, running North to South along the ridge. When we had steady rain for a few days the water rose to the top of the dike within about a foot of going over. I made Schneider Homes aware of this situation. They then cut a ditch to make the water run to the East towards Military Road. The small lake that was created stayed well into the spring after the rain had stopped. The dike showed fractures on the backside and if it had broken who knows what would have happened to my home, my family and our neighbors. Schneider Homes then filled in the dike which raised the level of the grade. I am unaware of any notice to neighbors at that time, such as the variance or the grading permit that they are applying for now. After 2 years of filling and compacting the area, the ground now gets very saturated when it rains. It is to the point that a person cannot walk across it without sinking into the ground. I have contacted Schneider Homes on various occasions to find out how much longer the filling and compacting was going to last and was basically brushed off. I was told that this is just the way it is. However, after a few persistent phone calls, I was finally told last year that the filling and compacting was only going to last until September of 1997. Yet, the filling and compacting has continued this spring and summer. I believe Schneider Homes is trying to cap off a natural spring. If they succeed in doing this, where will the water go? I don't believe Schneider Homes cares where the water goes as long as it's off their property. Because by filling and capping off the land, they are making a couple of more lots to sell. I also don't believe that Schneider Homes has any consideration for the people that live adjacent to their development. They have done nothing to control the dust, and have been running earth movers and vibrating compacting machines well after 6:00 in the evening. 1 understand that I should expect to be a bit inconvenienced with the development behind me, but not for the amount of time it has been going on. Two years is getting to be a little much for my family and myself. My neighbors also share in this concern. We could deal with the noise of homes being built, but the continual shaking of our house by the compactors has become out of control. And to know that the reason all the compacting is being done is to cap off a natural spring which will then inevitably come through to our yard is very exasperating. The latest Schneider Homes move took place on Thursday, August 6"'- My wife called me at work to tell me what to expect when I drove up the road to our house that evening. In one day, Schneider Homes built up a pile of dirt, stumps, and other things I can't quite describe right behind my house. This pile is about 18+ feet high and about 30 feet long. Since it is not covered or contained by any means, if it rains, this pile begin to disintegrate and come directly towards my house, since water runs down hill. This is just another example of why I feel that Schneider Homes is a very careless developer and has no regards for the surrounding homes that have been there longer than their most recent development. On the issue of their request for a variance to fill in more lots in their development, I don't see the need to give them a variance, Altering the landscape to make room for more homes is a big mistake. It only takes one look at the mudslides and lost homes in the over -developed Seattle area to make one think. Adding dirt on a hill isn't a good idea. Where would the fill be coming from, and would it be clean of contaminants? I have seen huge piles of concrete with rebar sticking out, stumps, and other things piled in the back of their development (which is adjacent to my back yard). The strange thing is that the piles have been disappearing while the filling of land has taken place which makes me speculate about just where it is going. I have been in contact with Jim Pyrall and others within The City of Federal Way and have voiced my concerns. I would like to say that I have been very impressed with everyone that I have spoken to in the Planning, Code Enforcement, and general Information departments of The City. Everyone has been very courteous and prompt in returning my calls and I thank you for your concern. I am very sorry that I cannot attend the meeting on the 11t", however I would ask that my concerns addressed in this fetter act as my voice in this matter. I would like to kept abreast of the outcome of this hearing by receiving a short summary of the decision that was made. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. I hope that you will take into account my comments and concerns. I have had strong first hand information dealing with Schneider Homes over the past 2 years and hope that you will take my thoughts into consideration when making your decision. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or would like any further information. Sincerely, Tim Hancock �I schneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard•Suite #1 •Tukwila, WA 981889(206) 248-2471 •FAX (206) 242-4209 February 16, 1998 Greg Moore, Director of Department of Community Development City of Federal Way 33530 1st Way S Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 Re: Plat of Heritage Woods, Div. Tracts H & J Variance to FWCC Ordinance No. 90-43 and 90-51. Pre -Application Conference Dear Mr. Moore: FM r. �kr4 BUiLr�l u ii P7 Vh Y Schneider Homes, Inc. hereby requests exemption from the requirement for a pre - application conference for the subject variance submittal based on FWCC Sec. 22-1653 exemption criterion number (iii). Heritage Woods has undergone extensive site plan and SEPA review, and has been approved and recorded. It is, in our opinion, unlikely that further pre -application review will provide benefit to the city or Schneider Homes. Respectfully, SCHNEIDER HOMES, INC. �! D s Alfredson, P.E. anager of Development & Construction SC-HN-EI-245 PB n„'� I schneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard•Suite #1 •Tukwila, WA 98188■(206) 248-2471 *FAX (206) 242-4209 February 16, 1998 City of Federal Way 33530 1st Way S Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 Re: Plat of Heritage Woods, Div. 1 Tracts H & J�� Variance to FWCC Ordinance No. 90-43 and 90-51. - .2,3 ryyg TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: �UILprN� aEPr` `'� r DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED VARIANCE A variance is requested to Federal Way Ordinance Nos. 90-43 and 90-51. Ordinance 90- 43 specifies maximum building height as well as the method of measuring height. Ordinance 90-51 amends 90-43 to modify the reference datum used to measure the building height. Under 90-51, the height is measured from the "Average Building Elevation." To paraphrase, (with a flat ground surface) the ABE is defined as the ground surface elevation adjacent to the building. If the surface grade is sloping, the ABE may be assumed as either; a) a point five feet above the lowest point of the ground surface adjacent to the building, or; b) at the highest adjacent ground surface elevation, whichever is lower. Further, 90-51 defines the ABE as being taken "either prior to any development activity or at finished grade, whichever is lower ... " It is this provision to which a variance is requested, to allow the establishment of the ABE to be made after the subject parcels have been regraded, rather than "prior to .. development." Currently, Tracts H & J stand at a 2:1 slope supporting 251h Ave S. Schneider Homes is under contract to Parklane Ventures to buy Tracts H & J if and when Parklane is successful in receiving a grading permit from the City to regrade the tracts in such as manner as is suitable for recording as building lots. This will entail the importation of a significant quantity of fill. This variance request is written under the assumption that a Heritage Woods Tracts H & J Variance Request Page 1 of 3 SC-HN-EI-245 PS grading permit will be or has been granted to Parklane, and does not address the issues surrounding that permit. In summary, the request is to establish the "Average Building [ground] Elevation" using the topography after re grading rather than topography prior to development. JUSTIFICATION Following is a discussion of the four criteria for receipt of a variance: A. "That the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located. " The vicinity is zoned residential and platted as such. Housing is currently being constructed. The variance will allow Tracts H & J to be recorded as residential building lots also. B. " That the variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings of the subject property to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located. " The tracts are currently sloped at 2:1. It is necessary to fill the tracts in order to make for suitable building lots. The elevation existing at the backs of the (planned) houses is lower than the proposed re -graded elevation by from 12 to 18 feet. Because of the slope of the lots even after re -grading, houses would have to be of the daylight -basement type. If it shall be required that the "Average Building Elevation" is established from the condition "prior to development", the ABE would be set 7-13 feet below the lowest elevation of the basement of the houses. Consequently, there would be insufficient height to construct the main floor and garage. This can be seen on Sheet C2 of the attached drawings. C. "That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located. " If granted, houses would be built in styles similar to others within the plat. Heritage Woods Tracts H & J Variance Request Page 2 of 3 Not only would the filling not be detrimental to the public welface, the filling of these lots will have the beneficial effect of providing greatly enhanced stability to the base of the 25 h Ave S roadway, which has in the past been subject to undermining and slides. D. "That the special circumstances of the subject property are not the result of the actions of the owner of the subject property. " The existing slope of Tracts H & J is 2:1. This grade was constructed by Parklane Ventures in order to provide support to the adjacent 25t' Ave S. The grading plan was approved after review by the City of Federal Way. At that time, Schneider Homes held no interest in the property, was not involved in any way with that construction. Respectfully, SCHNEI-D HOMES, INC. ennis At edson, P.E. Manager of Development & Construction Heritage Woods Tracts H & J Variance Request Page 3 of 3 KING COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT NO. 39 FEDERAL WAY FIRE DEPARTMENT 31617 - 1 ST AVENUE SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003-5299 March 12, 1998 To: Community Development Review Committee RE: Heritage Woods Res. Height Var./UP498-0003/Harris The Fire Marshal's Office has no comments pertaining to this project. Respectfully Submitted, -Io-P-6'Q Greg Broze�c Fire Marshal's Office Business Phones: Seattle 253-839-6234 Tacoma 253-927-3118 FAX: 253-946-2086 King County Fire District # 39 is an equal opportunity employer. LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT 316271st Avenue South • P. O. Box 4249 ■ Federal Way, WA 98063 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA OF: March 12,1998 ATTN: Mr. Jim Harris Senior Planner SUBJECT: Agenda Item No. 5 — Heritage Woods Tracts H & J Residential Height Variance UP498-0003 The District has no comment on this issue. Date: .3���I`'� Mary. Yo#g U Supe isor f Technical/Support Services Direct Line: (253) 946-5400 CnV OF �" e, �;, MA$TERLAND.USE APPLICATION: �0 DEPARTMENT OF COMMi71 iTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES V (j-''F FI 33530 First Way South, Federal Way, WA 98003 (253) 661-4000 -Fax (253) 661-4129 81JILDING DEPT. APPLICATIONNO. { r D Date February 16, 1998 Project Name Heritage Woods, Div. 1 Agent Parklane Ventures/ Name of Applicant Schneider Homes, Inc. Owner Schneider Homes, Inc. Applicant Address 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila 98 Phone (206) 248-2471 Signature Parklane Ventures, 612 4370 Dominion St 0 (253) 946-3652 Owner Name/Address Phone (if different than applicant) Burnaby, Gana a Property Location 25th Ave S & 26th Ave S @ S 280th P1 Kroll Zone Legal Description a portion of NW 1/4 of SE 1/4, SW 1/4 of NE 1/4, NE 1/4 of SW 1/4, of S33, T22N, R4E, W.M. Project Description Record existing tracts as-,re6idential building lots. Requires variance to FWCC 90-51 to measure height of structure from re -graded lot elevation rather than "existing" grade elevation. Parcel Number(S) Tr - '1960800500 Tract J — 3260800510 Type of Permit Required: SEPA Notice Sign Checklist Mailed Board Site Plan Review R R Land Surface Modification R R Boundary Line Adjustment Binding Site Plan R R R Short Subdivision Subdivision R R R Shoreline R R Variance R R R Conditional Use R R R Use Process I R R Use Process II R R R Use Process III R R R Quasi -Judicial Rezone R R R X Variance R* R R Comp. Plan/Rezone R R Annexation R R Lot Line Elimination Pre -Application Meeting SEPA Only R R R = Required * = Optional b Ci Mi _L.,.ry.t Revs® 8/ &W CITY OF FEDERAL WAY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: February 25, 1998 TO: Community Development Review Committee (CDRC) Members Stephen Clifton, Public Works Development Services Manager (1 copy) Lee Bailey, Lead Plans Examiner Mary Young, Supervisor of Technical Services, Lakehaven Utility District Jerry Thorsen, KC Fire District #39 FROM: Jim Harris, Senior Planner PROJECT PLANNER: Jim Harris PHONE (253)661-4019 PLEASE RESPOND BY: Application review March 12, 1998 FILE NUMBER: UP498-0003 PROJECT NAME: Heritage Woods Tracts H and J Residential Height Variance PROJECT ADDRESS: 25th Place South at 28000 Block, In Heritage Woods PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request to use the finished lot grade established through separate grading permit to measure height of future residences on Tracts H and J. Proposed homes will be typical daylight basement type. The amount and depth of fill proposed by the grading permit application dictates the need for height variance. ZONING: RS 7.2 PROJECT CONTACT: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, (206)248-2471 NOTE: DRCMEMO.but N N N N N N W w w w W L„ -n N X: F X u) 1-+ -"n N�C 1 N S F+ "n N QJ ,- TI N h r m0%> mrnN mO�-- N mcomN mwmN� m0o> N CD0M4` ZC71044` 0Njn41 ON mod` 0 N m _r` 0Nr'"� M tlM0 -14� L> O ms- ;XzO mN--1O rill NM7O nil -+X0 M H I Cl f -+ I X) CT LA I ;a a0 C I -;o m 1 70 W ni 1 3� cnOO z CD D O > 3O D x O D :;a0 r ;cN i Cn>tj r3Z<N rN N rN I� rN f•+ N -1` Zm<ro raD 0 J C7 L)) -Jm W 11 Ci h+ �wrO n r-;o O M:-10O o -I o T-1 Ln I D• > S7 1 DSi 1 DSTy 1 -< -i Z O co O -< -1 i 0 -< D O i •C O z O s c� o m v, a m z cn r- .o D .1 a- co z + z Xx z CD < < DLnD 2L >-< b Dm z L > --4 r rs L4 70 + to ch C7 D m Lnz m -< v z m r In D i N •D W �D N �D ► + �D CJ� �D .D F-+ co %D co :D OD o ® z co aJ W 0 .b O �o O 1-+ O .O O N O � U1 z O U•) 0 %lo O -1 O N W .D Co .O w co W :D N J w � N N N N N W w LU W W T1 N o= f-+ TI rV 70 r-+ -n N x: �-+ : -n ►-+ 3 1•-r i -n N F m ul=N . mco0N niQODN mCTTaN mco DN CDN�-• -P` ONr•l1 O Nr.r o070� � ON--ir m41-10 mWro mN7lqO m0T7Co ' mN--1O ;c ►--i I 7C Cr 1 x� m I 7n I z lZ c I a In In 0 D o v M b D Cn L. O b 3 0 r02N r370N r- :z N rho►-+ r- NJ F- c uI ►i w Hm�- 2 -I Or �-Icuo �rz0 crro cWzo Y--ioo b 27D 1 Dt-+m l 2> F+D I DN I yz z 1 -< -1 r" o -< 11) t_ O N C) m D cn Lo a z J --1 + Cn r N CDm 0 :E m D O v r a-<z n-< » z D 0 X -0 z r z + m 7D r m m o + o r In -1 n <n s to ., mz m m L C w w 41 rn .D C, .D 00 M .D .D Cn z rb .D Oo •D O .D O •O O 1.0 O .D O .D O .D O .D O .O N w •D W .D W .0 W N w -) N co �-- m --j %) o►-.to4L m N S O ;a I . D In 7Q O r d O N C10 co :r m m o D N m 1 -<z-�o o � m m� N N W ly it N F-A -n N co N mCDb N 1 mJcN oNr� t�r�tn� M 7, 0 m rlj 0 70 W m I X] I n 70 o D cn 70 O r N �-j r 0 0 JC') N ' NCD1D z -•1 70 b; z M m 0 L LD 1 DN70 1 X: a) n m n + -a c X 0 n TI M m 0 Cp 4� I co %0 0 O .D O CT O 110 O w W 1.0 W U) •. Y. T J S - v n w n N N N H+ � - 4• -n N - 4 P.- -n N to r- rn v Z 'n N rn r + O m-.1> N m WON I;- mmN m-,I--I -J i C D O N — 4` 0 x� X r •A C7 O n'1 O 4 cn --I mbzo mm0 coa3lno . marl<ot 73 c7 1 70 rZ I M d 0 1 20 m I t. m S b In b 7> v, O z X z 0 3> Z 0 $.: _s �- r r O r N O O > O r C11 O t n) � N m <r Oro z r, CD J r- 1`i N 0 70 c 7- co m o s -a a n .D o 2r rx C) o f :K 3>N 1 AZC_ I S 1 D NC I i Z m -< z C- 0 -< C7 0 �c D O -C z -< O •i n m 0D00 InmW D iJ+! 0 Cn i 3. 70 X z z Z-r n m •• n(4 m n cn r n rn d n m m t X s n z Ln to ?:. n c) m D {- m z W Co CT 2 =w• 10 Un .D w Z .D C7 {- o uo .n m m o ca { z LU O N {. m O �D 0 �.c N .f i O �1 { { N N N N { �• W W W lu t' -nNm" T)N-aN xN-iF•+ T) N:t f-+ f• C') r mJCN m NmN DCDXN m OoC7N t d �• C7 ► (17 1� O 1 -� -i "CI D p, O F-+ n z% { • 3 mNSO m ►-jrno r0ClO rn OD O t. : 7) 1 71 J m I m -r- 2 1 m O m 1? m DCn7D0 D - Cn0 CO D mO { z r 00 rN 00 <IvX o -q -�- N CD J 0o Z k-n D N w Co iC N i to z co m o �c -I o r- m D o .� --4 m o i ^: DNS 1 D S70 1 r-4z 1 n ZZ 1 q• -<z-�0 -< co mxDo -< z0t 0 0ll n In o -< k n n m .D t x � co � < cn ry n _r �< � � �• -1 r Dmr� ft � t rn < m t I co CXl �1 OD � n �0 .D C 1 .D O IU { co 1� co o co .o � .D { O CT O O .D C .D i O W O J l� .0 O w Ln W .D Co .D W ID i i i w w D�N�N C '•.sI O N O O G7 0 C \n m -r- :u " I z (n z In V'1 N Z N N 3>cr)zull -r i> I 0 2 A w (n 70 -q w w -n -0 r r\j m Q > N 0 xo mcnm.fi :;J 0 _L I I. X %.D r < N -P, m o � r 1 ��DCO i n r H I a H �o n .� 41 DJ �D CD 0 I O � O tJ1 0 .D = O+ O+ W %b W N i W w , � W ; 'n N moo 0 co 'rn 0 © N C N f• 3> m w Z O w a r 1 -a�zm 1 b o r- n �,D rNpoo mznN' m A M' --i z o >_ --i z x -< r o -I ►-� o - n o u1 n n m rn C < < 2 amr mrnC rs zrH m -i c� z CO z m m U1 W �D O .D lJ1 00 O CD p O N H p O ON N O w -i cn o0 w w w w -nNtti N i1Nwr1i m00raN m OD ,;o N 0-I`Co (DrC0 rfl Nv)� MNu) P- m NS 1 it7 Nz 1 7> n %D m (r m O r --I CO � r- -i � . D .-1 m I > ►-+ m I -C --1 71 0 -C -1 x O > O ys ;o -u _0 ro m m m m O ;u I p 70 x� 70 Ln D N g c c r � r r r m rn N (n r-41 r klD co N co %D O O O W 0 i w W W W I- N-0 N -n -o r N c0omN mo>N onl,no 0 7ro CN>411 m MM4% :a�j I x0s 1 Z �D D X b �D Lrno rm bCz ON XNL►- 1 A 1 3C") O -<IDCO ►'� �` -i N 1-, + > r a 7c -� v -< c5 �7 H 0 (n ;u C-) w t �O co �D O co 0 CO O O �.I O Vl O f+ CT Ol rV w N LU W w w W "nNS N W -nNCJN N �0.(n0, N ---IO. (n0. mco> N mCAi(7N Culn0 Ctr n0 0412:0 . 041 H=Cb sco mN�" r, mw i Oz' O O7_ 0 20%nr I m I ., m I a --i\o b cnw rcn►-�0 rv,H0 r- moo ro a booN 1>0O" Hzj raw Cm11D Cmo r �I xo" > w A 1 D n 1 37 2. 1 702 1 - -Imo -zzo nso nmo n z o rn 0 F-• . m o" ' mz irX z= zX n < m > --q m --� m -i m cn m V) �s m> + H H z �z cc co I^ >y r n r n �m e < off a 0 In m Ln r C H m Z \D co I w O 4 Cr% O �D 0 .D W N 1 w �D � CD �D ' m � LU LO w w l Uj w 1. N � N II -n N % N m N 2 N --q 0% cn O% -1 Os (n OP rn00"N mmm N C= V1C)o C l-nno 04%r0 0�z0 7zr.jm0o x►- =CD mocn� mwor Bozo zozo 70 4` 0 1 70 W m I m I H m I > z 1.0 - }y x� r cn H O r V1 - O rz o - ro(no ao0w > 0 0 cmfi Cmr- �rsrn Ozrn C--A7u0 2_�710 >0 1 D I x> 2 I b 2 I -� -� z o -< z z o n s o n= 0 D D -.I > p m 0 H rn 0 �D � m g r a z z z X r-c DH< �m -Im fT1 + rn cn rn (n + z 70 m m m 0oz co In m + r- n r n L 0 > C7 O b 7CJ om z r J5 .D m \-O cD .o � O O .0 H .D ►-.D 00 lD 03 1.0 a1 p LU .p 00 'D co z LU N -1 O% (n O` C�r1r>o x�Yco Bozo w m I r Ln w O > 0 C O Cmm Di ! n 2 O rn O v1 zs --1 m rn o H m z rn 0 w N --irn(nCT, C 0 n 0 7c 1-- 2 co �0z0 H m I r Ln 1--q O > 0 0 0 C m .D b 2 1 n=o mow z z --Im m cn m 0o z r c� < O w N --i (7` L/I CT 7: ►� s to Bozo H rn I r (n H O >000 C rT1 � » 2 1 nS O m©z zz --4rn m (n M H cuz rn 0 Sw d \.0 C % co .n ►y �A C3] � N w -n W L o F- mNnrN ot-Pzr, mulZO X N H I n -a c Co H c- O A (n b I rr N C b v) b < mz w N -� ON cn rn C un n O 7c 1-- s Cn C0z0 H m I r (n H o ]> O C7 O c rn +s C -1 X 0 r s I nsO m b H z 3 -I m m cn H co z rn < 0 N -n N 'l N rn (n o N o�---m4- m 0% x o 3J (n 1 3:1- cn a I- c- N N C Cr CD O O b . V1 I -< -1 0 O sz0� z b (n 0 i 0 CD .D O .D O •D w lZ N liJ 71 N ® r- 4 M�.nmN oozy moz o m m I n(n--10 r N J cb 7 wry � -< -I r- -0 21% 2 -� n b z A -_j -1 J Cr \-D O\ .D Q` I'D CD %D Ln CD �D CD 1.0 Co ~ `D `D O O Ci) %D 00 vD (b \D O �D 00 ID W � Ln .D W �D `T1N<N N `nt\) z R` N Y r%j;0N 41 N 'f1N -N N N! `flN2N 41 N N N fi r w filIV ir1N C) N RlNQIv rnNON rnN CN Llt-nLnN riLT-: N rn W0 N { -nN�N mco2N T r\)-nN TNLAN mr-izN TiNCN 111 rnNOcr (7) o0 Nr1i m'ozo o NrN rnrbo 0 41 zN m%)00 ;-� W XN C7HCN � O W r-,N mr--+rN M3N ou,r-,0 m m0N cnC71C Mm [N mac Lr. H I -coma Rl�� O m O.�O ffI OCic"l0 Mcon0 rn0-�O rn 070 • 0 bL!1ro r f71w »(ADO DLn0d n Ln DO ��,Ln I 0 > bLn� O rnNz fllNz 0 rilOr-,O ni0 N r XW r- N r N flllSlmN rQ F-+ bLn20 D(� O v n O D QO D O ', > 0 W � -i O N r-+ x co x O N fll U1 e CD D O N L7 W r r� C m .D r rnN N D r! r Gar-• N rn Ln r 3r� N D W rNrrd rNrO rND nrs I a., m 1 >41m 1 � CO C O b zI 2 r-a O 1s N 1 .� --1 r- 0 W 3►� W r� � bo 7 .D O -� -I :: 0 TX -< -i r O -< -i G7 O n n o H Z' i 1 -C N O 4' I � -� s o D lJ1 b 1 D VI V1 � -G m �l C s N O Sb� -< -•� r d 2C70 -< -� rn a -C a O -t o CDC bV1N D(rY + O Dr- + D IGm0h �Q,�D � X � S VI r �<G)� W D7� Cl r -1 r- r o -� Ln bRi 1> 1007 D (A o b �' rn a �G n ril G-G > m + D _ 2 p �- D m Ln m Cn Ln + -C •Uz• 'C) r- rn > r n n X > m r c) m m ! r v ,� D 1y i f t z I e w f co `o O kD co .p O CCS N Co .D O r� (b `d C:).D co .D Z m O .D Ln W O .O O .0 ti ./] O (b O .D O .O p i E C7 co O p. Cy O .PS w w .o w .a m Ln W .D w% o w O O o .n ' { W l� r N N N N TI NC6N m N C N TINLnN rn N m N m N X N M fm I L, CiU -1 nwco N n Iv f7 N N T N N1 -ts N mN zp mw-�om N dWmN cN 10-•cN mWN rn waN oNO N7• Xcrzo mrr N m mDN f N m O~rnw"m T NNo ' Z7 Ln I N I 70 m i Nn0 Mon MW 0 mt`N -r�00 arn�- m��o m�om� a m-4c bLn o r nvr o ncn o D I bcnoo n'7 1 s>Lnmo m m I acnro A ►-r 1 b~zU 1 aLn o oNNN 70 to W ND A r O W rN� U rN O f rN-tN r rN xycnz0 r b000 n�rm-o m I Dc11M O z00 r0 N7yN N<O ��30 co r. GO r\j r1 Nm0 - N�-+ No"0 00 ~ C70i0, r 70►-+ rN zN W D rNNC rQ O nrr I D.r►- I m a,ro 1 n�r-i1 D�`M I o D.f` 1 Zao�+o D I ono 00 z;�000 N i7oro W o �:mop m no 2 •0 o o = W -< -1 -� O 2 s v1 -< m o 2 -< - a< o -< -I O -C --� z o s -1 xi 1 D Z O D In z 1 -< rr) xy o 0 1 D o z I b Co., 1 O f -< G) 0 2� Z 2 r oo I f S rn N m � 0 bad m-� > m c/1 D 'p D -0 z n O � r nr%a D Z7 rrrl A O � < ;v F G Ln -ai Tt 2 O ra r F, r-o rz m-i n n mC 2ym-I D Ln D + i N m N 0 Ln z a ci + o m m n z x ;: �v 70 m Rl U1 -c r- r o X r P" % + r m Vl D c 3 Ln C :. n r m O r N � o�-, d c O.D ul O `D O .O rn 0 .O O c�N .o a O m~ mN .Dao W a\ W O 0 -.1 W D CO .p 0 `D .D W D W W lZ W G� 11 .p U W � 0 NO O O .A W 111 W .D W .G s -n N N 41 N 41 N o N mOD0N TlN V1N mOnfV -nNSN mNN "1.1Nr K) mNCnN 'nN;U N iINcc) N N 'iI fV N N mN-4N N n R1rN N llNm�V 00r-ui 00Sw O �--Z W dN� W mNON 0 OE W m NC N 00Po Nj mNSN MQ+r N m W mN mN:vN r1l N(•PiN riiN<fV 700,m0 xi O, fr 1 mNSo m dm0 m0;70 rfi Orp m�t•10 01--'r-+N M-P. ZNf71N z f- wN O OrnN CD "n--N �7NDN > D X7 1` r, I m N I X7 D I X7 D I :U S I 70 m --INn0 -�V1m0 m<G m O,r• O M41z0 O rNrF-J D -1 O rNNo D (n O r OO n VI O 0 r O D (n Z 0 co D U) -n O l D (n O m I N X, 'O E S 7C O D cn z 0 X7 (n 1 b cn O :YJ (A 1 a cn O N O -J co NDO1 --o-r N d` N W r " i, Nm1 r (n.A F_O .r � DDT r OW r 7)w r 9W �z n s -� 0 1 DSO I > Oo<O 1 EODr O Ed30 EG o0 r NC l51 ico V1p D3M W mm d 3►-+r-� -0-40 N v� NO-J N lil r0 -< SO b NH I LC DN-G I DNr� I �a� Yy W 0 1 D W D 1 z I' -�S 1 r coa D i1D 1 s co O D -C,m 1 � ODEO > A►-+ 1 Ebyra Z U L �UZo d lJ m - O z- i OZ~ -<Im< OC-r� M D m D >D E A CA + v DD D b (i1 S i -� m D (A - f m b V) D v1 O -r<Ln D (n + vl n cn a + -i S rn L m D rn D ►� I Z O r" m �; f 1 N a { z i oW W � �rD �D O � Oo D o 10 OOO co Ln m I- 0�1 O %D d Q; O p 1 Q p O.Oo co .z w .D W z W \.D W F+ p .D w w ►-• w 4` 0 lZ G w d .O i' N w w �o444 W �D N -n N 41 N N N � �. N ;;j rV mcomw -n.o-ifV m4�DN -nNZN i mNTN T1NSN mNC]N (n013N CODDN -nfVm N i -nrJnN `nNTJrV -nNDN _01`nN! itNEN MNSN i OOD w rn �'d0 co %_n W OOr W i C7F-+'TI W ONW MN70N o0D W mNON pHx N mNON 0�+;�N mNX7N D1020N rn">N mNa N x N 1 m r0 70 (n O 1 m41V70 m�'YI0 3:.l--10 mWD0 mo70 o rnm--Io mrNO N 00'_00 0 -+X7N C:)wzN i LCO D ;00 1 X7 rn V1Z0 D x I 3>v1i0o z m l mF-'700 70 7c I b(ntn0 7� 1 X7 T I X? 1 to m l mNXJO :c l m m OCl O x0 1 rN rN o r O r 00 xCOtn0 r 0 D(A00 rDD.9, >LnXo0 r D Ln CD 0 co O D(AZO D tnn O N SN E z z 0 14mT D wCD0 IVpJ Etoo 200 NW Ln E0Dm0 VI w E--100 NC)I-+ CrON NSA r0;)a4- mN CX7c"1� mom r w NO w r07CW C p. U 1 D �T1 E 1 DNC 1 DNX7 I DS 1 Ewm0 DNO 1 E-Ir O D2-C 1 E00 0 x Nzo MM:>0 i_ CIO CDn -< no D -<o�-(d <zno-<z700 -< o D WC) 1 DOD -I 1 0 zx I D.AZ 1 Lrn E< ZED E(n omw d v D N C7 G1 O` NL W -<;uSQ 0D00 -<w00 MzN m a m 0 ---�ya a D m D i� E D (n E O D to C m E m Eco d V1mz ON mn Sr Q E O NO11 Em-I Y> u D D w D r D -1 n -,am Zv cn D 1` S 'l m O m -N+ D to cn a Z rn -4 10 m = m r- Tr � r( U'I C, N lTl N GG �D O �D (� N C1� O C1� �D Oi N ~ OD O 0 O \O �O co CCD �-- �D O �-- •O �D OD O %D p � O J O J O �D O .D W U 1 Q O N O I'D O O` O or)O OD Z W �O W 41 LO �1 0 W O LO CD 1.0 0 �1 0 -.1 W �.D W Co N Ln w m W O -1 � -4 � N � N � � -:1 T N C_ �I m _l n \J) i! N rfl �1 m —1 Z'n D lJf S CJ� C fv m Cri N CL O 1'iI W r-, -n N u N N it N m N N -n N -� N N -n rV Z N N -n N C•) IV 7C r+ N SN C7�On CT ml-;\-r. 0coror, W Ni,�D z D� nO? r1) m r)1 N 0 w X W m co r N ! 0Nrw mO-CN m coC7D N TI Ct)DIV .,N sinN X F-' Cri I rn rnr- ?0 -J � 1 C���-.o 3J -!Ns0 rmwnw rnwz,r owcnw m w (� r-� op-<w rT) N r O ac;�W m O< O �Hcw �N(n0 -( I Z(/)D O CU r 1 g � p w r 1 D -�O x -J D I ;ia z 1 70 W M 1 x T. lYi z O r cc (n 1 rNZQ iJ �w nwzo rN)> It.. r-�Nz0% D(n 1 0 r D i0c v p D (f,,-)o yl to z 0 w m CT 0 m .r p O z W O a 7 I --1 r- i O D Zr I D O O �C- I '�C-O N X --ico O E Goz 0 N -i O Z20 N Ys m � z�0 C7 00 m- O+ o 0 0 Si I: D O n2C 1 y2D I Do(n 1 b 00 I D C7-1 1 -� -10 C� r� 1 =Dn CO""' �' S-Cz D-Iw ; D r-+ W D00 � iii 20w > >'m D z (nm mX !<m �.<n z A C-0 Z7 S1` x (n -ir nrn< Drn� Dro nrn Dm z (n CD o cn o V) (n + r + z + rrn ' x N to m r x z In -r C- m ! N -N-4 a m m ' r ,I • w t_n J lJ) I WIt 1-0 m N ` O W w .ZD r� . o Cn �D CO O m �D .D [b �D .D �D rD rb .D .b CD .D -P` �D o O o In (� .n 0 c -1C).n j o �b a .n o .n C7 �D C)ID co O r5 � W �D ( .b N Ol W �n 0 .O W ! c �b 0 .D W W r kb W 110 W D � ID lti V1 tYi TN��} m-.1C Qn TNZr m�lDw m-11CO0 DOND� (ntnra 1 S[TC71� -nNmfi V)a,-nN (VC)7 N .b0N N T rV itN J�btnCSti O�OZ-itT O Q]r(T � � C'1CJ ' m r-+ Ct) mCOCN � O W-n W M�1DN mcoCN m m 1`ZN m OoDN r-i r+ � �D b 1 iTlO n-1r � �r 1 r XO mq-n ►-+ D UIz (a) -� 0%mf� OOco W mNCo O )> w-�w --1 w O Orw D c O D m 0 IM F-+ N I D ;K 0 O N I cc O 0 r -� (n C I CD m z o tr Vi ► 1 D ZO j � 1 'C `D I D0 i i m 0 r-tiO iC7 W (n �N3 p rNOfn.4, Cr rN-C� nOZO Z O rN CT r-Xn0 m br r D C_O rNp N r WC_0 m rnC]rr n 00 r Zn0 M:Z m0 l` 2:�00 C -� -1 rC-)N D C7 11 r :a SO O x W i i--ID O M N S w -i z D NC)i-- N -1 )> i D O r I n A C) I > := m I S'L'I00 D S_ z z �i �0�1* �D rr7 I D p n o I n -1 1 D O fn I �< �O �D S u m Ll IV;uN O +4- z � <G)w D J` �DCb (nDN + D m > Dr a m r-(S DH C 'C Dmn m (nm < < -�C) C_ nrn n Cl C7 iJ to m C_ m C (n (n r-' a v1 + C z N r 0 D + 7p D z dz r Z n m (n r O z z 0 Cl) O w �l �O .J �D �O C p O O w w �O �D 10 Cn O O W �D �O �D .D �I �1 O N O V ! �! .D D COC lJ7 D, O 110 ID I'D .D �(] O O O W O� �D �D iD �D Cb w O G� v O �n �O p �b 00 O W N V) %n I'D �O G (b F-' C• O 0 %D .p D t � N N in N (n N 'T) rV N m N : m CO Z ry W o O C-) w m O C] 0 z z 1 Mii GJ G7 n I> r a r r'J m NxO1` N)AN ME a' z o D C7 o I j a 0 C-) I D C w <v) amr- Dmm (n (n m C� + L < n �D N m 10 ' be �n { o 1 ; o .b W J' W �O N Iv -n rJ D IV i1 N W N m rl z N rn OD r N O In Ow ; 0 OD W : m wmO m OC)0 70 co m 1 NJC 1 D (n O D 0 0 r rJ 0�-- r WC I- N Z VI C z O :E: z. D 0-11 D O 1 D 00, D r r� X: < 3 M: < -< D m D D (no (n m N N D oD o (n xs r m `a �D O CD �O O �D p � w .b W .o U1 l)1 .Sf � I D icJ un iIN�-7J m �J O 111 -nNS J rn J D u -n rvNJ m J 2 l.n mNx J m 01 O �_n In -11NZ J In -nN �E l.l1 TN u'r-J lJ7 Tw0-j Ui TN WJ 411 TNZJ to -nN;r-J ! C-) O 0 C1� ram` New n CD r- CT rJ Cb ram+ rn C7 Oo �-, Cr 0 !-' r-4 Ch m Vx m i71 d N cn 4� m V1 D to 0 W r 0, i rn .n -i l.n f C N n o" 1 m to D to O F-� C O� m 0 m to C7 O r CT m J C) In d C C� m J 1-4 to O �D r 2 I m�--�r�� 7J Co I m W m " 7o 0 z I rn.r- or� ;FS O f m�o.,►� ma -�� m `D '� f` r m J r F-•� f m to C7 + m J x I✓ �D m N -G � C7� "I N r F--' u1 J n xi o rNo D ru O I rNm� m n r b M ri1 1 r7- Ln 7rs b rtl 1 D cn � o i 70 m i cn x) b x r I a (A �-+ o f f l I D (n -� o m I a 0 -A o Z7 do rn I D z o m W :-+ I D D 0 -0C)r_.-1rn0 'o t)1 :U J r-NmC, to iJ kp r rn N U1 U) r roc N A r� i r ui N (� .D i r ztn N C") �r ' r N C_ l.'1 f r --Itn N rN lr rNz� rr1 1 r+ z I �--1c�o D 2 �-� o s_J-•10 r �-� a �J700 t �Jcnt7 �Jrao1 W X�cDo I N 2 r✓ �zno N In .D sz 0 n ---10 -c - o 1 -< 70 b 7s 2 3 I -< D O D .D rn 1 -< -� ao D .D 7• 1 -c -I r71 0 3y .O D I < --� b D .D 1 D .D cn 1 u .fi D I D G D I )> C7 C1 1 < rn m ;o� l7 r-+ 7 r CJ O to C7 Y 2 4` 2 z 0o z G� N -t - to O 2 -i Ch ' -< --q m 0 2 _0S O -< - I o Oo to -< z a .D a inr -� ► r o D w D i x z D D X x7% D C m D 'b z z D i1 m i m f X• 2 Z D E< i< z cn cnor rr r D -7 T D _7 C D Z7 v T 7o a m 3 D r1 Cl rn �+ 2 r+ rm r- C- rD a t C 70 i + m z + N z cn W E S 3 , m t z m + f z 1 co H D r z r C'1 + > D D z• f t1 ! r 3 a z m I m OU J CD C7 lJ1 J f J ''D W to Ci7 h co .D co .D Do .n .D C1C r J Ca ► + CA .D %D O CU .D .D N f (b •D .D N co 4) 111 .D 1 is F� N f-+ C7 .D O .D O do O .D r O .D O .D .D O .D 00 N W � W .D W .O W .D W .D o o� W o .c o .D o .D o .D o .b o .a , f W .p �. W -Z W .a W .O W In W 1) 1 J%In{ J i to J to j I J to J to J J F rJ J 'rlN-1 J -4 rn J a to Y1NCDJ 1 m J D to T7N2 J m J C to C 'T1 NX J m Ln m to -nrV 3 J i m to .� -n N C_�l i to TN SJ ` to -nN 7CJ to TN C_J to TNNJ to TNV1J Mmr-rn m�rE✓ oWr-rn k o01-1 ztr to nNrcr m to C to aWcno� � m In C to oWcnrn m to r-+ to oNcno, m to D to o�c70• m in n %A Daze, m J ry V1 o.nza• X N O 1 MNZC7� mNZf-+ T i m 1 m Wr N 70 tl m I mOz� m m I roror m0..I min m mF-Am m m�--C mtifl-A D X O r N J D N O r N a -c O D cn -C 0 a 1 D LM -C O x1 O 1PO a LA D Cn C- O D to 0 0 D v1 N O D 200 1 U1 ? O CT to n" 7 0 r N Cr Ln X Ch r 0% N)-0-r- r N{ N r w Ch N m O r to N al Gn r m t» N -n q% r z to N 11 r to r N N to 0 D S C I O D S C7 1 2: > 0 a i -{ I XJmO I .4-JD O ZJ z0 EJ Z70 �EJ -110 ZJ CEO X:JDO 1:: Ztn. -G z O -C 2 O -C 2 O D •D 0 -f -i (n O D •D 7t7 I -i C_ o D .D C_ I -r D 0 ID.0 C I -1 n o D .D PD 1 -c •--I m O D •O r l --1 D .n -I 1 D 0 -1 1 0 0 .D �m 0> LU M: D;o 0 r- J �mm 2 -•< N 2 O 0% m m 0 Z m r S -� co D O Z C W -<--f 1 0 2 -< J m 0 1- < r D F"rCn < C7 D b D m D'O3 D i7 D'D z DT n) :E: D"O r O "O m l a"O C' <m 1 D mz ' m 0 cn cn z r r- m r r r+ r r a ` + Co X L I m cn D X n m m N O a r D E r 7c rn � 2 z D � _ .D N .D to 1` •D Ch J .D J N .O .p W .D Co 7-I .D N •_ Oo .D CD .D .D co .D O .D Ov In O to Ct) .D .D (70 .D 00 .D .O J C .D .D O co .D .D 1` OD .D .D O .D O In 0 .O O .D O .D O .D 0 .D O .D O .D O .D 0 .D O O .D O .D W .D W .D W .D W W W .D w .D W .D W z .D W .D O .D W .D O .D W .D 2312 South 284t" Place Federal Way, WA 98003 August 7, 1998 Mr. Jim Harris, Associate Planner City of Federal Way 33530 11t Way South Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 Subject: Notice of Public Land Use Hearing Heritage Woods Height Variance File Number: UP498-0003 Dear Mr. Harris: We are writing in response to the Notice of Public Land Use Hearing for the variance submitted by Dennis Alfredson of Schneider Homes, Inc. We would like this letter to be submitted to the Hearing Examiner since we are unable to attend the public hearing on August 11, 1998. It has been brought to our attention that significant amounts of fill have already been brought into this site to cover the existing grade to construct lots with a view. Due to this alteration flooding of the existing adjacent homes has occurred. What will happen when additional si nificant amounts of fill are brought in? With the increase height to the elevation the new owners have found the trees in the green belt to be obstructive to their views. This has resulted in the owners cutting down trees that are protected in the original agreement concerning the green belt. We find this variance request to be very strange since the builder has already built homes on lots that he has elevated. Is this a new variance for different lots or will this variance be retroactive to the existing one? Thank you for your time. Sincerely, William & Melissa Boutelle (�r �JyI�LUi.SC✓V August 8, 1998 RECEIVED Once of the Federal Way LendUngem* City of Federal Way Land Use Hearing Examiner Federal Way City Council Chambers 33530 1 st Way South Federal Way, WA 98003 Dear Land Use Hearing Examiner: �. � G 2- dZ nFGe've© LE 19y8ClrY .CYpFFl%DpFY Tim Hancock 2220 South 284th Street Federal Way, WA 98003 (425) 251-3900 (Work) (253) 529-1391 (Home) My name is Tim Hancock and I live behind the Schneider Homes development, Heritage Woods. I am unable to attend the hearing on August 11 regarding File Number UP498-0003 but I wanted to take a moment to express my opinion on the subject. I have serious concerns about the methods Schneider Homes uses in developing property, as well as their need to add additional fill to make 7 more lots in a development that is slated to have over 110 home sites. Let me give you a little background as to what I have witnessed over the last 3 years. Approximately 3 years ago the Heritage Woods land was cleared and sat dormant for a period of time. There was a natural spring at the top of the hill behind my house that ran behind the house of my neighbors to the south as well. In the fall when the water table rose there was constant water flowing out of the spring into my yard and into the basement of my neighbors' home. The developer made a dike to retain the water that was approximately 8 to 12 feet high, 25 feet wide, and about 1/4 mile long, running North to South along the ridge. When we had steady rain for a few days the water rose to the top of the dike within about a foot of going over. I made Schneider Homes aware of this situation. They then cut a ditch to make the water run to the East towards Military Road. The small lake that was created stayed well into the spring after the rain had stopped. The dike showed fractures on the backside and if it had broken who knows what would have happened to my home, my family and our neighbors. Schneider Homes then filled in the dike which raised the level of the grade. I am unaware of any notice to neighbors at that time, such as the variance or the grading permit that they are applying for now. After 2 years of filling and compacting the area, the ground now gets very saturated when it rains. It is to the point that a person cannot walk across it without sinking into the ground. I have contacted Schneider Homes on various occasions to find out how much longer the filling and compacting was going to last and was basically brushed off. I was told that this is just the way it is. However, after a few persistent phone calls, I was finally told last year that the filling and compacting was only going to last until September of 1997. Yet, the filling and compacting has continued this spring and summer. I believe Schneider Homes is trying to cap off a natural spring. If they succeed in doing this, where will the water go? I don't believe Schneider Homes cares where the water goes as long as r-d�1 it's off their property. Because by filling and capping off the land, they are making a couple of more lots to sell. I also don't believe that Schneider Homes has any consideration for the people that live adjacent to their development. They have done nothing to control the dust, and have been running earth movers and vibrating compacting machines well after 6:00 in the evening. I understand that I should expect to be a bit inconvenienced with the development behind me, but not for the amount of time it has been going on. Two years is getting to be a little much for my family and myself. My neighbors also share in this concern. We could deal with the noise of homes being built, but the continual shaking of our house by the compactors has become out of control. And to know that the reason all the compacting is being done is to cap off a natural spring which will then inevitably come through to our yard is very exasperating. , The latest Schneider Homes move took place on Thursday, August 6t" My wife called me at work to tell me what to expect when I drove up the road to our house that evening. In one day, Schneider Homes built up a pile of dirt, stumps, and other things I can't quite describe right behind my house. This pile is about 18+ feet high and about 30 feet long. Since it is not covered or contained by any means, if it rains, this pile begin to disintegrate and come directly towards my house, since water runs down hill. This is just another example of why I feel that Schneider Homes is a very careless developer and has no regards for the surrounding homes that have been there longer than their most recent development. On the issue of their request for a variance to fill in more lots in their development, I don't see the need to give them a variance, Altering the landscape to make room for more homes is a big mistake. It only takes one look at the mudslides and lost homes in the over -developed Seattle area to make one think. Adding dirt on a hill isn't a good idea. Where would the fill be coming from, and would it be clean of contaminants? I have seen huge piles of concrete with rebar sticking out, stumps, and other things piled in the back of their development (which is adjacent to my back yard). The strange thing is that the piles have been disappearing while the filling of land has taken place which makes me speculate about just where it is going. I have been in contact with Jim Pyrall and others within The City of Federal Way and have voiced my concerns. I would like to say that I have been very impressed with everyone that I have spoken to in the Planning, Code Enforcement, and general Information departments of The City. Everyone has been very courteous and prompt in returning my calls and I thank you for your concern. I am very song that I cannot attend the meeting on the 11t', however I would ask that my concerns addressed in this letter act as my voice in this matter. I would like to kept abreast of the outcome of this hearing by receiving a short summary of the decision that was made. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. I hope that you will take into account my comments and concerns. I have had strong first hand information dealing with Schneider Homes over the past 2 years and hope that you will take my thoughts into consideration when making your decision. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or would like any further information. Sincerely, Tim Hancock W 1. ICIDr5y it ' v - .,i7` O .66'fL _ BB'6L . " % i95,6t.9p6 RigI a PI N �$cl e� �� 2!!§@B9&!!m a!!§B§«■&!! # % . Z # 11R, MIK a 1111d ! ]1111101---- IH Uff r , � ! [54--- ; a G k k a i & | ���'� ` |■|| §-,| § |� after the close of the hearing. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may request a reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The application for the proposal is to be reviewed under applicable codes, regulations and policies of the City of Federal Way. The Official File is available for review during working hours (Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM) in the Department of Community Development Services, 33530 1st Way South, Federal way, WA 98003. Staff reports will be available for review one week prior to the hearing. Any questions regarding this proposal should be directed to David Graves, Associate Planner at 206.297.2106. Heritage Woods Tracts H & J (Lots 52-59) NI Height Variance Federal Way CityMap SCALE 1.5995 nblr ffis manesrrrrrNed rausr as ao^apnr„zl ra •r Sen:a�m c^. r� ie (;n• u1 %rdavar tvay nu:cs no �:am�: r a s : ; � � _ _� :-; -:• NOTICE OF PUBLIC LAND USE HEARING HERITAGE WOODS HEIGHT VARIANCE Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City of Federal Way Land Use Hearing Examiner at approximately 2:00 P.M. on August 11,1998 in the Federal Way City Council Chambers, 33530 - 1st Way South, Federal way, WA 98003. FILE NUMBER: File No. UP498-0003 TOPIC: The applicant has requested a variance from the calculation method for determining the maximum height allowable for a building, based on the Average Building Elevation, as defined in Federal Way City Code Section 22-1. The applicant's building sites are located in an RS-7.2 (Residential Single Family) zoning district. Pursuant to FWCC Sec. 22-1, Average Building Elevation (ABE) is taken prior to any development activity or at finish grade, whichever is lower. The slopes of the previously platted lots average approximately 29%, partially due to the approved road design and construction. Parklane Ventures is proposing to add significant amounts of fill to the lots in question and re -grade them to yield suitable building lots, under a separate grading permit application. Up to 18 feet of fill will cover the existing grade in the area of the proposed buildings. If the ABE is measured from the existing grade, the applicant will be unable to construct houses which match the size and character of the existing homes both adjacent to the subject property and within the subdivision. Variances from provisions of the Federal Way City Code, Chapter 22, are subject to Process IV, Hearing Examiner decision. PROJECT LOCATION: 25th Place South at the 28000 Block; Plat of Heritage Woods, Division No. 1, Lots 52 - 59. APPLICANT: Dennis Alfredson, PE Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #1 Tukwilla, WA 98188 Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner, either by delivering these comments to the Department of Community Development Services prior to the hearing, or by giving them directly to the Hearing Examiner at the hearing; or by appearing in person, or through a representative, at the hearing, and presenting public testimony. The Hearing Examiner will issue a decision on the application within 10 working days f amd AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION 1 Li m4w S-Ymf4z,.' hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the lcnvs of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Application ❑ Notice of Action ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance ❑ Notice of Determination of Non - Significance and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Non -Significance (SEPA) ❑ Notice of Environmental Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (SEPA) ❑ Notice of Proposed Land Use Action Notice of Public Land Use Hearing ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Land Use Application ❑ Other was nwded/faxe poste olal each of following addresses (see attached) on 1998. Project Name File Number(s) �_�4 � b= Signature Date - V/4 AFFIDAV6PRM REVISED 1/R/98 07/22/98 WED 09:45 FAX 2536614075 City of Federal Way sc TX REPORT sss CM 001 TRANSMISSION OR TX/RX NO 1149 CONNECTION TEL 92535527042 CONNECTION ID TNT-TEL. SALES ST. TIME 07/22 09:44 USAGE T 01'37 PGS. 3 RESULT OK To: r"XA— From: Subject. - Date: r7 Pages; including this cover sheet. co�z , f Phone: FAX SAW/ r � qr 07/22/98 WED 09:50 FAX 2536614075 City of Federal Way xc TX REPORT a 001 TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 1148 CONNECTION TEL 92535527042 CONNECTION ID TNT-TEL. SALES ST. TIME 07/22 09:49 USAGE T 01'38 PGS. 3 RESULT OK C 0- y E -R FAX5 H _E E T EEWEEEWEIE� - To: From: Subject: Date: r7 Pages: 3—ShIduding this cover shut. Co�NTSII 0222 1 Mwar-1.9, 7 �w, v z �ffi. IF Fax Phone: MMIIIM'139.N / 9,qt C O V E R FAX S H E E T Y"j-0 SLU�� From: FJ"Lelp� L.L� Subject: Date: rl Pages: including this cover sheet. COMAMNTS: Mayor Ron Gintz City Manager Kenneth E. Nyberg Council Members Jeanne Burbidge Jack Dovey Mary Gates Linda Kochmar Michael Park Phil Watkins 01 �a3 Fax #: Phone: City of Federal Way 33530 First Way South Federal Way, VITA 98003 253-661- 4000 ,Fax: 253-661-4129 after the close of the hearing. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may request a reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The application for the proposal is to be reviewed under applicable codes, regulations and policies of the City of Federal Way. The Official File is available for review during working hours (Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM) in the Department of Community Development Services, 33530 - 1st Way South, Federal way, WA 98003. Staff reports will be available for review one week prior to the hearing. Any questions regarding this proposal should be directed to David Graves, Associate Planner at 206.297.2106. d151ertwood.wp NOTICE OF PUBLIC LAND USE HEARING HERITAGE WOODS HEIGHT VARIANCE Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City of Federal Way Land Use Hearing Examiner at approximately 2:00 P.M. on August 11,1998 in the Federal Way City Council Chambers, 33530 - 1st Way South, Federal way, WA 98003. FILE NUMBER: File No. UP498-0003 TOPIC: The applicant has requested a variance from the calculation method for determining the maximum height allowable for a building, based on the Average Building Elevation, as defined in Federal Way City Code Section 22-1. The applicant's building sites are located in an RS-7.2 (Residential Single Family) zoning district. Pursuant to FWCC Sec. 22-1, Average Building Elevation (ABE) is taken prior to any development activity or at finish grade, whichever is lower. The slopes of the previously platted lots average approximately 29%, partially due to the approved road design and construction. Parklane Ventures is proposing to add significant amounts of fill to the lots in question and re -grade them to yield suitable building lots, under a separate grading permit application. Up to 18 feet of fill will cover the existing grade in the area of the proposed buildings. If the ABE is measured from the existing grade, the applicant will be unable to construct houses which match the size and character of the existing homes both adjacent to the subject property and within the subdivision. Variances from provisions of the Federal Way City Code, Chapter 22, are subject to Process IV, Hearing Examiner decision. PROJECT LOCATION: 25th Place South at the 28000 Block; Plat of Heritage Woods, Division No. 1, Lots 52 - 59. APPLICANT: Dennis Alfredson, PE Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #1 Tukwilla, WA 98188 Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner, either by delivering these comments to the Department of Community Development Services prior to the hearing, or by giving them directly to the Hearing Examiner at the hearing; or by appearing in person, or through a representative, at the hearing, and presenting public testimony. The Hearing Examiner will issue a decision on the application within 10 working days CITY OF iEI:q EQ VjC.- (253) -4000 Pry 33530 1ST WAY SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WA 9800003-6210 AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I L hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Application ❑ Notice of Action ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance ❑ Notice of Determination of Non - Significance and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Non -Significance (SEPA) ❑ Notice of Environmental Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (SEPA) ❑ Notice of Proposed Land Use Action o Notice of Public Land Use Hearing ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Land Use Application ❑ Other was maile axed/ osted to/at each of following addresses (see attached) on 1998. Project Name File Number(s) L2 P� 0W ' o Q Signature Date REVISED 1/2/98 after the close of the hearing. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may request a reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The application for the proposal is to be reviewed under applicable codes, regulations and policies of the City of Federal Way. The Official File is available for review during working hours (Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM) in the Department of Community Development Services, 33 53 0 - 1st Way South Federal way, WA 98003. Staff reports will be available for review one week prior tv he hearing. Any questions regarding this proposal should be directed to David Graves, Associate Planner at 206.297.2106. M:hertwood.wp NOTICE OF PUBLIC LAND USE HEARING HERITAGE WOODS HEIGHT VARIANCE * — Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City of Federal Way Land Use Hearing Examiner at approximately 2:00 P.M. on August 11,1998 in the Federal Way City Council Chambers, 33530 - 1st Way South, Federal way, WA 98003. FILE NUMBER: File No. UP498-0003 TOPIC: The applicant has requested a variance from the calculation method for determining the maximum height allowable for a building, based on the Average Building Elevation, as defined in Federal Way City Code Section 22-1. The applicant's building sites are located in an RS-7.2 (Residential Single Family) zoning district. Pursuant to FWCC Sec. 22-1, Average Building Elevation (ABE) is taken prior to any development activity or at finish grade, whichever is lower. The slopes of the previously platted lots average approximately 29%, partially due to the approved road design and construction. Parklane Ventures is proposing to add significant amounts of fill to the lots in question and re -grade them to yield suitable building lots, under a separate grading permit application. Up to 18 feet of fill will cover the existing grade in the area of the proposed buildings. If the ABE is measured from the existing grade, the applicant will be unable to construct houses which match the size and character of the existing homes both adjacent to the subject property and within the subdivision. Variances from provisions of the Federal Way City Code, Chapter 22, are subject to Process IV, Hearing Examiner decision. PROJECT LOCATION: 25th Place South at the 28000 Block; Plat of Heritage Woods, Division No. 1, Lots 52 - 59. APPLICANT: Dennis Alfredson, PE Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #1 Tukwilla, WA 98188 Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner, either by delivering these comments to the Department of Community Development Services prior to the hearing, or by giving them directly to the Hearing Examiner at the hearing; or by appearing in person, or through a representative, at the hearing, and presenting public testimony. The Hearing Examiner will issue a decision on the application within 10 working days CITY OF 33530 1ST WAY SOUTH (253) 661-4000 FEDERAL WAY,' WA 98003-6210 AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION hereby declare, wz*rpenalty of perjury of the laws of tAStateof Washington, that a: ❑ Notice -of Application ❑ Notice of Action ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance ❑ Notice ofDeterm+nation ofNon- Significance and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Non -Significance (SEPA) ❑ Notice of Environmental Mitigated Determination ofNon Significance (SEPA) L� Notice of Proposed Land Use Action ZNotice ofPublic Land Use Hearing ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Notice ofPublic Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice ofLand Use Application ❑ Other was mailed flaxed/posted to/at each of following addresses (see attached) on �02 1998. Project Name file Num�i Si at�ure J AFFIDAwYm RBvisED 1%1198 WAM Date^. SIGN INSTALLATION CERTIFICATE APPLICATION # ��_ �`���� PROJECT NAME PROJECT ADDRESS DATE OF INSTALLATION 2 LOCATION OF INSTALLATION sJ3?- 1/1 ��/ 1 hereby testify that the sign installed fully complies with the installation standards of the Department of Community Development "Instructions for Obtaining and Posting Large Signs," and that the sign will be maintained until a final decision is issued on the land use action, including any associated appeal period. App I understand that the failure to return this certificate within five days of posting may result in delays, notice corrections, and re -mailings at the appiicant's expense. e Mann ls4A[- r�d�!an, P.E. %pru'-mor of Development Aod Construction Schnedpr HpMes? Inc. �r n a Date Phone (Day) 2312 South 284th Place Federal Way, WA 98003 August 7, 1998 Mr. Jim Harris, Associate Planner City of Federal Way 33530 1st Way South Federal Way, WA 98003-6221 Subject: Notice of Public Land Use Hearing Heritage Woods Height Variance File Number: UP498-0003 Dear Mr. Harris; We are writing in response to the Notice of Public Land Use Hearing for the variance submitted by Dennis Alfredson of Schneider Homes, Inc. We would like this letter to be submitted to the Hearing Examiner since we are unable to attend the public hearing on August 11, 1998. It has been brought to our attention that significant amounts of fill have already been brought into this site to cover the existing grade to construct lots with a view. Due to this alteration flooding of the existing adjacent homes has occurred. What will happen when additional significant amounts of fill are brought in? With the increase height to the elevation the new owners have found the trees in the green belt to be obstructive to their views. This ,has resulted in the owners cutting down trees that are protected in the original agreement concerning the green belt. We find this variance request to be very strange since the builder has already built homes on lots that he has elevated. Is this a new variance for different lots or will this variance be retroactive to the existing one? Thank you for your time. Sincerely, William & Melissa Boutelle NOTICE OF PUBLIC �1VED LAND USE HEARING ip ..�` r HERITAGE WOODS 1 HEIGHT VARIANCE Notice is hereby given that a Public hearing will be held AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION by the City of Federal Way Land Use Hearing Examiner at approximately 2:00 P.M. on August 11, 1998 in the Fed- - 1 eral Way City Council Cham- STATE OF WASHINGTON bers, 3Way iFedera3530 Way,1WA98003.outh;: COUNTY OF PIERCE FILE NUMBER: File No. UP498-0003 TOPIC: The applicant has re- quested a variance from the I, Mariann Ehresman, being first duly sworn, calculation method for deter - mining the maximum height on oath, says that she is the legal clerk of allowable for a building, based on the Average Build- The News Tribune, a daily newspaper published ing Elevation, as defined 16 . Federal Way City Cade Set - in Tacoma, Pierce County, Washington, and of Lion 22-1. The appil[ant•s building general circulation in said state, and having a sites are located in an RS-7.2 (RerWenlial Single Family) dailycirculation of over 149,872 copies. P zoning district. Pursuant Ia FWCC Sec. 22.1, Average That said newspaper is now and at all times Building Elevation [ABEI is taken prior to any develop- hereinafter mentioned as a legal newspaper ment activity or at finisri The rp eve usly as defined by the laws of the state duly sopes�ofethe platted lots averagey To � approved by the Superior Court of Pierce mstely 29°k, parsialldue to due the approved road design and construction. Parklene County, Washington, as provided by Ventures is proposing to add significant amounts of fill to Chapter 213 Sessions Law of 1941. the lots in question and re - grade them to yield suilabfe That the advertisement, of which the building lots, under a sena- rate grading permil•appli[a- attached is a printed copy as it was Lion. Up to 18 feet of fill will cover the existing grade in published in the regular issues of said the area of the proposed buildings. If the ABE Is mea- newspaper, was published: 1 time(s), sured from the existing grade, the applicant will be commencing on the 24th day of unable to construct houses which match the slze and July 1998, and ending on the 24th charahomes bcotri ter of the existing adlacant to the day of July 1998. the subdivision. Variances She gut properly and antes that the full amount for said publication was the P From provisions of She Fed - eral Way City Code, Chaple,• sum of $ 201.25 22, are sublOct to Process IV, Hearing Examiner decision. ad#T974197/6614000CIT PROJECT LOCATION: 2Sth Place South at the 28000 Block; Plat of Heritage Woods, Division No. 1, Lots S2 - 59. APPLICANT: Dennis Alfredson. PE I Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #1 Tukwila, WA 98188 Subscribed to and sworn before me on this Any Person may participate in the public hearing by sub - 27th day of July 1998. to hetiHearintgeExaminertcommensel ther by delivering these com- ments to the Department of Community Development Services Prior to the hearing; or by giving them directly to Ehe I -Waring Examiner at the hearing; or by appearing In person, or through a repro• Notary public in d forte sentative, at the hearing,• and Presenting public testi- state of Washington, residing at Tacoma, mony. The Hearing Examin- erwill issue a decision on the Pierce County Washington ■'1 aPplicallon within 10 work - ing days af}er the close of hearing. Only ss �1 i-• t7�[i 1; the Persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Ex- �{]� • %I f''1 i� Bminer may request a recah- the Hearing ��G=�•?�� sideration of Examiner's decision. The ap- plication for the Proposal is S 63 NO I APBs J�� to codes, d under apand polities of the City of Feder- if hhJ+ ~vSLl%�r � al Way. � I _� +++4aa.- Q The Official File Is avaItable for review during working hours (Monday through i _0� 1 ttik ��. tr'.` Fri- day, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM7 in �t t� ' \QJ +:� the Department of Commu• nity Development Services, _� 1 M Feder - IL �� aSWay,sWAB98003.t Staffre- Portswill be available for re- view one week prior to life hearing. Any questions re- garding this proposal Should be directed to David Graves, Associate Planner at 2a6- 297-2106. AUG 1 0 1998 r l,:Li.pvc OFFICE OF F-LL)LHALWAY KING COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT NO. 39 FEDERAL WAY FIRE DEPARTMENT 31617 - 1ST AVENUE SOUTH FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003-5299 March 12, 1998 To: Community Development Review Committee RE: Heritage Woods Res. Height Var./UP498-0003/Harris The Fire Marshal's Office has no comments pertaining to thi: project. Respectfully Submitted, Greg Broze Fire Marshal's Office Business Phones: Seattle 253-839-6234 Tacoma 253-927-3118 FAX: 253-946-2086 King County Fire District # 39 is an equal opportunity employer. LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT 316271st Avenue South / P. O. Box 4249 ■ Federal Way, WA 98063 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA OF: March 12,1998 ATTN: Mr. Jim Harris Senior Planner SUBJECT: Agenda Item No. 5 — Heritage Woods Tracts H & J Residential Height Variance UP498-0003 •Iuu �►0 The District has no comment on this issue. Date: �lI M' Yog U � Supe isor 6f Technical/Support Services Direct Line: (253) 946-5400 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: February 25, 1998 TO: Community Development Review Committee (CDRC) Members Stephen Clifton, Public Works Development Services Manager (1 copy) `7Lee Bailey, Lead Plans Examiner ,Mary Young, Supervisor of Technical Services, Lakehaven Utility District (Jerry Thorsen, KC Fire District #39 FROM: Jim Harris, Senior Planner PROJECT PLANNER: Jim Harris PHONE (253)661-4019 PLEASE RESPOND BY: Application review March 12, 1998 FILE NUMBER: UP498-0003 PROJECT NAME: Heritage Woods Tracts H and J Residential Height Variance PROJECT ADDRESS: 25th Place South at 28000 Block, In Heritage Woods PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request to use the finished lot grade established through separate grading permit to measure height of future residences on Tracts H and J. Proposed homes will be typical daylight basement type. The amount and depth of fill proposed by the grading permit application dictates the need for height variance. ZONING: RS 7.2 PROJECT CONTACT: Dennis Alfredson, Schneider Homes, (206)248-2471 NOTE: DRCMEMO.but The Official File is available for review during working hours (Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM) in the Department of Community Development Services, 33530 - 1st Way South, Federal way, WA 98003. Staff reports will be available for review one week prior to the hearing. Any questions regarding this proposal should be directed to David Graves, Associate Planner at 206.297.2106. hwhrgnot NOTICE OF PUBLIC LAND USE HEARING HERITAGE WOODS HEIGHT VARIANCE Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the City of Federal Way Land Use Hearing Examiner at approximately 2:00 P.M. on August 11, 1998 in the Federal Way City Council Chambers, 33530 - 1st Way South, Federal way, WA 98003. FILE NUMBER: File No. UP498-0003 TOPIC: The applicant has requested a variance from the calculation method for determining the maximum height allowable for a building, based on the Average Building Elevation, as defined in Federal Way City Code Section 22-1. The applicant's building sites are located in an RS-7.2 (Residential Single Family) zoning district. Pursuant to FWCC Sec. 22-1, Average Building Elevation (ABE) is taken prior to any development activity or at finish grade, whichever is lower. The slopes of the previously platted lots average approximately 29%, partially due to the approved road design and construction. Parklane Ventures is proposing to add significant amounts of fill to the lots in question and re -grade them to yield suitable building lots, under a separate grading permit application. Up to 18 feet of fill will cover the existing grade in the area of the proposed buildings. If the ABE is measured from the existing grade, the applicant will be unable to construct houses which match the size and character of the existing homes both adjacent to the subject property and within the subdivision. Variances from provisions of the Federal Way City Code, Chapter 22, are subject to Process IV, Hearing Examiner decision. PROJECT LOCATION: 25th Place South at the 28000 Block; Plat of Heritage Woods, Division No. 1, Lots 52 - 59. APPLICANT: Dennis Alfredson, PE Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #1 Tukwilla, WA 98188 Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner, either by delivering these comments to the Department of Community Development Services prior to the hearing, or by giving them directly to the Hearing Examiner at the hearing; or by appearing in person, or through a representative, at the hearing, and presenting public testimony. The Hearing Examiner will issue a decision on the application within 10 working days after the close of the hearing. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may request a reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The application for the proposal is to be reviewed under applicable codes, regulations and policies of the City of Federal Way.