12-101364J&
AML CITY Of
Fbderal Afty
00�
�vm�al -W
Mark & Susan Sabol
2219 South 304th Street
Federal Way, WA 98003
John & Susan Pearson
2215 South 3046' Street
Federal Way, WA 98003
RE: File#12-101364-00-,AD; RESPONSE TO WETLAND INQUIRY
Sabo l/PearsonWetland Review, 2215 & 2219 South 304th Street, Federal Way
WETLAND REPORT
The City forwarded your request to our wetland consultant, ESA, for their review. Senior
Scientist/Sustainability Specialist, Lizzie Zemke, visited the subject sites and reviewed relevant documents.
Vw,4,j) B 27 2� te ical• i a -a darca7asslo
PTA M I I 17-I&N NJ 4 re 11 is KIMP&I
I W� 11 Lq WWR U-1 I R KX1 J I I I LOA q I L
REVIEW PROCESS
LN.-et-+n ffie fir,&,gs *f the wetlient rep*A tke f&twiAj; review ?)r,tGess-.s me reiviref N)Wilt.2tickia eke
above -mentioned properties on Steel Lake.
[61
A Preapplication Conference is required (this requirement can be waived upon request) prior to a SEPA
application. A Preapplication. Conference serves as a feasibility study of your project and assesses any
T'#tn_Generalh*Aht v xQW,lication conference
occurs within 3 weeks of submittal.
Intrusions into a regulated wetland — As mentioned in the wetland report, there is a Category III regulated
_W99z
6 P — X osed dock will intrude into
gii! rogulated wedand
WIIIN
Mr. & Mrs. Sabo] and Mr. & Mrs. Pearson
May 10, 2012
Page 2
(a) It wilt -not adversely affect Water quality.
(b) It will not adversely affect the existing quality of the wetland's or buffer's wildlife habitat.
(c) It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities.
(d) It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards.
(e) It will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the area of the subject property nor to the city
as a whole, including the loss of open space.
(f) It will result in no net loss of wetland area, function, or value.
(g) The project is in the best interest of the public health, safety, or welfare.
(h) The applicant has demonstrated sufficient scientific expertise and supervisory capability to carry out the
project.
applicant is committed to monitoring the project and to making corrections if the project fails to meet
projected goals.
T1 i-jage
41[s]NOMP "Ums
W111 pig
a
Il NO
• Preapplication Conference (if not waived): $464.00
• Process IV Application: $3,961.50
• SEPA Checklist Review: $951.50
6,01WIrF011 I A
rebeeca.chapin@cityoffederalway.com.
M=
Becky Chapmi
Assistant Planner
enc: ESA Wetland Report, dated April 27, 2012
Process IV Application
SEPA Checklist
Substantial Development Permit
Master Land Use Application
c: Email to john.pearson@multicare.org, susanpearson@comcast.net; and marksabol@gmail.com
Lizzie Zemke, ESA, 5309 Shilshole Ave NW, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98107
1 Per WAC 173-27-040(h), if the dock is less than $10,000, then it would be exempt from the need to obtain a Substantial
Development permit.
12-101364 Doc, LD, 61030
Rebecca Chapin
From: Lizzie Zemke <LZemke@esassoc.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 1:56 PM
To: Rebecca Chapin
Subject: RE: Sabol/Pearson Dock
Hi Becky
I he wetland size is difficult to determine. A portion of a larger lake fringe wetland occupies the Sabol and Pearson lots.
This portion is less than 2,500 square feet. However it was clear during the site visit that the wetland extends along the
lakeshore beyond those two properties and is therefore larger than what we see on those two lots. Without conducting
.• . . . . . . . '#P-.s�KLrP-'u*m -P wet1a-tdPYtPids- It could uotentially extend around most of
MW
the lake, in which case the wetland could be greater than 10T,"square teet. Either way (Zb teet 575111-7rpPTPTE-•�
consists entirely of regularly mown lawn grass on both properties.
Lizzie Zemke
Senior Scientist/Sustainability Specialist
ESA I Northwest Biological Resources
5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, SUite 200
Seattle, VVA 98107
20&789-9658 1206,550.6796 mobile
[zemkg�. r r
From: Rebecca Chapin rmaikAbhg �ca-Chaojn@ciWofteralway�OMI
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 2:47 PM
To: Lizzie Zemke
Subject: RE: Sabol/Pearson Dock
Becky Chapin
Assistant Planner
City of Federal Way
33325 8th Avenue South
SORITUVA526111"
Fr onike esassoc. m: Lizzie Zemke [-allt ,
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 11:06 AM
To: Rebecca Chapin
Subject: Sabol/Pearson Dock
Hi Becky
Attached is our letter regarding conditions at the Sabol/Pearson dock site. Please let me know if you have questions.
Thanks!
Lizzie Zemke
Senior Scientist/Sustaitiability Speciat;
ESA I Northwest Biological Resources
5309 SMshole Avenue NVV, Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98107
206.789-96581206,550.6796 mobile
L---@- I
5309 Shilshole Avenue NW www.esaSSOG.COM
ESA Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98107
206.789.9658 phone
206.789.9684 fax
date April 27, 2012
to Rebecca Chapin, City of Federal Way Planner
from Lizzie Zemke, ESA
subject Sabol/Pearson Dock Site Visit
•
Under RPM, T efland. categories ancl stanciarci DuiTefs, WTT-MF-L=;
properties is a Category III wetland.
Please feel free to contact me at 206.7 89.965 8 or Izemke@esassoc.com if you have questions about the
UMN411NAPIM
F014-MMO
Thank you for the time spent discussing your Steel Lake dock project. Our company has a long history and an
outstanding reputation for building superior projects throughout the Puget Sound area. Please keep in mind that your
ideas, additions or changes would be welcomed. The following is the estimated construction cost for your project.
Ramp - (1) 3' x 12' Aluminum ramp Nv/ hinge -1-Y-e IV
- Thru-Flow grated decking
Floating Dock
- (2) 6' x 12' float with polyethylene foam filled tub flotation
- Connecting hinge
- Cleats as needed
- Composite wood and Thru Flow decking
- All metal fasteners are hot dip galvanized
- All timber Chemonite pressure treated Douglas/fir
- White vinyl rub strip on sides of float and pneumatic white corners
NM
I
I'll I IN111151 III! a 4 -1 11141-11101! --
1111111111111 111
- 50% of cost prior to construction
- Balance is due at time of completion
U
$9,900
I know that you will find Marine Floats a company of high integrity that provides quality work. We would be glad to
provide you with any additional information and references. Thank you for your interest in Marine Floats and we
hope to perform for you on this project.
RUMMUM
lb/pm
Rebecca Chapin
From: Rebecca Chapin
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 7:53 AM
To: john.pearson@multicare.org; Mark Sabol (marksabol@gmail.corn);
susanpearson@comcast.net; 'soozulla@grnail.corn'
Subject: Dock Follow-up Questions
1 0 P14WAIM rAM I I VA I I WE 01-HAR
eacn existing FUt5IUU11UdI IUL 15 PUIVIRM
are doing a joint dock you wouldn't be allowed to have a float as well.
IN,
measuring tneiengi if
the elevation of the ordinary high water mark, whichever is reached first.. There is no exception to this requirement, so the city would
not accept the dock starting at the mean water level as proposed. As stated before, a Shoreline Variance is required if you wish to
extend the dock further than 36 feet as long as you can meet the criteria.
5 MsIZI MKIII-119310i
Becky Chapin
Assistant Planner
City of Federal Way
33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
Phone: 253-835-2641
RECEIVED
APR 112012
ESA
CITY OF
Federal Way
Date: April 9, 2012
City: City of Federal Way
Department of Community and Economic Development
33325 8'� Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
Consultant: Lizzie Zemke, ESA Adolfson
5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98107
Vi -roj ect: Sabol/Pearson Steel Lake Property
Wetland Status Verification and Delineation
Parcel #s 053700-0110 & 053700-0115
File No.: 12-101364-00-,AU
Project Proponent: John & Susan Pearson
2215 South 304'h Street
Federal Way, WA 98003
253-946-0353
Mark & Susan Sabol
2219 South 304th Street
Federal Way, WA 98003
253-222-4362
Project Planner: Becky Chapin, Assistant Planner (253-835-2641)
Documents Provided: Wetland Review Basic Service Request
Map indicating Category III wetland according to Federal Way wetland
inventory.
Wetland Inventory Field Form
Task Scope: Background: According to the Federal Way Critical Areas Map, the above -
referenced sites contain a Category III wetland in addition to being located
on the shoreline of Steel Lake. Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC)
15.10.250 calls out 25-foot buffers for Category III wetlands. The proponents
would like to have the wetland analyzed and verified prior to building a
shared dock.
Acceptance:
.............. J�� 0�
City of FederaUy Mar
Consultan ,�4SA)
ESA is requested to perform the following tasks:
1. Verify the existence of Category III wetland as defined in FWRC
Chapter 15. 10, "Critical Areas," Article VI, "Regulated Wetlands"
within 200 feet of subject property.
_WetftT&��_
Not to exceed $ 1050.00 -without a prior written amendment to this Task
Authorization. This amount is based on the City's flat fee for 'Wetland and
Stream Review Basic Service.'
Date
12-101364 Doc I D 60823
From:
Sent:
To:
.##
Thank you for your patients as l get the answers to your questions. Below are the City's responses to the three questions you asked for
clarification on.
I. Is a T atthe end of the dock allowed, and how is it measured-,
Our size limitations are related to dock width pile size. Length is often a function of depth.
Width for the first 30 feet from shore is normally restricted to 4 feet, then 6 feet Nvat rward from there. For joint use
dock, 6 feet wide for the entire might pernitted, I recommend the total length of the T section be about 24 feet max.
Pile diameter would be 6 inches max, with pile bents spaced no closer than 12 feet.
-
•`
2. What type of + +, the city recommend for the doci
The following regulations of the FWRC apply to all newly constructed docks:
Any pier, dock, mooring buoy, or float must be constructed out of materials that will not adversely affect water quality. Use of
her ically treated wood is Prohibited in fresh eater lake shorelines.
The decking of all piers and docks shall be designed to allow a minimum of 45 percent Fight passage. This may be
accomplished through grated decks, space between decking, light prisms, or other means.
Note: It is recommended that you contact Larry Fisher for any requirements Fish and Wildlife may have regarding dock materials,
3. What is the process to extend the dock further water ward than the 36 feet code allows?
Per FWRG 15,05,160, a 'Shoreline Variance' is required if you wish to extend the dock further than 36 feet. The following is the code
language for the shoreline variance process:
1, The purpose of a shoreline variance is to grant relief to specific bulk, dimensional, or Performance standards set forth in the
shoreline master program, Where there is an extraordirf6ry or un I i0e 610CUMStA006 relating to the Oroperjy such that the strict
N
Q
implementation of the shoreline master Program would impose unnecessary hardship on the applicant or thwart the policies of
the Shoreline Management Act. I
♦ i � i i "
#
s #
i
I The g1 fee for Shoreline "ariance revle is 111
ve
I have sent our request for basic wetland review to the Gche wetland consultant, se le Z at
tify you have any further questionSA Adolfson, You should s.
Y
a call from s. Zemke, or possibly another associate, to schedule a site v�sl�: Please let ►t
Becky Chapin
Msistaot Planner
City of FederO Way
South
Eeipg2l 98003-6325
From: Mark Sabol <marksaboi@g mail. com>
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2012 8:25 AM
To: Rebecca Chapin
Cc: susanpearson@comcast.net; john.pearson@multicare.org
Subject* Re: Steel Lake Dock Proposal
Hi Becky,
Thanks for your ongoing help with this. Sue said you mentioned the possibility, because we're going over $1 Ok
(it's likely to be $20k), that a Substantial Development permit would be triggered, and that perhaps a length
exception could be made if that were the case. After discussion, we are very interested in that.
Looking forward to what you find out. Thanks again!
RM
*n Fri, Mar 30,2012 at 12:06 PM, Rebecca Chapote:
1[61%11111RMIC-1 I 11 I KA 1r, 1110 11 E I I RA VA L81 mrimmu"', 11
I . a - .10 10 1
2. What type of materials would the city recommend for the dock?
3. What is the process to extend the dock further water ward than the 36 feet code allows?
I wanted to let you know Planning Manager Isaac Conlen is out so I will not be able to get answers today. I will work on it
and make sure you get a response by early next week.
Sue also indicated that if the dock could not be extended turtner, it wouia no longer 87.1 71 1= 1=157�7V
,*ock proposal. If that is the case, you will be able to get a full refund of the wetland review fees. At tl�is time I will not
process the wetland review until I have answered your questions, and hear it that you would like to continue the process,
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Um
Becky Chapin
dA��vzkt-
m
City of Federal Way
10-IM"MR-MIA1m'' "TOMILIM
Phone: 253-835-2641
Make it a great day!
--Mark
9
Mark Sabol, Ph.D.
Tukwila School District
206-901-7639
Cell: 206-234-6096
N
Rebecca Cain
"MOMMONOMI 11
From: Rebecca Chapin
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 11:08 AM
To: susanpearson@comcast.net
Cc: Kari Cimmer
Subject: Steel Lake Dock Proposal
Attachments: 063 Wetland & Stream Review Basic Service.doc; 143 Shoreline Exemption Application.doc
Hi Susan,
-NMI, 1,111
being on the neighboring property, as well as possible wetland buffer extending on to your property. In order to determine if there is a
wetland or wetland buffer on or near your property, the city will require you to apply for the basic wetland review service (attached),
which costs a flat fee of $1,050.
M14
!6rfT-dfFS_e11L-L'# sells 4
fff' MlI'
vm.?7ri e&prrmar�t
permits will be require to add a dock.
shoreline regulations for residential docks. Below I have outlined the permitting process for both scenarios: if there are I)no
wetlands/wetland buffers; or 2) wetlands/wetland buffers on site. All the handouts and applications below are available on the city's
website.
1) No Wetlands. The following reviews are required to be submitted and approved prior to building a dock.
SEPA iiM&w:- 2011 fee $26t5Q
This project does not qualify for a categorical exemption from State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) checklist review under WAC 197-
ol:mckl i6t 16 m ii i � iii i
by your proposed development.
enefitJ #d
i AwwwwwaWwwwwww"Al 000 0 0
a bt:(-A appilGaTilm -A r-f I LIVII I lei 01 %17�C
you formerly submit a land use application, Generally, the preapplicatioh conference odf subrittol and the 20142
fee is $464.00.
P�TAI XV�lft W rAVW
not exceed $10,900.00Jhe applicant must submit to the City of Federal Way a Shoreline Exemption application. The Shoreline
Exemption review is an administrative review which includes the review of your proposed project and the valuation of your project.
Please include a detailed cost estimate with your submittal.
&&tantiat Do��enwotmif 201�2 fee $2,404A
•gjllg1 _1terial. labor, etc. to build the dock exceeds $10,000 a
MPAIJUAVI -1 111 - "M
11;1JE ?V - Im
rmi-IIIMMUN
under the provisions of Process I 11.
am
'go. o-'-"Illlilgilia
MIMTMMM�- LI,!- �.- ��l — �1-1 'I, • , �11
?long with one of the land use processes described below.
14�11,S-Mam ► ted �Le�id
If it is determined that the dock will be located in a regulated wetland, the city may approve any request to locate an improvement
within a regulated wetland using land use Process IV review, 2012 fee of $3,961.50 (Process IV requires a public hearing and decision
by the City's Hearing Examiner). Approval of a request for improvements within a wetland shall be based on the following criteria
FWRC 15.10.260:
(a) It will not adversely affect water quality.
(b) It will not adversely affect the existing quality of the wetland's or buffers wildlife habitat.
(c) It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities.
(d) It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards.
loss of open space.
(f) It will result in no net loss of wetland area, function, or value.
(g) The project is in the best interest of the public health, safety, or welfare.
(h) The applicant has demonstrated sufficient scientific expertise and supervisory capability to carry out the project.
(i) The applicant is committed to monitoring the project and to making corrections if the project fails to meet projected goals.
Intrusions into a wetlandbutfer
If it has been determined that th dd•k' I h'
W"WO CP. 96"111"WWWW, 1-1,21
R 11 Me fig R 11 RA i in tIII RM MINN
IMIRIMMIM 11111111 111 1 IF I R
Becky Chapin
Assistant Planner
Community and Economic Development
City of Federal Way
33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
Phone: 253-835-2641
A ro
Fnmnn: - Susan Pearson <ousanpeorson@�xomoast.net'
Sent: Friday, March 09.2O122:18PK8
To: |saenCon|en
Cc: Pearson John
Proposal to build dock on Steel Lake
|saac[nn|en
Planning Manager
Community and Economic Development Dept.
City mfFederal Way
Dear Mr. Conlen:
I spoke with one of the city planners on Monday with questions about what are the city requirements for building a dock
at our home on Steel Lake. She directed me to you and suggested that I include the following information in a letter:
-our address is 2215 South 304th Street, Federal Way, 98003
-We would like to build a dock eitherjointly with our neighbors Mark and Sue Sabol at 2219 South 304th Stre
or build a separate dock depending on the total cost of the proposed projects. I
-Are one or both of these uses permitted?
-There isasmall area onthe neighbor's property which may be rated as a wetland.
-What is the permitting process under these circumstances?
My husband John and I would be happy to come in and discuss this proposal with you if necessary. our phone number
2t home is 253-946-0353. We look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Susan Pearson
Rebecca Chapin
From: Rebecca Chapin
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 12:06 PM
To: Mark Sabol (marksabol@gmaii.com); susanpearson@comcast.net;
john.pearson@multicare.org
Subject: Steel Lake Dock Proposal
I received a call from Mrs. Sabol yesterday with some questions to answers regarding the dock proposal. She asked me to include all
parties when responding. The following are the questions I am in the process of researching.
1. Is a T at the end of the dock allowed, and how is it measured? - _ZT
2. What type of materials would the city recommend for the dock? —
3. What is the process to extend the dock fuOer water ward than the 36 feet code allows?
I wanted to let you know Planning Manager Isaac Conlen is out so I will not be able to get answers today. I will work on it and make
sure you get a response by early next week.
Sue also indicated that if the dock could not be extended further, it would no longer be beneficial for you to continue with the dock
proposal. If that is the case� ypp Will be able to get a full refund of the wetland review fees. At this time I will not process the wettand
review until I have answered your questions, and hear back that you would like to continue the process. Please let me know it you have
any questions.
Thanks,
Becky Chapin
Assistant Planner
Community and Economic Development
City of Federal Way
33325 Sth Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
Phone: 253-835-2641
V1, t�ffi_
'2)4-tvq� v-q
of CkPMl're-T
wfa qm
w
MPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMMNT SIERVICFS
33325 811, Avenue South
RECEIVED Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
253-83 5-2607; Fax 253-83 5-2609
MAR 212012
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CDS
WE -I -LAND AND STREAM REVIE'RI
BASIC SERVICE
0AX-) I W Its We k 1 U 9*11 ON I COWS I (Waif) I to i I Ito) 1 6AM 1 EI) M91ral
Two hours of wetland or stream study review
Equivalent of a two hour site visit by two scientists
Preparation of a brief memorandum
Coverage of various reinibursables
MIN
to use this service tor onsite consultation conssis en wi, e
properties will require a specific consultant prepared scope of work and cost estimate. When the fee is paid, the
4ty's consultant wi� contact you to 90404le the site visit.
------ — -------------- ------- --------- ------- --------------
Project Name: I )
0j Folderk
Request.--Rzz, a6z-
Z,
&'zo, '74le-5- e7W
Location: cam. 30' t —a*-,7Z Z'7 cc,, -3,9 K"�--5
Parcel #:
si Asa --2.2-2 - Y,36z
Name: Phone: ,
Mailing Address: a?15 4,17
F,ee: $1,050.006"'40 Date Paid: —
Ulm 07 1 ITM t 67•=14 R 74 =
Bulletin 4063 — January 1, 2011 Page 1 of 1 UHandoutsMetland & Stream Review Basic Service
4 D
Signature: ��Iltl ate: 2-
Btdletin #063 — January 1, 2011 Page 2 of 2 k:\Handouts\Wetland & Stream Review Basic Service
Rebecca Cha in
From: Rebecca Chapin
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 3:38 PM
To: 'Mark Sabol'
Cc: john.pearson@multicare.org; susanpearson@comcast.net; SueCELL
Subject: RE: Steel Lake Dock Proposal
MI=
See my answers to your questions below in red. I hope this clears a few things up for you, but please let me know if you have any
additional questions.
Becky Chapin
Assistant Planner
Community and Economic Development
City of Federal Way
33325 8th Avenue South
1 *1
1411 N I Mi.
From: Mark Sabol
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:21 PM
To: Rebecca Chapin -SueCELL
Cc: *0 , �—iirii'amulticareor _sp
Subject: Re: Steel Lake Dock Proposal
Hi Becky -
ell, we did buy this property and are pretty much moved in. We have been discussing with our neighbors,
John and Susan Pearson, the idea of building a shared dock. They've been in touch with Isaac this week about
that as well.
Questions we have at present are:
1. Is it safe to assume that we can to the initial assessment, and other permits going forward as a single fee for
each that we can then split? (So the, I believe it was $1050, could be done then for the 80 feet which is the
adjacent properties together?)
still be used. As long as the city receives the $1,050.00 for the review service, how the fee is paid for is up to the property owners.
2. Is this sometimes done by letting the dock contractor obtain all the permitting requirements with the city, and
the property owners just signing off (and paying) along the way?
FS
analor umew apply Jul Pei 1111LZ5 U-rellibull%- �A
would need the property owners to sign the application but who pays the permit fees is up to you.
M OF, I Rgligggipi III III I
•I : M [ ITIM,
IIIIIII]JUVINIRI•''! MIMS 0•
First off, I understand that you would like to go forward with submitting the wetland report. If y . ou inte . nd to submit prior to owning thel
wig -1 SIMN
111111 111111 1!? 111 iiiiill!!Il�ll�l I; I•ll! I I III !IIIIIIIpI !I II!!jI Jill, 11 111111 111 1111
1111 IIIIIIIIII�1111' 11�111111111 1111 1�1111 IIIIIIIIII 111 1111 �11 11 �IIIIII IIIIII
SEPA review
III III �111 ip�111 lipil lillill 111111111111111111111111 liqJ111111 iiiiiiiiiiii I iiiiiii iiiiiii��ill I !1111111��1111
I &
This Pf*Wd does n t ON - for a categonu�i 6xem
000 from State fh�ItM"Mmenn P
V
11 T�T Jrr F I
A Preapplication Conference is required (this requirement can be waived upon request) prior to a SEPA application, A Preapplication
Conference serves as a feasibility study of your project and assesses any potential issues before you formerly submit a land use
application. Generally, the preapplicafion conference occurs within 3 weeks of submittal.
M rnent Exe
MLW�
Per MC 173-27-040(h), this project would be exempt Rom substantial shoreline develo
WAA 1"OUICTU ew
YJ MIM lncludbt� the Mvf-ew of your proposed proectand the YaWafibn of u
Please contact the building dept. Plans Examiner, Scott Sproul at 253-83-5-2633 for any building permits that may be required,
2) Wetlands or Wetland Buffers. All the Proceeding reviews are applicable (SEPA, Shoreline Exemption, Building Permit),
Aong with one of the land use processes described below.
InLrusions infn A r4mid-nAnd wp Liand.,
MMMMM
(a) It will not adversely affect water quality.
M It will not adversely affect the existing quality of the wetland's or buffer's wildlife habitat.
(c) It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities.
(d) It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards.
(e) It will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the area of the subject property nor to the city as a whole, including the
loss of open space.
M It will result in no net loss of wetland area, function, or value.
3
(g) The project is in the best interest of the public health, safety, or welfare.
(h) The applicant has demonstrated sufficient scientific expertise and supervisory capability to carry out the project.
(i) The applicant is committed to monitoring the project and to making corrections it the project fails to meet projected goals.
dWthjn1hebUff0are 6" reqqlated wetlapd, �lhro* a Protm III land Use
ock is locgib
If the proposed develoPMeot does not meet any of the above -mentioned Wei averaging or [)trier 1011LAITI I %A ILVV�,
must be r�ed by Process IV, pursuant to FWRC 15.10-270(6) Mo&fWthM
If you have any questions please do not heistate to contact me.
Thanks,
Becky Chapin
Assistant Planner
City of Federal Way
33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
�253-835-2641 (p)
25_3-835-2609 (f)
Reb 9.0—M
M
Make it a great day!
--Mark
Mark Sabol, P.D.
Fourth Grade Teacher and Leamer
Tukwila School District
2�06-901-7639
Cell: 206-234-6096
•
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject::
Rebecca
Thuns..
�inarksa..
Ofe6l Lake a..#
posaI
Hi Mark,
Just wanted to get back to you regarding your inquiry on the permit process for constructing a dock on Steel Lake.
First off, I understand that you would like to go forward with submitting the wetland report. If you intend to submit prior to owning the
property the city asks that you have the property owner make the request for the wetland basic service review. You can of course pa
the fee, but we require the property owners signature on the application. Y
If there is not a wetland and wetland buffer issues associated with the Property there will be some permitting issues as describe
below, but there is no reason to believe the project could not be accomplished.. d
If it tunas out wetland/buffer is present that complicates the analysis. It becomes a more extensive permitting process. If the
rid for
approval an be met (described below) you would be authorized to build the dock. It's hard for me to access the outcome of that
analysis without further detail. What I an say is that it's a reasonable request - not the type of thing that has no chance of success:
There are two options for the proposed new dock- If there are 1) no wetlands or 2) wetlands/buffer.
1) No Wetlands. The following reviews are required to be submitted and approved prior to building a dock.
~ EPA review
This project does not qualify for a categorical exemption from State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) checklist review under WA
11-80, and therefore a SEPA checklist; review will be required. A SEPA checklist is used to assess any environmental impacts caused
by your proposed development,
• • "� .r• . . r• r
before •
of the project does
'he Shoreline
of your project;
ufrtln Pe it.`
Please contact the building dept. Plans Examiner, Scott Sproul at 253-835-2633 for any building permits that may required.
uired.
q
1
r.
t,� t t tt. • •- tt•-
. t t�•
• r
t •
t « • «
r • • t • • r •"" 1.If the proposed developm#r� does not meet any of the above�mentioned buffer avera ing or 6urrer reGILA1111 I U1 ILVI la,
If you have any questions please do not heistate to contact me.
Thanks,
Becky Chapin
Assistant Planner
City of Federal Way
33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
253-835-2641 (p)
253-835-260 lid
e5ecca.Ch' ire Mi oedeaiva ,Mom
2
Rebecca •
From: Rebecca Unapin
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 2:59 IPM
To: 'Mark Sabol'
Subject: RE: Thank you and question
Attachments: 19.200.010 Detached Dwelling Unit.pdf
Hi Mark,
I can answer your questions regarding setbacks for a garage. The lot is zoned Single Family (RS7.2), detached dwelling units in an RS
zone have the following setbacks:
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.200.010 (attached)
20 ft front
5 ft side
...........
FWRC 15,05.080(5)(a)(i)(C)
All 0 1 is I
• are•ev iii
development may be located the same distance from the ordinary high wator mark as the adjacent residences (using the string line
setback method as defined in FWAQ1, • shall in no case be closer than 30 feet from the ordinaty'high watermark.
A garage Is exempt from a substantial development permit, however you will have to submit for a shoreline exemption from the city. A
building permit will also be needed for a garage (contact the building department at 253-835-2607). IT let you read the setback
requirements and if you have any questions please feel free to contact me.
Thanks,
Becky Chapin
Assistant Planner
............... ............ ......... . "I',"", "I'll, P1#-ffii,*Pz1
City • Federal Way
0325 Sth Avenue South
• Mark Sabo
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 • AM
To: Rebecca Chapin
Subject: Thank • and question
Hi Becky,
I just want to thank you and Isaac for taking the time to go out and look at that lake property with our realtor,
Tara. Our four -year -old grandson lives in L.A., and our dream of living on a lake where we can swim and fish
also embraces our hope to have a place that will draw him and his parents up here occasionally. Sue and I were
elated to hear that you guys went out there to look the very next day with Tara, as we couldn't make an offer
without a fairly good hope of a small dock.
Could you give me a name and email or phone for the person to talk to about set -back requirements for building
a garage (or if that's even possible)?
RM
Make it a great day!
--Mark
Mark Sabol, Ph.D.
Fourth Grade Teacher and Leamer
WNTIMORMUITIV
206-901-7639
Cell: 206-234-60)196
C At
From
Sent:
To:
c:
Subject:
Attachments:
�L-1 tor a
! ! !
! .. r .!!
Wilre
r
i nowil!�
Becky Chapin
Assistant Planner
Community and Economic Development
FederalVOW Sout
Phone:
From. Matt Herrera
Sent. Tuesday, January 10, 2012 10:24 A
Isaac Conlen
c: Rebecca Chapin
Subject'. RE: Pictures of Steel Lake Property
Isaac,
Obviously landward of the bulkhead the area has been landscaped with upland vegetation (lawn, snowberry, w
red cedar, and ornamental grasses) so the only area l would look at is waterward of the bulkhead. I looks lik extern
immediate area waterward of the bulkhead is less than 6 and 1/2 feet so it would not be considere ka the
aquatic habitat, therefore you would be looking for the three wetland indicators of hydrology, d a deepwater
Y gy, soil and vegetation.
Hydrology - I would assume the area waterward of the bulkhead would meet the Zone 2 "Permanently Inundated"
criteria on the Non -tidal Area Hydrologic Zone referenced in the manual This would result in needed hydrology
fo
than 12.5 percent of the growing season and therefore meet the hydrological indicator. for more
Soil - Looks like the hydre soil would meet criteria 36(c) of the manual "[s]oils that are frequently
very long duration during the growing season," ponded for long or
1
Vegetation - This is the tricky one.- if the vegetation was submergent, it would not meet the vegetation indicator, but I.
alder or cottonwood near the property line� The
did see what looked like some sedges poking out and perhaps an culative (FAQ or above indicator status. I'm pretty
manual requires more than 50% of the dominant species meet the Fa
sure the sedges and the cottonwood or alder are in the FAC or above category. xistence of a lake fringe
After looking at the pictures and reviewing the manual, I would be reluctant to rule out the e
is
wetland waterward of the bulkhead and on the neighboring property where it looks like no armoring present, A
shoreline that is not modified is likely to contain more visual indicators than one that has been armored.
From: Isaac Conlen
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 9:14 AM
To: Matt Herrera
cc: Rebecca Chapin
. I I. pi,11111111 iii af Steel Aakp puoperty
Ni Matt, nd give us your opinion as to whether you think a wetland may be present? Thanks.
can you look over these pictures a
From- Rebecca Chapin
09, 2012 8:15 AM
To: Isaac Onlen
Subject pictures of Steel Lake Property
FYI - pictures of the property with potential wetland on Steel Lake
x
From: Dropboailto:no-re
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 11:18 PM
To: Rebecca Chapin ants share "Steel Lake Wetlands?" with y
SuNiect, Tara Anderson w to I
Tara wants to share some files with you using Dropbox. Message from Tara:
'think the weedy reeds are a bit hard to see with the overcast sky. Sorry. Is
there G sPecific spot on the,website that we canlaaawr—,
VAN=
Thanks again!
Realtor
AmeriBrokers
253-209-5333"
2012 Dropbox
3
1208 East D St - Tacoma - WA 98421 - 253-383-2740
SCALE: APPROVED BY: DRAV
REVIS
DATE: 4/25/12
L/ PROPRIETARY PROPERTY
MARINE FLOATS CORPORATION
This 6acurnent is the proprietary property of PROPOSED RAMP AND FLOAT
Marine Floats Corporation and shall notbe used in part or whole
for any other project without
THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF MARINE FLOATS Pearson/Sabol Dock DRAM
CORPORATTON STEEL LAKE