The URL can be used to link to this page

16-101141CITY OF �. Federal Way October 6, 2017 'Mr. Richard Peterson Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle 710 9"' Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 Re: File #16-101141-00-SE; ENVIRONMENTAL THRESHOLD DETERMINATION CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway.. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Plan, 37500 Pacific Hwy South, Federal Way Dear Mr. Peterson: This office and other city staff have reviewed the environmental checklist you submitted. We have determined that the proposal will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, provided the mitigation measures identified in the enclosed Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) are met. As a result, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required to comply with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). A 14-day comment period is required by the SEPA rules (WAC 197-1 1-340). A notice inviting comments will be published in the Federal Way Mirror on October 6, 2017. At the end of the comment period, the department will determine if the MDNS should be withdrawn, modified, or retained as issued. All final determinations may be appealed within 21 days following the comment deadline. No licenses, permits, or approvals will be issued until completion of the appeal period. Our decision not to require an EIS does not mean that the license, permit, or approval you are seeking from the city has been granted. Approval or denial of the proposal will be made after public hearing by the Hearing Examiner vested with that authority. The environmental record is considered by the Hearing Examiner and conditions will be imposed to reduce identified environmental impacts, as long as the conditions are based on adopted and designated city policy. After a final decision has been made on your proposal, you may, but are not required to, publish a Notice of Action as set forth in RCW 43.21 C.075. The Notice of Action sets forth a time period after which no legal challenges regarding the proposal's compliance with SEPA can be made. A copy of the Notice of Action form and copies of RCW 43.21C.080'and WAC 197-1 1-680 providing instructions for giving this notice are available from the Department of Community Development. The city is not responsible for publishing the Notice of Action. However, the city is responsible for giving a notice (to parties of record) stating the date for commencing a judicial appeal (including the SEPA portion of that appeal) if your proposal is one for which the city's action on it has a specified time period within which any court appeals must be made. Mr. Peterson October 6.2017 Page 2 If you need further assistance, please contact Senior Planner Jim Harris, at 253-835-2652, or J i m.harrisCcityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, r Brian Davis Director of Community Development enc: MDNS Staff Evaluation of SEPA Checklist [: Jim Harris, Planner Jim Brennan, JA Brennan Associates. 100 King Street- Suite 200, Seattle. WA 98104 John Hemplemann, Cairncross & Hempelmann, 524 2"d Avenue, Suite 500, Seattle, WA 98104 16-10114 1-00-SE Doc 1 D 76i:1 CITY OF k Federal Way November 15, 2017 Mr. Richard Peterson Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle 710 — 9t" Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 17HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor r is lip�a_, myc at h o l iccemetery. o rg Re: File #17-105494-AD; CRITICAL AREA EXEMPTION APPROVAL Gethsemane Cemetery Stormwater Maintenance, 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way Dear Mr. Peterson: The City of Federal Way received a June 22, 2017, request for Administrative Decision for a Critical Areas Exemption from J.A. Brennan for proposed stormwater facility maintenance within a wetland buffer at the above listed address. Additional information supporting the exemption request was submitted to the City in an Otak Inc. Wetland Report Addendum dated August 18, 2017. Per Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.110: 19.145.110, "Exemptions" "The following activities and developments are exempt from the provisions of this chapter. All exempted activities shall use reasonable methods to avoid potential impacts to critical areas. An exemption from this chapter is not an endorsement to degrade a critical area; ignore risk from natural hazards; or otherwise limit the ability of the director to identify and abate such actions that may cause degradation to a critical area." "(2) Operation, maintenance, or repair of existing public improvements, utilities, public or private roads, parks, trails, or drainage systems if the activity does not further alter or increase impact to, or encroach further within, the critical area or buffer and there is no increased risk to life or property as a result of the proposed operation, maintenance, or repair, and no new clearing of native vegetation beyond routine pruning." The project description is as follows: Near the south central area of the existing cemetery site, there is an existing storm drainage facility, which is located within the outer portion of the 165-foot buffer of wetland No. 6. The applicant has proposed maintenance, repair and upgrades to the existing storm drainage facility and proposed compensatory mitigation to wetland No. 6 buffer. The existing storm drainage facility was approved by King County on engineering plans dated August 31, 1972 on file with the City. A portion of the proposed maintenance and repair of the existing stormwater pond is within the buffer of wetland 6, as discussed in the Otak Inc. technical memo dated August 18, 2017. The proposed work includes clearing vegetation from the inside slopes of the pond, installing a bentonite slurry cutoff wall to prevent seepage and slope failure with the existing berm, installing Mr. Peterson November 15, 2017 Page 2 a new catch basin and pond inlet, installing a 12-foot-wide gravel access road adjacent to the buffer, and installing 12-foot-wide emergency overflow spillway at grade. Most of the maintenance and repair identified above is proposed outside the wetland buffer. The bentonite slurry wall, removal of trees from the interior side slopes of the drainage facility, and a small area of grading (<50 square feet) for the access road is proposed within the wetland buffer and is needed to tie into existing grades. The existing stormwater facility receives some stormwater from Gethsemane Cemetery, but the quantity of storrriwater discharging into the facility is limited due to a broken inlet pipe. Since the existing stormwater facility is located within a wetland buffer, the October 6, 2017 MDNS for the proposal includes a condition to mitigate potential impacts resulting from the proposed stormwater facility maintenance and repair as follows: In order to compensate for potential impacts to the buffer of wetland No. 6 resulting from storm drainage facility maintenance and repair, wetland buffer enhancement of the wetland buffer shall be provided at a ratio of approximately 2.1:1. Buffer impact mitigation shall be provided as generally outlined in the Otak Inc. Addendum to Wetland and Stream Delineation Report dated August 18, 2017. The final mitigation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of any development and/or grading permits. CONCLUSION The city reviewed the request and supporting materials along with applicable sections of FWRC 19.145. In accordance with FWRC 19.145.110.2, the above described activity qualifies for a Critical Areas Exemption and is hereby approved. This approval does not exempt the project from other local, state, and federal permit requirements. Should you have any questions about this letter contact Senior Planner Jim Harris, 253-835-2652, or 'im.harris ci offederalwa .cam. Sincerely, Brian Davis Community Development Director c: Jim Harris, Senior Planner Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Jim Brennan, Jim@jabrennan.com John Hempelmann, JHempelmann@Caimcross.com 17-105494 Doc, 1 D. 76864 DEPARTNIENT OF CONINIUNITI' DEVELOPMENT 81Yi Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 CITY OF 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 Federal Wa.d.. www.cifyoffederalwa�Gom DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION !Z. l 4.,hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Pemit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/or 14p osted to or at each of the attached addresses on V, /1 2017. Project Name V\Semahc- i File Number(s) 1 S 1� Si g natuie Date JL 1 K:\CD Adminisiraiion Files\Declorotion of DistributiondochosI printed 1/12/2017 10:33:00 AM CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OFLAND USEPUBLICHEARING Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan File 16-101140-00-UP Notice is hereby given that the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing on Monday, December 4, 2017, at 2:00 p.m., in the Federal Way City Hall Council Chambers (33325 8cn Avenue South, Federal Way, WA). Topic: The applicant has applied for a Process IV -Bearing Examiner approval for proposed cemetery expansion of approximately 20.8 additional acres. The existing cemetery development is about 8.2 acres in size. The Archdiocese owns approximately 58 acres total, but this project proposes changes only to that 29-acre portion of the site that is west of Hylebos Creek. The project proposes five phases of incremental construction. The proposal is to further develop and expand the existing cemetery with new burial sites, driveways, shrines, columbaria, landscaping, stormwater and utility improvements, and other associated improvements. The site contains several wetlands and Hylebos Creek. Location: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA Applicant: Richard Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle City Contact: Jim Harris, Senior Planner, iim.harl•is(_@cityoffederalwac, 253-835-2652 Application Received.• March 7, 2016 Application Determined Complete: April 4, 2016 Notice of Application Issued: April 15, 2016 Requested Decision and Other Permits Included with this Application: Use Process IV (File 16- 101140-UP); Environmental Determination (File 16-101141-SE); Transportation Concurrency (File 16- 101142-CN). Required Studies: Preliminary Stormwater Technical Information Report, Stream and Wetland Delineation and Report, Cultural Resources Evaluation. Development Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 14, "Environmental Policy," Title 16 "Surface Water Management," and Title 19 "Zoning and Development Code." A State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) was issued for the project on October 6, 2017. Pursuant to FWRC 19.70, Process IV— Hearing Examiner, the Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing on the cemetery use/expansion application and will issue a written decision on the application within 10 working days after the close of the hearing. Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner, either by delivering comments to the Community Development Department before the hearing, by giving them directly to the Hearing Examiner at the hearing, or by appearing at the hearing and presenting oral public testimony in person or through a representative. Any person may request a copy of the decision once made. Written comments may be mailed to the Community Development Department, 33325 8"' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Please reference the file number when presenting written testimony. This application is to be reviewed under all applicable codes, regulations, and policies of the City of Federal Way. The official files are available for review at Federal Way City Hall during working hours in the Cnmmunity Development Department. A On report to the Hearing'Fxaminer will be availahle for review one week before the hearing. I ubiisbed in the .11'eder ai Way Mirror on November i%, 20-1. City of Gethsemane Cemetary - Master Plan Federal Way 1 37600 Pacific Hwy S. Gethsemane Cemetary RD NE) - Faderai o Way � y a C j I Legend Subject Site N Federal Way --- 0 250 500 1,000 _.,_ Federal Way City Limits Feet ti I—) {f DEPARTNIENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 CITY OF 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 Federal Wa. y3 www.cit ofFederc�lwc .cam DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION 1 I, 1.w, are 'nA hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significarce (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Pemnit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was jK mailed ❑ faxed Xe-moijed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on �ns ) , 2017. Project Name File Number(s) Signature Date )1 Ca KACD Administration Files\Declarolion of Dislribulion.doc/Last printed 1/12/2017 10:33:00 AM CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OFLAND USE PUBLICHEARING Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan File 16-101140-00-UP Notice is hereby given that the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing on Monday, December 4, 2017, at 2:00 p.m., in the Federal Way City Hall Council Chambers (33325 8t" Avenue South, Federal Way, WA). Topic: The applicant has applied for a Process IV - Hearing Examiner approval for proposed cemetery expansion of approximately 20.8 additional acres. The existing cemetery development is about 8.2 acres in size. The Archdiocese owns approximately 58 acres total, but this project proposes changes only to that 29-acre portion of the site that is west of Hylebos Creek. The project proposes five phases of incremental construction. The proposal is to further develop and expand the existing cemetery with new burial sites, driveways, shrines, columbaria, landscaping, stormwater and utility improvements, and other associated improvements. The site contains several wetlands and Hylebos Creek. Location: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA Applicant: Richard Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle City Contact: Jim Harris, Senior Planner, jim.harris rr.cityoffederalway.com, 253-835-2652 Application Received: March 7, 2016 Application Determined Complete: April 4, 2016 Notice of Application Issued: April 15, 2016 Requested Decision and Other Permits Included with this Application: Use Process Iv (File 16- 10 1 140-UP); Environmental Determination (File 16-101141-SE); Transportation Concurrency (File 16- 101 l 42-CN). Required Studies: Preliminary Stormwater Technical Information Report, Stream and Wetland Delineation and Report, Cultural Resources Evaluation. Development Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 14, "Environmental Policy," Title 16 "Surface Water Management," and Title 19 "Zoning and Development Code." A State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) was issued for the project on October 6, 2017. Pursuant to FWRC 19.70, Process IV— Hearing Examiner, the Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing on the cemetery use/expansion application and will issue a written decision on the application within 10 working days after the close of the hearing. Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner, either by delivering comments to the Community Development Department before the hearing, by giving them directly to the Hearing Examiner at the hearing, or by appearing at the hearing and presenting oral public testimony in person or through a representative. Any person may request a copy of the decision once made. Written comments may be mailed to the Community Development Department, 33325 8`I' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Please reference the file number when presenting written testimony. This application is to be reviewed under all applicable codes, regulations, and policies of the City of Federal Way. The official files are available for review at Federal Way City Hall during working hours in the, Community Development Department, A staff report to the Rearing Examiner will be available for review one week before the hearing. I ubiisbed in the ir''edc-r ai Wav Mirror on Noveinber 17, 2017. City of Gethsemane Cemetary - Master Plan Federal Way 37600 Pacific Hwy S. �1 RD NE) Gethsemane Cemetary Federal a Wad m - -E Legend Subject Site N 0 250 500 1,000 Federal Way (_ _; Federal Way City Limits rL_ Feet Public Notice - Neighboring Parcels (within 300') Long Term Master Plan �. a. brennan Project Name: J Gethsemane Cemetery Phased assncint es rtsa Property Address: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA 98003 Applicant: Rich Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle Landscape Architects & PI—. 100 S. King St, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98104 Owner: Corporation of the Archbishop of Seattle, A Corporation Sole t 206-583-0620 f. 206.583.0623 Permit Application: Master Land Use Application Process IV —iabren—com (Hearing Examiner's Decision) Parcel number Taxpayer name Parcel address Mailinq address - 2188203335 COOPER ALAN N/A C/O STROM ANITA FEDERAL WAY 1227 58TH AVE NE TACOMA WA 98422 2188203365 RAPACZ SARAH J 112 SW 374TH ST 112 SW 374TH ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 2188204205 CHRISTIANSON BETTY 37405 PACIFIC HWY S C/O SHIKINA CINDY L FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 1868 SW MAPLE OAK LN #677 / BEAVERTON OR 97003 2188204325 CHRISTIANSON BETTY 37405 PACIFIC HWY S C/O SHIKINA CINDY L FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 18668 SW MAPLE OAK LN #B77 BEAVERTON OR 97003 2188204245 CHRISTIANSON BETTY 37405 PACIFIC HWY S C/O SHIKINA CINDY L FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 18668 SW MAPLE OAK LN #B77 BEAVERTON OR 97003 2188204285 CHRISTIANSON BETTY N/A C/O SHIKINA CINDY L FEDERAL WAY 18668 SW MAPLE OAK LN #B77 BEAVERTON OR 97003 2188204330 CHRISTIANSON BETTY N/A CIO SHIKINA CINDY L FEDERAL WAY 18668 SW MAPLE OAK LN #B77 BEAVERTON OR 97003 2188204455 LOONEY WILLIAM A N/A PO BOX 1435 FEDERAL WAY TACOMA WA 98401 2188204480 LOONEY WILLIAM A N/A PO BOX 1435 FEDERAL WAY TACOMA WA 98401 2188204490 MARCHAND CHRIS P N/A 244DB 118TH CT SE FEDERAL WAY KENT WA 98030 2188204520 LOONEY WILLIAM A N/A 7115 PACIFIC HWY E FEDERAL WAY MILTON WA 98354 3221049019 SOUTH SANDRA S 233 S 373RD ST 233 S 373RD ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 3221049021 KARILEEN LLC N/A PO BOX 847 FEDERAL WAY CARLSBAD CA 92018 3221049024 HOWES BEVERLY (AS OF 3/4/2019) 516 S 376TH ST 12523 47TH AVE E CAMPBELL NORMAN (AS OF 2/1512016) FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 TACOMA WA 98446 3221049032 IVERSON CLARA M 7005 JOHNSON RD NE 4323 S 189TH ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 SEATAC WA 98188 3221049033 PARKE WAYNE LEROY JR N/A 8408 234TH AVE E i FEDERAL WAY BUCKLEY WA 98321 3221049046 PARK MIN H+DEAREASA 37305 PACIFIC HWY S 7115 PACIFIC HWY E FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 MILTON WA 98354 3221049057 MORRISON LEONARD+RICHARD N/A 11804 110TH AVE E FEDERAL WAY PUYALLUP WA 98374 3221049059 HOWES BEVERLY (AS OF 314/2016) 610 S 376TH ST 12523 47TH AVE E CAMPBELL NORMAN (AS OF 211512016) FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 TACOMA WA 98446 3221049065 HENRICHSEN NEIL C 6927 JOHNSON RD NE 6927 JOHNSON RD NE FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 TACOMA WA 98422 3221049069 CHURCHILL SYLVIA N/A 3136 SW 302ND PL FEDERAL WAY FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 3221049070 OAKMAN COREY C 37540 8TH AVE S 37540 8TH AV S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 3221049087 CLARK ALTA M 215 S 373RD ST 215 S 373RD ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 322T49091 KOREAN-AMERICAN CALVARY 37515 8TH AVE S BAPTIST CHURCH / FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 PO BOX 23238 FEDERAL WAY WA 98093 3221049101 CARVALHO JEFFREY P 700 S 376TH ST 700 S 376TH ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 3221049106 OAKMAN COREY C N/A FEDERAL WAY 37540 8TH AV S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 3221049109 BRENEMAN HEATH+MARIA N/A 7001 JOHNSON RD NE FEDERAL WAY TACOMA WA 9AA)� 3221049110 WSDOT/REAL ESTATE SERVICES N/A PO BOX47*3 / FEDERAL WAY OLYMPIA WA 96003 3221049134 UNITED STATES 400 S 376TH ST PUYALLUP TRI13E TRUST J FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 Warm TACOMA WA 98404 MAR 07 2016 Gethsemane Cemetery CM OF FEDERAL WAY Neighboring Parcel Report Phased Long Term Master Plan 1 of 1 CDSJ Process IV Master Land Use Application PAGE 2 Public Notice - Wei- of aria a cell �wi 1 3D0'} Project Name: Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long Term Master Plan Property Address: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA 98003 Applicant: Rich Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle Owner: Corporation of the Archbishop of Seattle, A Corporation Sole Permit Application: Master land Use Application Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision) j. a. brennan ��/4i� ;1>SU, is ICS : St[ Lmd—pe iltclutecb & Plal 100 S. Bing St, Site -700, Seattle, \C9 98104 L 1-06.583-06-)0 E 206.583.0623 a'- ) b--muom Parcel number Taxp.gyer name Parcel address Mailing address King Coun 2188203395 KING JAMES VINCENT 372341STAVE SW 37234 1ST AVE SW FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 2188204105 ZEMEK MARIE E N/A 27409 220TH PL SE MAPLE VALLEY WA 98178 2188204580 COUNTY LINE EQUIPMENT N/A 8507 PACIFIC HWY E COMPANY INC TACOMA WA 98422 Pierce County 421311002 COUNTY LINE EQUIPMENT 8507 PACIFIC HWY E COMPANY INC 6601 XXX 7TH STCT NE TACOMA WA 98422 421314022 COUNTY LINE EQUIPMENT 8507 PACIFIC HWY E COMPANY INC 8507 PACIFIC HWY E TACOMA WA 98422 421314030 CEDARS RV COURT LLC 8425 PACIFIC HWY E 1118 NW 130TH ST SEATTLE WA 98177-4113 421314108 CAHILL PARTNERS LP 8410 PACIFIC HWY E 12527 23RD STREET CT E EDGEWOOD WA 98372 421314125 X-RAY LLC 8411 PACIFIC HWY E MICHAEL THOMPSON 321 WILLOW ST PORT TOWNSEND WA 98368 421314132 CAHILL MICHAEL J & MONICA J 8410 PACIFIC HWY E 12527 23RD STREET CT E EDGEWOOD WA 98372 421314127 RONDAR VARILIY 8324 PACIFIC HWY E 8324-PACIFIC HWY E TACOMA WA 98422 421314025 HENRICHSEN NEIL C & BARBARA XXX PACIFIC HWY E PO BOX 459 A MILTON WA 98354 421314124 HENRICHSEN NEIL & BARBARA 6921 JOHNSON RD NE 6927 JOHNSON RD NE TACOMA WA 98422 Gethsemane Cemetery Neighboring Parcel Report Phased Long Term Master Plan 1 of 1 Process IV Master Land Use Application ,7 4125 4132 Ln 1 �I IQ NE 4127 i 51 Is 5z r 124 5tcr-:tip C i f I Leo-.• LEGEND PROJECT BOUNDARY 300'OFFSET --�r�■ PARCELS INCLUDED IN PUBLIC NOTIFICATION rr,5 V a .xsz S 37tnd � ��r✓ l G11 �'3 41 .ry Lit p 0 Q- J it [ 1�57 f 9139 x' r Lfi 9 0 6 u /�,/�7 -150 '? [�� ffll� �1? 0148 9137 GETHSEMANE CEMETERY PUBLIC NOTICE MAP A 300 o� s G f� C ci i t !v ros 1. C GM 710 4-, A� in JI m 1!Jt V ' C") 0 m 99 33Z Pf S AII;kCITY OF Fe dl a ra l Allay October 25, 2017 Sent Via Email to: Gretchen Kaehler, DAHP, Gi•ctehen.kaellleru.dallp.4va.gov Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, kwalten@muckleshoot.nsmus Tamela Smart, Lummi Nation, tamelasa lummi-nsn.goV Kris Miller, Skokornish THPO, kmi.11e a skokornish or - Nathan Reynolds, Cowlitz Indian Tribe, nreyl�o[dstr?ata►vlitx.or� James Gordon, Cowlitz Indian Tribe, jggrdgnrd cowliiz.org Diana Noble-Gulliford, dinnf� a::gElllil'oid_.cnni Richard Peterson, rich I), it nrycathol iccemete[Y.0rg _ John Hempelmann, i empe malm�ct�ca3'iitcross.c ri CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www, cityoffederalway. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor e - -,, ,TENTION OF MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (MDNS) — Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion, 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way Dear Party of :Record: This letter is to notify you that the Community Development Department has reviewed all timely comments submitted to the City regarding the proposed Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS). The Department will retain the MDNS as the proposal is not anticipated to cause significant adverse environmental impacts that would require review in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The MDNS is not a land use decision or a permit to authorize construction; it is a determination that an EIS is not required. Most of the comments received on the MDNS were concerning the Inadvertent Discovery Plan (IDP). The Department utilized its substantive authority granted under the,5tate Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to condition the MDNS document to require the applicant to prepare and receive approval of an Inadvertent Discovery Plan. A draft of the IDP is contained as Appendix E of the SWCA Cultural Resources Assessment dated January 31, 2017. The Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) will be requested to review the IDP prior to any ground disturbing activity on the site. If you have any questions regarding this letter or the land use application, please contact Senior Planner Jim Harris at 253-835-2652 or jim.harrisrc cit qfl Ktgl.-fl!yrq nn . Sincerely, Brian Davis Community Development Director Doc I D 76742 Tamara Fix From: Tamara Fix Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 3:46 PM To: 'gretchen.kaehler@dahp.wa.gov'; 'kwalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us'; tamelas@lummi- nsn.gov; kmiller@skokomish.org; nreynolds@cowlitz.org; jgordon@cowlitz.org; 'diana@gulliford.com'; 'richp@mycatholiccemetery.org'; jhempelmann@cairncross.com Subject: Gethsemane Cemetery Hearing Attachments: 20171115120438.pdf Attached is a Notice of Public Hearing for the above -mentioned project in Federal Way. The Planner for the project, Jim Harris, can be reached at iim.harris@citvoffederalway.com or 253-835-2652. Tamara Fix Administrative Assistant Federal Way 33325 8'h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2602 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.cit offederalwa .com , - AA� CITY OF 49 Federal Way NOTICE OFLAND USE PUBLICHEARING Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan File 16-101140-00-UP Notice is hereby given that the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing on Monday, December 4, 2017, at 2:00 p.m., in the Federal Way City Hall Council Chambers (33325 8`�' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA). Topic: The applicant has applied for a Process IV - Hearing Examiner approval for proposed cemetery expansion of approximately 20.8 additional acres. The existing cemetery development is about 8.2 acres in size. The Archdiocese owns approximately 58 acres total, but this project proposes changes only to that 29-acre portion of the site that is west of Hylebos Creek. The project proposes five phases of incremental construction. The proposal is to further develop and expand the existing cemetery with new burial sites, driveways, shrines, columbaria, landscaping, stormwater and utility improvements, and other associated improvements. The site contains several wetlands and Hylebos Creek. Location: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA Applicant: Richard Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle City Contact: Jim Harris, Senior Planner, 'im.harrisOci offederalwa .coat, 253-835-2652 Application Received: March 7, 2016 Application Determined Complete: April 4, 2016 Notice of Application Issued: April 15, 2016 Requested Decision and Other Permits Included with this Application: Use Process IV (File 16- 101140-UP); Environmental Determination (File 16-101141-SE); Transportation Concurrency (File 16- 10 1 142-CN). Required Studies: Preliminary Stormwater Technical Information Report, Stream and Wetland Delineation and Report, Cultural Resources Evaluation. Development Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 14, "Environmental Policy," Title 16 "Surface Water Management," and Title 19 "Zoning and Development Code." A State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) was issued for the.project on October 6, 2017. Pursuant to FWRC 19.70, Process IV— Hearing Examiner, the Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing on the cemetery use/expansion application and will issue a written decision on the application within 10 working days after the close of the hearing. Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner, either by delivering comments to the Community Development Department before the hearing, by giving them directly to the Hearing Examiner at the hearing, or by appearing at the hearing and presenting oral public testimony in person or through a representative. Any person may request a copy of the decision once made. Written comments may be mailed to the Community Development Department, 33325 81h Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Please reference the file number when presenting written testimony. This application is to be reviewed under all applicable codes, regulations, and policies of the City of Federal Way. The official files are available for review at Federal Way City Hall during working hours in the Community Development Department. A staff report to the Hearing Examiner will be available for review one week before the hearing. Published in the Federal Way Mirror on November 17, 2017. CITY OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF CODINIUNITI' DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.ciiynffederalwoy.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION I hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter �( Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed p(e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on V'�,aJ 1�,2017. Project Name File Number(s) 1116 Ce Signature-, Date 11 — 1_ S -1 Y,:\CD Adminislrotion Files\Declaration of Dislribufion doc/Lost printed 1 /12/2017 10:33:00 AM Tamara Fix From: Linda Mills <Imills@kentreporter.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 11:31 AM To: Tamara Fix Subject: Re: Gethsemane Cemetery Hearing Hi Tamara, I have received your notice (re: Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan) to be published in the Federal Way Mirror on Friday, November 17, 2017. Thank you, Linda Linda Mills Legal/Public Notice Advertising - Obituary Representative Auburn, Bellevue. Bothell/Kenmore, Covington/Maple Valley/Black Diamond, Issaquah/Sammamish,Kent, Kirkland, Mercer Island, Redmond and Renton Reporters, Federal Way Mirror, Snoqualmie Valley Record, and Okanogan Valley Gazette -Tribune Direct:253-234-3506 Internal:36027 Fax:253-437-6016 19426 68th Ave. S., Ste A, Kent, WA 98032 Map Print Rates Online Rates Media Kit Sound Info On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Tamara Fix <Tainara.Fix@cit offedei-al%.va .comma wrote: Please publish the attached legal notice (Gethsemane Hearing, 16-101140) in Friday's (Nov. 17, 2017) issue. Please confirm and issue an affidavit of publication. Thanks! Akk CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OFLAND USE PUBLICHEARING Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan File 16-101140-00-UP Notice is hereby given that the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing on Monday, December 4, 2017, at 2:00 p.m., in the Federal Way City Hall Council Chambers (33325 8cn Avenue South, Federal Way, WA). Topic: The applicant has applied for a Process IV - Hearing Examiner approval for proposed cemetery expansion of approximately 20.8 additional acres. The existing cemetery development is about 8.2 acres in size. The Archdiocese owns approximately 58 acres total, but this project proposes changes only to that 29-acre portion of the site that is west of Hylebos Creek. The project proposes five phases of incremental construction. The proposal is to further develop and expand the existing cemetery with new burial sites, driveways, shrines, columbaria, landscaping, stormwater and utility improvements, and other associated improvements. The site contains several wetlands and Hylebos Creek. Location: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA Applicant: Richard Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle City Contact: Jim Harris, Senior Planner, iim.harris m ciiyoffederalway.com, 253-835-2652 Application Received: March 7, 2016 Application Determined Complete: April 4, 2016 Notice of Application Issued: April 15, 2016 Requested Decision and Other Permits Included with this Application: Use Process IV (File 16- 101140-UP); Environmental Determination (File 16-101141-SE); Transportation Concurrency (File 16- 101142-CN). Required Studies: Preliminary Stormwater Technical Information Report, Stream and Wetland Delineation and Report, Cultural Resources Evaluation. Development Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 14, "Environmental Policy," Title 16 "Surface Water Management," and Title 19 "Zoning and Development Code." A State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) was issued for the project on October 6, 2017. Pursuant to FWRC 19.70, Process IV— Hearing Examiner, the Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing on the cemetery use/expansion application and will issue a written decision on the application within 10 working days after the close of the hearing. Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner, either by delivering comments to the Community Development Department before the hearing, by giving them directly to the Hearing Examiner at the hearing, or by appearing at the hearing and presenting oral public testimony in person or through a representative. Any person may request a copy of the decision once made. Written comments may be mailed to the Community Development Department, 33325 8`I' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Please reference the file number when presenting written testimony. This application is to be reviewed under all applicable codes, regulations, and policies of the City of Federal Way. The official files are available for review at Federal Way City Hall during working hours in the Cnmmunity Develnpment Department, A staff report to the Hearing Examiner will be available for review one week before the hearing. I ub.ished in the 17e ederui Wav Mirror on November 17, 2017. City of Gethsemane Cemetary - Master Plan Federal Way 37600 Pacific Hwy S. Gethsemane Cemetary _�o P-W Federal a Way ca r, Legend A Subject Site Federal Way -- 0 250 500 1,000 j„_ _i Federal Way City Limits Feet City Gethsemane Cemetary - tester Plan 16 flap DateFederal 0y City of Federal Way of ► 33325 6lh Ave S. Federal Way 37600 Pacific Hwy S. Federal Way Wa 96003 (206) - B35 - 7000 www.cityofiede ralway.com Gethsemane Cemetary ,. A■■f �1�■ 1II■!� ■ Puget 1 Sm Inril Federal C S B1RCH Si ICUWay Legend CITY or -- N Federal Way Subject Site .e 0 250 500 1, 000 This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. L�ep� Federal Way City Limits Feet The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. 161 da'h PL414% October 20, 2017 Mr. Jim Harris Contract Planner City of Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Allyson Brooks Ph.D., Director State Historic Preservation Officer In future correspondence please refer to: Project Tracking Code: 2016-06-03926 Property: City of Federal Way Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion, CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE GETHSEMANE CEMETERY PHASED LONG-RANGE MASTER PLAN FEDERAL WAY, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, INADVERTENT DISCOVERY PLAN FOR THE GETHSEMANE CEMETERY PHASED LONG-RANGE MASTER PLAN FEDERAL WAY, KING COUNTY, WASHI NGTON Re: Archaeology - Concur with Survey and Inadvertent Discovery Plan, Site 45KI1866 Determined not Eligible Dear Mr. Harris: Thank you for contacting the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) with documentation regarding the above referenced project. We have reviewed the above cultural resources survey. We have the following comments and concurrences: 0 We concur with the recommendation that the historic foundation designated as 45KI1866 is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the Washington Heritage Register (WHR) and requires no further documentation or protections. • We request that plans for future construction beyond Phases 1 through 5 as they are currently proposed in the Master Plan be reviewed by a professional archaeologist prior to completion of the undertaking. All future plans should also continue to avoid St. George's Cemetery east of Hylebos Creek. ■ We also concur with the Inadvertent Discovery Plan (IDP). The IDP should be kept onsite at all times during in ground disturbing work in the Cemetery Expansion Area. The IDP Contact List may need to be updated periodically as staff and contact information are subject to change. State of Washington • Department of Archaeology L Historic Preservation P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 www.dahp.wa.gov Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Gretchen Kaehler Assistant State Archaeologist, Local Governments (360) 586-3088 Wretch en. kaehl er@da hp. wa. gov cc. Laura Murphy, Archaeologist, Muckleshoot Tribe Brandon Reynon, Cultural Resources, Puyallup Tribe Jackie Wall, Cultural Resources, Nisqually Tribe Rhonda Foster, TBPO, Squaxin Island Tribe Stephanie Neil, Archaeologist, Squaxin Island Tribe Amber Early, Principal, SWCA Jim Harris From: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us> Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 10:22 AM To: Jim Harris Subject: RE: Gethsemane Cemetery MDNS Jim, Thanks for sending us the site plans for the Gethsemane cemetery project. We have reviewed this information and have no further questions. Best regards, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program Phillip Starr Building 39015-A 17e Ave 5E Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 From: Jim Harris [mailto:Jim.Harris@cityoffederalway.eom] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2017 9:58 AM To: Karen Walter Subject: RE: Gethsemane Cemetery MDNS Karen: The preliminary site plans for the Cemetery Expansion proposal are attached. Let me know if you have any additional questions. Jim Harris Senior Planner Federal way 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2652 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.cit offederalwa .corn Office Hours Mon - Thur, 8:00 AM — 4:30 PM or by appointment From: Karen Walter[fnal1to:KWa1ter0muck1eshoot.nsn ] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2017 9:43 AM To: Jim Harris Subject: FW: Gethsemane Cemetery MDNS Jim, I We received this MDNS for the Gethsemane Cemetery expansion project referenced above and need additional information. Is there a site plan available for this proposal? We would like to review it during the environmental review process. We prefer electronic copies if available. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program Phillip Starr Building 39015-A 172" d Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 From: Tamara Fix [maiito:Tamara.Fix ci offederalwa .cam] Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 9:25 AM To:'suzanne.l.anderson@usace.army.mil'; 'separegister@ecy.wa.gov'; 'ra min. pazooki@wsdot.wa.gov'; 'gretchen.kaehler@dahp.wa.gov'; 'laura.arber@dfw.wa.gov'; Karen Walter; 'wfwoctap@fws.gov'; 'reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov'; 'sepadesk@dfw.wa.gov'; 'Fisher, Larry D (DFW)'; Laura Murphy; 'sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov';'bra ndon.reynon@puyalluptribe.com'; dlewarch su uamish.nsn u ; 'epa-Seattle@epa.gov'; Chris Cahan; 'rflynn@ci.tacoma.wa.us'; info earthcor s.or ; 'basbury@lakehaven.org';'shirley.schultz@ci.tacoma.wa.us'; stiMm@cityofmiiton.net; ci hall ci ofedgewood.org; 'sfriddle@cityoffife.org' Subject: Gethsemane Cemetery MDNS Attached is an MDNS and SEPA checklist for the above -mentioned project in Federal Way. The Senior Planner for the project, Jim Harris, can be reached at 'ii m.harri5�cityoffederalway.com or 253-835-2652. Tamara Fix Administrative Assistant V.A Federal Way 33325 Wt Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2602 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.citvoffederalway.com Jim Harris From: Tamela S. Smart <TamelaS@lummi-nsn.gov> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 2:54 PM To: Jim Harris Cc: Gretchen Kaehler (Gretchen.Kaehler@dahp.wa.gov) Subject: Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion Project (File No: 16-101141-00-SE) Dear Jim Harris, The Lummi Nation has received the Notice of Environmental Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) for the Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion Project located at 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, Washington. The Lummi Nation is responding as an affected tribe. The Lummi Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office (LNTHPO) has facilitated a review of the above listed document as well as other records on file at our office. Based on our review, it is clear that this location has the potential for inadvertent discoveries. We recommend that the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) and tribes within closer proximity to the development area be consulted with. These comments are based on the information available at the time of the review. The LNTHPO should review any changes related to the proposed project. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at 360-312-2253 or via email at tamelas{ftmmi-nsn.gov. Sincerely, Tamela S. Smart, M.A. Deputy THPO/Compliance Officer Culture Department, Lummi Nation 2665 Kwina Road, Bellingham, WA 98226 Direct Line: 360-312-2253 Email: TamelaS aNummi-nsn.gQv LNTHPO would like to contribute to the conservation of our planet's natural resources and kindly requests that all correspondence and documents be sent electronically. (I Jim Harris From: Miller, Kris <kmiller@skokomish.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 2:14 PM To: Jim Harris Subject: Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion Mr Harris, The Skokomish THPO (Tribal Historic Preservation Office) received notification of the proposed expansion of the Gethsemane Cemetery. We do not have any comments for this proposed action, but suggest you contact other local tribes in the project area for consultation. If you have any questions, please contact me at shlanayl@skokomish,org. Sincerely, Kris Miller Skokomish THPO Kris Miller Tribal Historic Preservation Officer 80 NTribal Center Road Skokomish, WA 98584 .shlanay Z4skoko►nish.oi Jim Harris From: James Gordon <jgordon @cowl itz.org > Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 2:11 PM To: Jim Harris; Gretchen.Kaehler@dahp.wa.gov Subject: File # 16-101141-00-5E - Cowlitz Indian Tribe response. Attachments: Cowlitz Indian Tribe Inadvertent Discovery Language.pdf; 150428 Cultural Resource Protection Laws.pdf Mr. Harris, Given that the above -referenced projects are within the Cowlitz Tribe's area of concern, the Cultural Resources Department (CRD) of the Cowlitz Indian Tribe would like to state its interest. The CRD recommends an Inadvertent Discovery Plan be attached to the permit; we have included language for your consideration. In addition, we recommend Consultation with additional interested Tribes. Contact information may be found via http;�Jgoiama.ga This determination is based on all currently available knowledge, and is subject to revision should new information arise. Please contact us with any questions or concerns you may have. We look forward to working with you on this undertaking. Thank you for your time and attention. Nathan Reynolds Interim Cultural Resources Manager Cowlitz Indian Tribe PO Box 2547 Longview, WA 98632 360-575-6226 Office 360-577-6207 Fax nreynoldslEcowlitz.or� James Gordon Cultural Resources Technician Cowlitz Indian Tribe PO Box 2547 Longview, WA 98632 360.577.5680 office 360.957.3004 cell 360.577.6207 fax The confidentiality of this message is protected by federal law, Tribal code, and other stuff. Nothing in this message constitutes a waiver of the Tribe's Sovereign Immunity. cowlitz.org COWLITZ INDIAN TRIBE INADVERTENT DISCOVERY LANGUAGE In the event any archaeological or historic materials are encountered during project activity, work in the immediate area (initially allowing for a 100' buffer; this number may vary by circumstance) must stop and the following actions taken: 1. Implement reasonable measures to protect the discovery site, including any appropriate stabilization or covering; and 2. Take reasonable steps to ensure the confidentiality of the discovery site; and, 3. Take reasonable steps to restrict access to the site of discovery. The project proponent will notify the concerned Tribes and all appropriate county, state, and federal agencies, including the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. The agencies and Tribe(s) will discuss possible measures to remove or avoid cultural material, and will reach an agreement with the project proponent regarding actions to be taken and disposition of material. If human remains are uncovered, appropriate law enforcement agencies shall be notified first, and the above steps followed. If the remains are determined to be Native, consultation with the affected Tribes will take place in order to mitigate the final disposition of said remains. See the Revised Code of Washington, Chapter 27.53, "Archaeological Sites and Resources," for applicable state laws and statutes. See also Washington State Executive Order 05-05, "Archaeological and Cultural Resources." Additional state and federal law(s) may also apply. It is stronaly encouraged copies of inadvertent discovery language/plan ore retained on -site while joro t activity is underwray. Contact information: Nathan Reynolds Interim Cultural Resources Manager Cowlitz Indian Tribe PO Box 2547 Longview, WA 98632 360-575-6226 Office 360-577-6207 Fax n re v nol d s C@ cowl itz. ore Revised 19 September 2017 CULTURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION LAWS NOTE: This list is not all-inclusive, and does not take place of consultation. Not all laws will apply in all situations. Federal Laws National Historic Protection Act (NHPA) 36 CFR 60 haD:/lwwmach e.eov/docs/sehpaVa202008-linal. pdf Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) 43 CFR 10 lilt :/Icefr. oaccess. ovlc iltltext/texi- idx'? ypc=sisnlsle:s=ecfrcc=eck sid=abefc428407c704d6 3fef71637939827•idno=43r ion=I7IV I:g 1=NA'I7VE°/e2 OAMERICAN%2OGRAVES%20PROTECTION%20AN D°/u20REPATRIATION:rlen=d i v5:vic►v=tex t;itode=43 °/03 Al. 1.1.1.10 or htt://tin rl.coM/ e4sx7o Executive Order 13175— Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments Itttp:ll%�,r%vwe:n.doe.t'ov/pdfs-'MEMO%n29Tribal%20Cons ullation%2Wnd%20Executive1/Q20Ordcr%2013175.udC or http:/hinyurl.comAingxrh� Washington State Laws Archaeological Sites and Resources 27.53 RCW httpllapps.lgg.wagov/1tCW/de_f_aull.aspx'?cite=27.53 Executive Order 05-05 httl3://www.govern or.wa.ov/execorders/eo OS-O5. df Notice of Forest Practices to Affected Indian Tribes WAC 222-20-120 httty:/lalips.leg.ua.kov/WAC/default.aspx?citc=222-20- 120 Oreton State Laws Indian Graves and Protection I ORS 97.740-S ht1 :I/www.Iep,state.trr us/ors/097.html Objects 97.760 Archaeological Objects and ORS 358.905 - htt ://ww%v le .btate.ontt%(orsl358.ltlml Sites 358.955 Jim Harris From: Diana Noble-Gulliford <diana@gulliford.com> Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 11:31 AM To: Jim Harris Subject: RE: Gethsemane Cemetery Understood. One of the aerial photos that has been redacted (1936) 1 would think would be from the King County imap website and that would be public information. Does the city question the rationale for redaction when such a document has been submitted for this type of action? Sorry to get into the details Jim. It is how I learn for future reference. Thanks, Diana From: Jim Harris[mailto:Jim.Harris@cityoffederalway.com] Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 11:11 AM To:'Diana Noble-Gulliford' <diana@gulliford.com> Subject: RE: Gethsemane Cemetery Diana; I will need to discuss this with the City Attorney office and will get back to you later with responses. Jim Harris Planner Federal Way 33325 81h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2652 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.cit,yoffederalway.com Office Hours Mon - Thur, 8:00 AM — 4:30 PM or by appointment From: Diana Noble-Gulliford [mailto.diana uliiford.com Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 9:31 AM To: Jim Harris Subject: RE: Gethsemane Cemetery Thank you Jim. Looks very interesting. I have forwarded the publication to Dick Caster, a writer and historian on Father Hylebos and the St. George's Cemetery. Will the redacted photos and text ever be redacted? Not sure why it is redacted since it has been over 50-100 years since the historical part of this property was developed. Was this requested by relatives? the church? Tribal elders? Is there a rule or law that dictates that this is public policy? Thank you for keeping me updated on this. Diana From: Jim Harris [rnailto:Jim.Harris@cityoffederalway.comj Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 9:03 AM To:'Diana Noble-Gulliford' <diana@eulliford.com> Cc: Robert Hansen <Robert.Hansen @citvoffedera[wa .corn>; Tina Piety<Tina. P iety@cityoffederalway -corn> Subject: RE: Gethsemane Cemetery Diana: Here is the link to the Cultural Resources Assessment Report ftp://ftp.cityoffedera Tway. com/O utbox/Gethsema ne/ This report is redacted as the full SWCA Report includes information about burial sites and other cultural resources protected from disclosure. Click on this link then it is the only file in the Gethsemane folder. Contact myself or Tina Piety at 253 835-2601 if you need help getting to the document in the City's FTP site. The Cemetery project review is making some progress. We had to work through some engineering and wetland issues that are now resolved with the applicant and their design team. We are looking to get the project to public hearing with the Hearing Examiner in mid November. A copy of the City's SEPA determination will be mailed to you by tomorrow. Let me know if you have any further comments or questions. Jim Harris Planner Federal Way 33325 8`h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2652 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.cityoffedera Iwav_co m Office Hours Mon - Thur, 8:00 AM — 4:30 PM or by appointment From: Diana Noble-Gulliford fmailto:diana@guliiford.com] Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 8:23 AM To: Jim Harris Subject: RE: Gethsemane Cemetery Thank you Jim for the update. I would like to come in to City Hall to review the file. I can download the cultural assessment if I have a link. My main concern is the St George's Cemetery as you know. I am interested in any input you may be received from the Puyallup Tribe. Thanks again. I was wondering what was going on with this application. Diana From: Jim Harris [mailto:Jim.Harris(&eitvoffederalway.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2017 10:45 AM To: Diana Noble-Gulliford (diana@gulliford.com) <diana eulliford.com> Subject: Gethsemane Cemetery Diana: I just wanted to give you a heads up that the City will be issuing an environmental determination on the Cemetery expansion this coming Friday. The City has also received a Cultural Assessment Report for the property. I can let you review a copy of the Cultural Report at the permit center. Alternatively, I will have a copy of the report on the City's FTP site available for public viewing in the next couple of days. I do not have any extra printed copies of the report, but I could get one made if you prefer. Let me know if you have any questions. Jim Harris Planner Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2652 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.cityoffecIk way.com Office Hours Mon - Thur, 8:00 AM — 4:30 PM or by appointment Virus -free. www.evast.com c . A' RESUBMITTED _ PERTEET.COM PERTEET LL [E>� `j 6 2017 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 00 ..7 EVERETT, WA 98201 (;fTY OF FEDERAL WAY 425.252.7700 C.OMMUN17Y DEVELOPMENT To: Jim Harris, Planner, City of Federal Way From: Jason Walker, PLA, PWS, Environmental Manager and Wetland Ecologist, Perteet Date: September 26, 2017 Re: 16-101141-00-SE & 16-101140-UP Gethsemane Cemetery Critical Areas and Impacts Mitigation Plan —Second Review Perteet Inc. conducted a follow-up review of resubmitted information to address findings stated in our March 24, 2017 memo. A meeting was also held at the City of Federal Way on August 8, 2017 with city staff, the applicant, and their wetland consultant. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED The following resubmitted documents were reviewed by Perteet: • Technical Memorandum: Gethsemane Cemetery — Response to 3rd Party Review of Critical Areas and Impacts Mitigation Plan prepared by Otak, Inc, dated July 11, 2017. ■ Technical Memorandum: Addendum to Wetland and Stream Delineation Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan for Gethsemane Cemetery, prepared by Otak, Inc., dated August 18, 2017. FINDINGS 1) Perteet accepts Wetland 1 (Unit 1) was revised from a Category III to a Category II classification pursuant to our prior memo and the accompanying responses to our otherfindings relating the to the probable off -site wetland feature, comments on ratings, and observations made at probable watercourses. These items are addressed and acceptable pursuant to the recent response submittal items cited above. 2) The buffer mitigation approach proposed for the stormwater pond is also acceptable with a few exceptions listed below. The mitigation provides more area (21,000 square feet) than the area of buffer impact (10,100 square feet) to address common risks associated with the success of permittee-responsible mitigation and occurs in a landscape position that will be functional to the adjacent natural system (restoring a buffer area that is presently a mowed lawn with native plant species that are appropriate for buffer restoration). Sufficient information has been provided to address FWMC 19.145.140 (Mitigation Plan Requirements) except as noted below. a. Address permanent protection of all critical areas on the site (inclusive of buffers) pursuant FWMC 19.145.150 and 19.145.170, as determined to be applicable by the City for this action. b. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.180 —Critical area Markers, Signs, and Fences. Fence and sign installation should occur at the outer edge of all buffer areas on the property for critical areas demarcation and protection. Depict signs and fencing on the mitigation plan drawing and/or Page 1 of 2 24PERTEET I7 . • ,, PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 site plan drawings. Describe the proposed fencing method. A two- or three -rail (open rail) 4- foot high wood fence is standard. Signs can be part of the fence on fence posts that extend to 5 or 6 feet in height at sign locations. Signs should occur at approximately 100 foot minimum intervals pursuant to common best practices. c. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.140(7)(c) — Erosion and Sediment Control and to avoid probable water quality risks pursuant to FWMC 19.145.200, clearing and soil disturbance (grading, sod stripping, and soil conditioning) in the buffer impact and mitigation areas should be limited to the dry summer months. d. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.140(7)(c) and 19.145.200, the site should also be stabilized (e.g. seeded and/or mulched) during the summer growing season with appropriate BMPs, presumed mostly to include seeding and mulching (precluding use of straw that can re -seed) and silt fencing at the disturbance limit. Mitigation planting should occur after soil work and seed stabilization in the wet winter dormant season. For appropriate germination, seeding should occur no later than mid -September. Provide the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESL) Plan depicting and describing these items and the sequence and timing of construction activities on that plan sheet. Coordinate preparation of the TESC plan with the Best management Practices section on Page 12 of the July 11, 2017 Mitigation Plan (report). Indicate mulching of plantings with wood chips or arborist mulch on the mitigation planting plan drawing. Describe a minimum of a 3 foot diameter by 4"-6" depth mulch ring around each plant with mulch held -back from contacting the plant stems by 4". This information is partially complete in the report but not clearly shown and also conflicting on the mitigation planting plan drawing. f. Indicate irrigation by an automated temporary system on the mitigation planting plan drawing in the "Irritation Within Buffer" notes. g. Tall -growing grasses specified in the Upland Seed Mix table on the mitigation planting plan drawing are a concern. It is recommended to use Meadow Seed Mix pursuant to the Ecology 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume II - Chapter 4 - Page 282, and as included in previous Ecology manual versions and used region -wide as a common best practice method for areas where colonization by native plants is desirable: Table 11-4.1.7 Meadow Seed Mix 1% We! 9hI %Pur % Germirtatiar Romp ordregon LenWass 20 92 85 kgrastrs alga or Agras*s om9aeel, Red te$Ufe 70 98 90 Festuca rubra whiFe Cu" clover S(1 C8 G Trrfatlum rapent o. Address FWMC 19.145.14000) — Financial Guarantees. Provide and address these requimrents pursuant to code as directed by City when requested. End of Memo Page 2of2 Jim Harris From: John Hempelmann <JHempel mann@Cairncross.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 8:10 AM To: gretchen.kaehler@dahp.wa.gov Cc: Jim Harris; Richard Peterson (Rich P@ mycatholiccemetery.org); Sharon Boswell (sboswell@swca.com); Midori Dillon Subject: Gethsemane Cemetery Attachments: Inadvertent Discovery Plan (03428330).pdf Dear Ms. Kaehler, I am writing on behalf of the Catholic Cemeteries of the Archdiocese of Seattle. We have received your October 20, 2017 letter to Mr. Jim Harris at the City of Federal Way that comments on the City's SEPA Determination for the Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan under review by the City. First, we appreciate your comments. Specifically, with respect to the second comment, we will make certain that additional professional archeology review is undertaken before proceeding with any phases beyond the current Master Plan. Also, as you have seen, the Master Plan carefully avoids the old St. George's Cemetery which is not on property owned by the Archdiocese. Second, we were surprised that the Department had not received the proposed Inadvertent Discovery Plan which was one of the Appendices to the Cultural Resources Report prepared by SWCA. I am attaching the proposed IDP to this email. Can you please let us know if the Department suggests any revisions? Finally, we want you to know that the Archdiocese contacted all the Tribes that had commented on the Master Plan and made the Cultural Resources Report available to all the Tribal representatives. We look forward to hearing from you. Can you please copy Mr. Harris on your reply? Thank you. John Hempelmann CH& I John Hempelmann Attorney Cairncross & Hempelmann 524 Second Avenue I Suite 500 1 Seattle, WA 98104-2323 d: 206-254-4400 1 f 206-587-2308 1 JHempehnann@cairncross.com I www.caimeross.com I Bio (" YEAR .APiN1YER5ARY H� Ranked by Chambers USA 2017 in the area of Washington State Real Estate: Zoning/Land Use. This email message may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and delete the original message without reading, disclosing, or copying its contents. CITE' OF Federal Way MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (MDNS) Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan File No: 16-101141-00-SE Description of Proposal: Proposed cemetery expansion of approximately 20.8 additional acres. The existing cemetery development is about 8.2 acres in size. The Archdiocese owns approximately 58 acres total, but this project proposes changes only to that 29-acre portion of the site that is west of Hylebos Creek. The project proposes five phases of incremental construction. The proposal is to further develop and expand the existing cemetery with new burial sites, driveways, shrines, columbaria, landscaping, stormwater and utility improvements, and other associated improvements. The site contains several wetlands and Hylebos Creek. Proponent: Richard Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle Location: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA Lead Agency: City of Federal Way Department of Community Development City Staff Contact: Senior Planner Jim Harris, 253-835-2652, or jim.harris@cityoffederalway.corn The Responsible Official of the City of Federal Way hereby makes the following decision based upon impacts identified in the environmental checklist, Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, Staff Evaluationfor Environmental Checklist, and other municipal policies, plans, rules, and regulations designated as a basis for exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act Rules pursuant to RCW 43.31 C.060. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c), only if the conditions listed below are met. This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. FINDINGS OF FACT l . The subject property is located at 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, Washington. The total cemetery site area is approximately 58 acres in size, but this proposal only extends to the portion of the site located west of Hylebos Creek, totaling approximately 29 acres. The proposal is to filrther- develop and expand the existing cemetery with new burial sites, driveways, shrines, columbaria, landscaping, stormwater and utility improvements, and other associated improvements. No action or development is proposed for the portion of the property on the east side of Hylebos Creek. The subject property is zoned Suburban Estates (SE), requiring a minimum lot size of 5 acres. The comprehensive plan designation for the site is Low Density Single Family. A cemetery is a permitted use in the SE zoning district. The property contains several wetlands and wetland buffers. The applicant provided the City a February 25, 2016, Wetland and Stream Delineation Report by Otak Inc. The following wetlands and summary of proposed wetland buffer impacts are located within the western portion of the cemetery property. • Wetland 1: Located at the northwest corner of the site, with a 165-foot required buffer. Applicant has requested a 25 percent buffer width reduction with buffer enhancement. • Wetland 2: Small unregulated wetland adjacent to Pacific Highway South. ■ Wetland 3: At the SW corner of the site with a 60-foot buffer. • Wetlands 4 and 5: Adjacent to Hylebos Creek, with a 165-foot buffer. • Wetland 6: Near the south central area of the site. An existing storm drainage facility is located within the outer portion of the 165-foot buffer of wetland No. 6. The applicant has proposed repair, maintenance and upgrades to the existing storm drainage facility and proposed compensatory mitigation to wetland No. 6 buffer. • Wetland 14: Near the south central portion of the site, with a 60-foot buffer. • Wetlands 7-13 are located on the east side of Hylebos Creek and are not impacted by the proposed Cemetery Expansion. The Hearing Examiner will evaluate and decide on the proposed wetland buffer reduction and enhancement for wetland No. 1 as required by FWRC. The proposed maintenance and repair of the storm drainage facility within the buffer of wetland No. 6 will be reviewed by the Community Development Department for compliance with permissible Critical Area exemptions in FWRC. 4. The applicant submitted a Cultural Resources Assessment prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants dated January 31, 2017, for the Cemetery Expansion. The Report describes the pre - contact and historical land use of the project area and provides a summary of previous cultural resources work in the vicinity as background for an assessment of the potential for discovery of significant archeological resources or human remains within the project boundaries. The Report concludes with an assessment of project effects and recommendations for construction following an inadvertent discovery plan (IDP). 5. The proposed Cemetery expansion will be reviewed for compliance with Federal Way Revised Code requirements by the Federal Way Hearing Examiner under a Process IV Public Hearing. 6. The "Final Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist, File No. 16-1 01141-00-SE" is hereby incorporated by reference as though set forth in full. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Federal Way's comprehensive plan policies adopted by Federal Way, and contained within the Federal Way C0777prehensive Plan (FWCP), serve as a basis for the exercise of substantive SEPA authority to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions applicable to potential adverse environmental impacts resulting from this project. The following components of the FWCP support the conditions for the development. Mitigated Determination Of Nonsigniticance(MDNS) Pace 2 Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan Pile No: 16-101 141-00-SE/Doc. I.D. 76328 1 NEP2 Preserve and restore ecological functions, and enhance natural beauty, by encouraging community development patterns and site planning that maintains and complements natural landforms. NEP3 Plant suitable native trees and vegetation within degraded stream, wetlands, lake buffers, and steep slopes. NEP 6 Mitigation sequencing steps, which begin with avoiding impacts altogether by not taking certain action or parts of an action, should be applied to all projects where impacts to environmentally critical areas are proposed. NEP19 The City should encourage the retention of surface water runoff in wetlands, regional retention facilities, and low impact development stormwater facilities, or use other similar stormwater management techniques to promote aquifer recharge. NEP32 The City may regulate private development and public actions to protect water quality and to ensure adequate in -stream flow to protect fisheries, wildlife habitat, and recreation resources. NEP33 The City will seek to retain native vegetation within riparian corridors. New planting of vegetation with the approval from the City may be required .where such revegetation will enhance the corridor's function. Consideration should be given to the removal of non-native invasive species. NEP45 The City will protect its wetlands with an objective of no overall net -loss of functions or values. NEP47 Require buffers adjacent to wetlands to protect wetland function and values integral to healthy wetland ecosystems. Buffer requirements should be predictable and where allowances for buffer alterations are warranted, provide clear direction for mitigation, enhancement, and restoration. NEP48 Preserve wetland systems by maintaining native vegetation between nearby wetlands and between wetlands and nearby streams and other wildlife habitat areas. NEP56 Mitigation sites should replace or augment the wetland values to be lost as a result of a development proposal. Sites should be chosen that would contribute to an existing wetland system or, if feasible, restore an area that was historically a wetland. LUP 68 Zoning should be compatible with and conducive to continued preservation of historic neighborhoods and properties. LUP 69 Safeguard and manifest Federal Way's heritage by preserving those sites, buildings, structures, and objects which reflect significant elements of the City's history. LUP 70 Work with the Historical Society of Federal Way to come tip with a methodology to catalog historic sites using the City's geographic information system. LUP 71 Undertake an effort to publicly commemorate historic sites. LUP 72 The City shall continue to work with the Historical Society of Federal Way towards attainment of historic resource policies. Mitigated Determination Of Nonsignificance(MDNS) Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan Page 3 Pile No: 16-101141-00-SE/Doc. I.D. 76328 SEPA CONDITIONS Based on the above policy, the following mitigation measures are required to minimize identified potential significant adverse environmental impacts. I ) In order to compensate for potential impacts to the buffer of wetland No. 6 resulting from storm drainage facility maintenance and repair, wetland buffer enhancement of the wetland buffer shall be provided at a ratio of approximately 2.1:1. Buffer impact mitigation shall be provided as generally outlined in the Otak Inc. Addendum to Wetland and Stream Delineation Report dated August 18, 2017. The final mitigation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of any development and/or grading pen -nits. 2) In order to avoid adverse impacts to cultural resources, as recommended and detailed in the SWCA Cultural Resources Assessment dated January 31, 2017, future ground - disturbing activities shall follow a plan for inadvertent discovery in order to guide Gethsemane Cemetery in case cultural resources are unexpectedly discovered. An inadvertent discovery plan shall be prepared by the applicant prior to any ground disturbing activity. This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days fi-om the date of issuance. Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, October 20, 2017. Unless modified by the city, this determination will become final following the above comment deadline. Any person aggrieved of the city's final determination may file an appeal with the city within 21 days of the above comment deadline, November 10, 2017. Responsible Official: Brian Davis Position/Title: Director of Community Development Address: 33325 8"' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003 Date Issued: October 6, 2017 Signature: H,, L Mitigated Determination Of Nonsioniticance(MDNS) Page Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan Pile No: 16-101 141-00-SE/Doc. I.D. 76328 Puget f -_ Federal ST ICU 1 LO 11 �, egend N - Federal Way Subject Site 0 250 500 1,000 Federal Way City Limits Feet This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. �, Y Y The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. 4ik CITY OF 40'::tS:� Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www. c i t vof f e d erol wp v. c orn DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION 1,11 AA S hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/or �posted to or at each of the at ached addresses on L es � C G Cra C,c �v»-r 3 ►- 0 c, 2017. W t 0, Project Name G-t WL 414 fvL-( File Number(s) I () ( SL Signature Date I:\Declaration of Distdbution.doc/Last printed 8/11/2017 11:46:00 AM Posted Sites: Federal Way City Hall: 33325 8th Ave South Federal Way Library: 34200 111 Way South Federal Way 320th Library: 848 S. 320th St I:\Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 8/11/2017 11:46:00 AM CITY 'OF A Federal Way NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (MDNS) Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan File No: 16-101141-00-SE The City of Federal Way has determined that the following project does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the city. Proposed Action: Proposed cemetery expansion of approximately 20.8 additional acres. The existing cemetery development is about 8.2 acres in size. The proposal is to further develop and expand the existing cemetery with new burial sites, driveways, shrines, columbaria, landscaping, stormwater and utility improvements, and other associated improvements. The site contains several wetlands and Hylebos Creek. Proponent: Richard Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle Location: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA Lead Agency: City of Federal Way Department of Community Development MITIGATION MEASURES (SUMMARY): 1) In order to compensate for potential impacts to the buffer of wetland No. 6 resulting from storm drainage facility maintenance and repair, wetland buffer enhancement of the wetland buffer shall be provided at a ratio of approximately 2.1:1. Buffer impact mitigation shall be provided as generally outlined in the Otak Inc. Addendum to Wetland and Stream Delineation Report dated August 18, 2017. The final mitigation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of any development and/or grading permits. 2) In order to avoid adverse impacts to cultural resources, as recommended and detailed in the SWCA Cultural Resources Assessment dated January 31, 2017, future ground -disturbing activities shall follow a plan for inadvertent discovery in order to guide Gethsemane Cemetery in case cultural resources are unexpectedly discovered. An inadvertent discovery plan shall be prepared by the applicant prior to any ground disturbing activity. Further information regarding this action is available to the public upon request at the Federal Way Department of Community Development (Federal Way City Hall, 33325 8 Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003). Contact Senior Planner Jim Harris at 253-835-2652 orjim.harris@cltyoffederalway.com. This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on October 20, 2017. Unless modified by the city, this determination will become final following the comment deadline. Any person aggrieved by the city's determination may file an appeal with the city within 21 days of the above comment deadline. Published in the Federal Way Mirror on October 6; 2017. City of C, Cem- Masx Plan Map of Date: Apol2 City Federal Way -chsemane _etary 33325 Blh Ave S. Federal Way 37600 Pacific Hwy S. Federal Way 00 96003 (206)-6o -7 vrmv.cityoffed era Iat way.com ST Gethsemane Cemetary R +� nr S 38 f �� (JOH ON RD NE) s �0 . Puget i - Soun i Federal C S 81RCH Si ICU 'n 1' -' ^ _egend L}TY dF — IN Vedera9 Way Subject Site A. 0 250 500 1,000 Federal Way City Limits Feet This is intended for makes no warranlyapresenlaccuacy. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy n :ar DEPARTMENT OF COIININ-1UNITV DEVELOPMENT 33325 81h Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 CITY OF 253-835-7000;Fax 253-835-2609 www.citvoffederolway.com Federal Wa DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION I, hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significarce (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Pemit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ire -mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on 2017. Project Name File Number(s) Signature �a .'— Date!Jb - V -1 % K:\CD Adminislrolion Files\Declaration of Distribution doc/Lasl prinled 1 /12/2017 10:33:00 AM Tamara Fix From: Linda Mills <Imills@kentreporter.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2017 11:42 AM To: Tamara Fix Subject: Re: Gethsemane Legal Notice Attachments: 1981813.PDF Hi Tamara, I have received your notice (Re: MDNS Gethsemane Cemetery) to be published in the Federal Way Mirror on Friday, October 6, 2017. Thank you, Linda Linda Mills Legal/Public Notice Advertising - Obituary Representative Auburn, Bellevue, Bothell/Kenmore, Covington/Maple Valley/Black Diamond, Issaquah/Sammamish,Kent, Kirkland, Mercer Island, Redmond and Renton Reporters, Federal Way Mirror, Snoqualmie Valley Record, and Okanogan Valley Gazette -Tribune Direct:253-234-3506 Internal:36027 Fax:253-437-6016 19426 68th Ave. S., Ste A, Kent, WA 98032 Map Print Rates Online Rates Media Kit Sound Info On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Tamara Fix <Tainai•a.Fix cr,cityoffederalway.coin> wrote: Please publish the attached legal notice (Gethsemane MDNS, 16-101141) in Friday's (Oct. 6, 2017) issue. Please confirm and issue an affidavit of publication. Thanks! 1 CITY Of: Federal Way NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (MDNS) Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan File No: 16-101141-00-SE The City of Federal Way has determined that the following project does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required tinder RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the city. Proposed Action: Proposed cemetery expansion of approximately 20.8 additional acres. The existing cemetery development is about 8.2 acres in size. The proposal is to further develop and expand the existing cemetery with new burial sites, driveways, shrines, columbaria, landscaping. stormwater and utility improvements, and other associated improvements. The site contains several wetlands and Hylebos Creek. Proponent: Richard Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle Location: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA Lead Agency: City of Federal Way Department of Community Development MITIGATION MEASURES (SUMMARY): 1) In order to compensate for potential impacts to the buffer of wetland No. 6 resulting from storm drainage facility maintenance and repair, wetland buffer enhancement of the wetland buffer shall be provided at a ratio of approximately 2.1:1. Buffer impact mitigation shall be provided as generally outlined in the Otak Inc. Addendum to Wetland and Stream Delineation Report dated August 18, 2017. The final mitigation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of any development and/or grading permits. 2) In order to avoid adverse impacts to cultural resources, as recommended and detailed in the SWCA Cultural Resources Assessment dated January 31, 2017, future ground -disturbing activities shall follow a plan for inadvertent discovery in order to guide Gethsemane Cemetery in case cultural resources are unexpectedly discovered. An inadvertent discovery plan shall be prepared by the applicant prior to any ground disturbing activity. Further information regarding this action is available to the public upon request at the Federal Way Department of Community Development (Federal Way City Hall, 33325 8"' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003). Contact Senior Planner Jim Harris at 253-835-2652 orjli-n.harrls@cityoffederalway.com. This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-1 1-340(2). Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on October 20, 2017. Unless modified by the city, this determination will become final following the comment deadline. Any person aggrieved by the city's determination may file an appeal with the city within 21 days of the above comment deadline. Published in the Federal YVuv Mirror on October 6, 2017. CITY OF FILE e ra l Way NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (MDNS) Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Site Plan File No: 16-101141-00-SE The City of Federal Way has determined that the following project does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the city. Proposed Action: Proposed cemetery expansion of approximately 20.8 additional acres. The existing cemetery development is about 8.2 acres in size. The proposal is to further develop and expand the existing cemetery with new burial sites, driveways, shrines, columbaria, landscaping, storrmwater and utility improvements, and other associated improvements. The site contains several wetlands and Hylebos Creek. Proponent: Richard Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle Location: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA Lead Agency: City of Federal Way Department of Community Development MITIGATION MEASURES (SUMMARY): 1) In order to compensate for potential impacts to the buffer of wetland No. 6 resulting from storm drainage facility maintenance and repair, wetland buffer enhancement of the wetland buffer shall be provided at a ratio of approximately 2.1:1. Buffer impact mitigation shall be provided as generally outlined in the Otak Inc. Addendum to Wetland and Stream Delineation Report dated August 18, 2017. The final mitigation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of any development and/or grading permits. 2) In order to avoid adverse impacts to cultural resources, as recommended and detailed in the SWCA Cultural Resources Assessment dated January 31, 2017, future ground -disturbing activities shall follow a plan for inadvertent discovery in order to guide Gethsemane Cemetery in case cultural resources are unexpectedly discovered. An inadvertent discovery plan shall be prepared by the applicant prior to any ground disturbing activity. Further information regarding this action is available to the public upon request at the Federal Way Department of Community Development (Federal Way City Hall, 33325 8t" Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003). Contact Senior Planner Jim Harris at 253-835-2652 or jim.harris@cityoffederalway.com. This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-1 1-340(2). Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on October 20, 2017. Unless modified by the city, this determination will become final following the comment deadline. Any person aggrieved by the city's determination may file an appeal with the city within 21 days of the above comment deadline. Published in the Federal Wav Mirror on October 6, 2017. City of Federal Way C: _ ihsemane Cemetary - Mas x Plan Map Dale April City of Federal Way 33325 6th Ave 5. 37600 Pacific Hwy S. Federal Way 0096003 (206) - 635 - 7000 www. cilyoffedera Tway -cam Gethsemane Cemetary` _S 380 sr (JOHNSON RD NE) t 6'19 r I■rr. Puget-- - Sound: . - - Federal 1RCH ST BIRCH ST c� Way Legend \ CITY OF N Federal Vila Subject Site �•= a: 0 250 500 1,000 Federal Way City Limits Feet This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only .._.., The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. CITY OF � Federal Way October 25, 2017 Sent Via Email to: Gretchen Kaehler, DAHP, Gretchen.kaelilerawdahN.wa,gov Karen Walter, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, kwa[tei2@muck1eshoot.nsn.us Tamela Smart, Lummi Nation, tamelasGalurnmi-r7sn.gov Kris Miller, Skokomish THPO,kmillercr,skokornish.or'W Nathan Reynolds, Cowlitz Indian Tribe, nrevnolds cowlitz.oi James Gordon, Cowlitz Indian Tribe, j ordon@cowlitz.orQ Diana Noble-Gulliford, diana@gulliford.com Richard Peterson, ri�hp @a rnycatholiccemetery.arr? John Hempelmann, ihempelinaim c .carincross.com CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor RE: File 416-101141-00-SE; RETENTION OF MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (MDNS) — Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion, 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way Dear Party of Record: This letter is to notify you that the Community Development Department has reviewed all timely comments submitted to the City regarding the proposed Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS). The Department will retain the MDNS as the proposal is not anticipated to cause significant adverse environmental impacts that would require review in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The MDNS is not a land use decision or a permit to authorize construction; it is a determination that an EIS is not required. Most of the comments received on the MDNS were concerning the Inadvertent Discovery Plan (IDP). The Department utilized its substantive authority granted under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) to condition the MDNS document to require the applicant to prepare and receive approval of an Inadvertent Discovery Plan. A draft of the IDP is contained as Appendix E of the SWCA Cultural Resources Assessment dated January 31, 2017. The Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) will be requested to review the IDP prior to any ground disturbing activity on the site. If you have any questions regarding this letter or the land use application, please contact Senior Planner Jim Harris at 253-835-2652 orjii-n.harris@citvoffederit-,N;ay.com. Sincerely, Brian Davis Community Development Director Doc I D 76742 A.BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project: Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long Term Master Plan 2. Name of applicant: Corporation of the Catholic Archbishop of Seattle, Corporation Sole 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Edward Foster, Director of Property and Construction Services 710 9th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 382-2064, EdFASeattleArch.org Contact Person: Richard Peterson, Director of Cemeteries 710 9'h Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 (206)' 524-1451, ricb@mycatholiccgncftm.ora 4. Date checklist prepared: 03/02/2015 5. Agency requesting checklist. City of Federal Way 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction will occur between 2016 and 2066. The 50-year phased master plan is divided into five (5) 10 year phases. Please see the Justification for Long -Term Master Plan included in the Process N Application. The timing and exact details of the phases will be determined by future circumstances. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. This project is proposes cemetery expansion into 20.8 additional acres over 50 years. The existing cemetery development.is about 8.2 acres. The total cemetery size after 50 years is 29 acres. The Archdiocese owns approximately 58 acres but this project proposes changes to the west side of the site. The project proposes 5 phases of incremental construction over 50 years. Please see Project Narrative for more detailed information about the phases. The timing and exact details of the phases will be determined by future circumstances. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. • Level One Downstream storm drainage analysis • Preliminary technical information report addressing relevance of the 8 Core and 5 Special Requirements of the King County Stormwater Design Manual (KCSWDM) • Trip generation analysis • Geotechnical report • Wetland delineation ■ Stream delineation Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 3 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by youi proposal? If yes, explain. There are no known applications pending for government approvals of other proposals related to Gethsemane Phased Master Plan. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. -City-of-Federal Way -Use Process IV (Hearing l xaminer-Approvall 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you; to describe certain aspects of your proposal You do not need to repeat those answers on this page.) The Gethsemane Cemetery long-range, phased master plan is intended to guide cemetery construction incrementally over the next 50 years, and is focused on planning the area of the property to the west of West Hyiebos Creek, The phased construction approach typical of cemeteries reflects the long term relationship between the Catholic Church, their cemeteries, and the community. Long term planning allows the organization to thoughtfully create an attractive and sustainable cemetery landscape that will be maintained for hundreds of years. The Gethsemane Cemetery property is approximately 58 acres in total but this proposal only extends to five phases on the west side of West Hylebos Creek: Phase 1: 3.83 AC Phase 4: 4.66 AC Phase 2: 3.68 AC Phase 5: 1.28 AC Phase 3: 7.58 AC Each preliminary phase includes burials, driveways, shrines, and columbarium. Phase 5 also includes a mausoleum. Please see the Project Narrative for the detailed phasing description. The timing and exact details of the phases will be determined by future circumstances. 12. Location of the proposal. (While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any perm. it applications related to this checklist) Project Address: 37600 Pac Hwy S, Federal Way 98003 Parcel Numbers: 322104-9025, -9020, 4560, 4365, 4281 Please see the Site Plan, Vicinity Map, and Topographic Plan included in the Process 1V Application. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General descri Lion of the site circle one): Flat rolling,hifl , steep slopes, mountainous other...: Generally flat/rolling with areas of steep slopes. See survey plans for existing conditions. b. What is the stee est slope on the site (aPproximate Percent slope)? 50% slope. The current cemetery area is generally flat or gently rolling. The proposed project area would convert the steep man-made slopes on the site interior into more gently rolling hills. Total elevation change is Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long Term Master Plan Process IV Master Land Use Application 4 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist approximately 60 feet rising from West Hylebos Creek to the top of the cemetery hills and back down to Pacific Highway S (Hwy 99). c. What general types of soils are found on the site for exam le clay, sand ravel peat, muck)? If ou know the c/ass cation of a ricul#uraI soils s ec' them and note an a ricultural land of Iona -term commercial si !2- ance and whether the OLQPosal results in removing any of these soils. Soils are generally clay and hold water. The soils listed on the county survey include: (listed from most to least area on site) KpB - Kitsap silt loam Bh - Bellingham silt loam Sk- Seattle muck AgD - Alderwood gravelly sandy loam KpD - Kitsap silt loam No - Norma sandy loam d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? if so, describe. There are no surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity. The Geotechnical analysis of site soils indicates low risk of erosion or liquefaction and no evidence of soil movement or instability is visible or documented. e. Describe the yurpose, Moe, total area and apgLcLximate-quantities and total affected area of an filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. When developed in 1975, the Gethsemane Cemetery site graded the land into a flat area for the existing cemetery and a berm to the east of unneeded soils. This waster plan proposes a naturalization of the berm to change the site from its steep hillside current condition to a rolling hill landscape. The rolling landscape will allow more of the site to be used for future burials while making the site more aesthetically pleasing. Fill or grading could occur in association with specific phases. Fill type and/or amount of grading required would be determined at time of building and grading permits. See the Detailed Phasing Description document attached to the application for more specific information on grading expectations for each phase. Source of fill will be determined prior to phase construction and is expected to include reuse of site soils and offsite import. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearinq, construction or use? If so, _generafly describe. The project area does not contain any designated Erosion Hazard Areas. Potential erosion during —construction--could-occur;-but wilt -be -mitigated witbL-Temperary-Erosion-and-Sediment-controls-according to Federal, State and local (FWMC Chapter 18) regulations. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts are anticipated. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after proiect construction for example as half or buildin s ? The proposed master plan includes 1.7 AC of new impervious surfaces and 2.9 acres of existing impervious- surface. The cemetery is currently 8.2 acres but phased development over 50 years proposes an expansion to 29 total acres. At that point, 15.86% of the project area would be covered with impervious buildings, roads, and paths, which includes existing impervious area that covers approximately 10% of the site. The cemetery also owns 29 additional acres at this location which are proposed to remain pervious throughout this project development. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion or other impacts to the earth if an Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 5 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist pirst,-the p;vject is -designed -to fit the natural topography, soils, and drainage patterns of the site. Clearing and construction planned over 5 phases allows vegetation in each phase of the site to grow and establish before beginning the next phase -.>During construction, erosion control measures will be utilized such as covering disturbed soils and controlling surface runoff. Steep slopes and sensitive wetland areas will be further protected from erosion using erosion and sediment control BMPs such as silt fences and straw wattles -as -described in the KCSWD-M. Z Air a. at types of emissions to the air would result from the 2Lqposal during construction o eration and -maintenance -when the .M ect is cOm leted? ►fan. ^enerall • describe and gLve aporoximate quantities if known. Construction equipment will be typical of large construction sites and would include hand-held power tools, gasoline and diesel -powered compressors and generators, and gasoline and diesel -powered vehicles to remove existing roadway inlrastructure and build the new roadway improvements. These tools would generate greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) due to the combustion of gasoline and diesel fuels, such as oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, particulate matter and smoke, uncombusted hydrocarbons, hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide, and water vapor, Other emissions during construction would include dust and exhaust from construction vehicles. These effects are expected to be localized, temporary and minimized. The project would produce GHGs in three ways: embodied energy in materials to be installed on the project; eitcrgy expended through construction activity (especially as described above); and energy expended during regular operation, maintenance, and monitoring activities throughout the anticipated lifespan of the ceinetery. b. Are there any off -sire sources of emissions or odor that may affect our pro oral? If so, enerall describe. No off -site sources of emissions or odors are known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air if an During construction, impacts to air quality would be reduced and controlled through implementation of federal, state, and local emission control criteria and construction practices. These would include requiring contractors to use best management practices for construction methods, proper vehicle maintenance, and minimising vehicle and equipment idling. a. Surface Water 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the -site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The project area is located in the Hylebos Creek Basin and West Hylebos Creek bisects the site. West Hylebos Creek flows south and meets East Hylebos Creek in northeast Tacoma, becoming Hylebos Creek, which is a tributary to Puget Sound at Commencement Bay. There are also wetlands located on and adjacent to the project site. Please see the wetland report for more infoF manion. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, the project design includes work within 200 feet of the creek and wetlands. In the upland areas outside the City's buffer, grading and clearing and vegetation will be completed as shown on the uetnsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 6 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist plans for use as cemetery burials. Within the buffers, a pedestrian footpath and natural burials will be completed as described in the plans. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No fill or dredging will occur within the wetlands or creek areas. In the wetland buffers, expected construction activities include grading, stormwater management facility modification, natural burials, and walking trails. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 year floodplain? If so, note the location on the site plan. No portion of the project area is located in a 100 year floodplain. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency's National Flood Insurance Program Flood Insurance Rate Map Number 53033C1250 F (Revised May 16, 1995), the project area is located entirely within Other Areas, Zone X, which has been determined to be outside the 500-year floodplain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. This project is not expected to result in the discharge of waste materials to surface waters. b. Ground Water 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses, and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. This project is not expected to withdraw from or discharge to groundwater. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial containing the following chemicals... ; agricultural; etc.). -Describe- the, general size -of the system, -the -number -of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. This project is not expected to result in the discharge of waste materials into the ground. c. Water Runoff (including stormwate 1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The project area consists mostly of pervious surfaces, primarily lawn, with some impervious areas of asphalt roads and concrete sidewalk paths. The entire area has proposed landscape planting for aesthetic and habitat value. Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 7 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist --- -- -- d,lavers#-yarv.'.i$-vvnuivtvf-3of-impe Maus-'li:ewimroofs; driveways patios)-, with pciJloils areas covered by lawn, landscaping, and trees. Currently, stormwater runoff'from impervious surfaces is collected via inlets and conveyed via storm drain to discharge into buffers, grasses and soils adjacentto the drives,and paths. The project would prepare and implement a CESC plan. BMPs (as identified in the King County Stormwater Manual ) would be used to manage stormwater runoff, construction disturbance; and erosion as needed during construction. -The-completed-project would •he re-covered with lawn- and vegetation and would -not reed to manage additional stormwater runoff beyond currently existing conditions. Stormwater would follow newly design pathways but would discharge into the same grasses and soils adjacent to drives and paths as existing conditions. Stormwater runoff volume and durations will meet Level 2 Flow Control per the KCSWDM. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. ❑using construction, it is possible that erosion from the construction site could enter surface waters. However, a CESC plan using appropriate BMPs would be developed and implemented to avoid or minirnie this risk. 3) Does the ;proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the.slte? If so, describe. The completed project does not propose to affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site. Stormwater runoff is not expected beyond currently existing conditions and will follow similar pathways, The_cuirent volume., timing,_ and duration of these stormwater flows are not known. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface. ground and runoff water and drainage pattern impacts, if any. Based on the characteristics of the project area, it is anticipated that impact to water can be avoided or reasonable mitigated. No significant unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated. Typical construction methods are anticipated and no adverse impacts to surface or ground waters are expected. BMPs, as identified in the King County Stormwater Manual would be used to control erosion and sedimentation during construction. The project would develop and implement an erosion and sediment control plan. 4. Plants a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: X Deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other X Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X Shrubs X Grass Pasture Crop or grain Orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops X Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other Other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of ve etation will be removed or altered? Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 8 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist The project would limit plant removal, pruning, and other disturbance to that required for project construction. Construction limits would be clearly and physically delineated by protective construction fencing to prevent unauthorized trespass and collateral damage to nearby vegetation. 438 trees (765 tree units) would need to be removed to accommodate construction across the entire 50-year project area. 1397 tree units are required to be on site at the end of construction however this project goes above -and -beyond the requirement by providing 2024 total tree units. 48% of proposed plantings are expected to be drought -tolerant even though only 25% is required. Installation of stormwater management devices would typically disturb pervious surfaces such as lawns and landscape beds. While the exact locations of these installations have not yet been identified, the project would restore disturbed soils and cultivated vegetation. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. No known threatened or endangered plant species are known to be on or near the project area. d. Proposed landscaping,tandscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance ve etation on the site, if any. Approximately 800 new trees are proposed and of those planted, approximately 500 will be native, drought tolerant species. 500 are proposed in the wetlands, buffer and natural -burial areas, while 300 are in the traditional cemetery burial areas. The proposed landscape planting, as shown on the Landscape Plan has been designed for maximum aesthetic and habitat value. The site is required to provide a 10' wide perimeter landscape Type III buffer along all property lines. The buffer will be a mixture of evergreen and deciduous trees interspersed with large shrubs and ground cover. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. Blackberry grows in the understory of the forested hillsides and into the open lawn/meadow areas of the cemetery. A review of the King County Noxious Weeds GIS map on 1/13/2016 identifies 2,500 sq ft of Goatsrue in the North Arm of the site, just east of Pacific Highway S (Hwy 99). 5. Animals a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to .be-on-or-near-thesif . Birds such as hawks, heron, eagles, songbirds, crows and pigeons have been seen on site. Mammals such as deer, possum, raccoon, deer mouse, little brown rat, and squirrels have been seen on site. West Hylebos Creek is a known salmon -bearing waterway. b. List any threatened and endan erect s ecies known to be on or near the site. According to a review of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife SahnonScape mapping software on 1/13/2016, West Hylebos Creek is accessible to the following threatened salmon species: • Documented Presence: Fall Chinook, Winter Steelhead • Documented Spawning: Coho, Fall Chum • Presumed Presence: Pink Salmon (odd year) Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 9 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist A review-ofthe-US fish -and Wildlife Service's-IPaL Trust Resource -Report -lists -he following species as endangered or threatened near the project area: Birds: Marbled Murrelet (threatened) critical habitat Streaked Horned Lark (threatened) critical habitat Yellow -billed Cuckoo (threatened) critical habitat (proposed) Fish: -Bull Trout (Threatened) critical habitat Mammals: Canada Lynx (Threatened) critical habitat M, to Birds: c. Is the site part of a mLgration route? if so ex lain. Bald Eagle (year round) Black Swift (breeding season) Caspian Tern -(breeding season) Fox Sparrow (year round) Olive -sided Flycatcher (breeding season) Peregrine Falcon (breeding season) - Purple Finch (year round) -- Rufous Hummingbird (breeding season) Short -eared Owl (year round) Vesper Sparrow (breeding season) Western Grebe (wintering season) Willow Flycatcher (breeding season) Federal Way is located within the migratory route of many birds and other animal species and is part of the Pacific Flyway, a major north -south route of travel for migratory birds in the Americas extending from Alaska to Patagonia. West Hylebos Creek and its wetlands run through the site and is an important uPe. tipn ro»te for many animal speC?es. 3�ald eagle$ and satlon are bcoasionalh observed on the Site. d. Proposed measures to respPyp or enhance !wildlife if ar!k . The project will preserve wildlife by mitigating and minimizing modifications to critical area buffers. Replacing degraded vegetated areas overgrown by blackberry with native trees and shrubs will fiuther enhance wildlife habitat. e. List any invasive animals ecies known to be on or near the. site. No invasive animal species are known to be present on or near the project site. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. !Vh-t kinds of --er y "electric, natural �"uu vri rrivu Stvvv u4uQrti livirir by used to meet the completed ro ect's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heatina. manufacturing, etc. The cemetery is expected to use electricity for street lighting and irrigation when the project is complete. b. Would your Proiect affect the potential use of solar ever by ad'acent properties? if so Tenerativ describe. The proposed project does not involve building structures or planting vegetation that would block. access to the solar energy for adjacent properties. c. What kinds of energtr conservation features are included in the Duns of this proposal? List other p ogosed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if and Streetlights and irrigation systems will be installed with low impact development in mind. They will be controlled with a timer system that considers and adapts to environmental factors such as the weather and hours of daylight. Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 10 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist Contractors will be required to operate equipment in compliance with King County and City of Federal Way energy codes, at a minimum. Energy impacts are expected to be minor. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards including exposure to toxic chemicals risk of fire and explosion. s ill or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this ro sal? If so describe. Small amounts of materials likely to be present during construction include gasoline and diesel fuels, hydraulic fluids, oils, lubricants, solvents, paints, and other chemical products. A spill of one of these chemicals could potentially occur during construction as a result of either equipment failure or worker error. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. Contamination is not expected to be found at the site. Before it was a cemetery, the property was a school and the project location has no known past use as an industrial or commer�--ial site. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. There are no known hazardous chemicals or conditions that might affect project development and design. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. No toxic or hazardous chemicals would be stored, used, or produced during the project's construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. - 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. It is not anticipated that any special emergency services would be required during construction or operation of the project. Possible fire or medic services could be required during project construction, as well as possibly during maintenance of the completed project or for visitors of the cemetery. However, the completed project would not demand higher levels of special emergency services -than -already -exist -at -the project -location, Typical-emergency..ser-v-icmr-equired-for-medical emergencies are provided by the Federal Way Fire Department. Typical security services are provided by the Federal Way Police Department. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. The construction contractor would be required to develop and implement a spill control plan to control and manage spills during construction. During construction, the contractor would use standard operating procedures and BMPs, as identified in the City of Federal Way Stormwater Code, to reduce or control any possible environmental health hazards. A Wniin-,ency plan for potential spillage of fuel or containinated ,naterial will be developed prior to initiating earth work on the site. Measures will be implemented to control upland releases and aquatic area spills. Any spill to the aquatic environment would be reported to the US Coast Guard and cleanup actions would be conducted in accordance with Coast Guard regulations. The property Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long Term Master Plan Process IV Master Land Use Application 11 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist owner would be -responsible for documenting any environmental impacts resulting uom an � accidental spill. During construction, it will be the responsibility of contractors to provide for the safety of their workers, including proper training and personal protective gear, if necessary. Contractors will comply with current Washington Department of Labor and Industries requirements. b. Noise 1) - -What (14pes- of -noise exist -in the area which .►??ay affect your project -(for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Noises that exist in the area (vehicular traffic on I-5 and Pacific Highway S) would not affect the project. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other) ? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Noise levels in the vicinity of construction would temporarily increase during construction. Short- term noise from construction equipment would be limited to the allowable maximum levels of City of Federal Way's Noise Control Ordinance [FWRC Chapter 7.10.020—Public Disturbance Noise]. Within the allowable maximum levels, FWRC permits noise from construction equipment between the hours of 7 a.m. and 8 p.m. weekdays, and 9 a.m. and 8 p.m. weekends. It is expected that the majority of construction would take place from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays. However, there may be a need for constrn,ct;on to implement a 7-day/week and 1 I -12 hour/day work schedule. These longer days and/or work hours would be necessary to reduce the duration of work that negatively impactslocalbusinesses or residences. The decisiontoallow longer days and/or hours would be based on minim ring such impacts to affected parties. The completed project would generate occasional and periodic noise from equipment used for cemetery operation, maintenance, and monitoring but it is not anticipated to be an increase from current levels. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if -any: Construction equipment would be muffled in accordance with the applicable laws. Limits to noise and construction activities would be enforced while the project is being constructed and during operations, except for emergencies. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adaacent ro erties? Will the pn2gosal affect current land uses on neadbz or adacent properties? If so describe. The site is currently used for cemetery visitation and worship services. Adjacent property uses (from most to least frequent) include: vacant single family lots, single family residential use, cemetery, church, and warehouse properties. The proj ect proposed is not expected to affect current land use on nearby or adjacent properties. b. Has the pLoject site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial si nificance will be converted to other uses as a result of the roosal if any? If resource lands have not been desi nated how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or non -forest use? The project site has not been used for agricultural purposes. Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 12 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how. The proposed project would neither be affected by nor affect surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations. c. Describe any structures on the site. The existing developed cemetery area is approximately 8.2 acres and includes a 9,552 sq ft masonry structure for administrative, worship, and maintenance operations. Three mausoleum structures are approximately 1,135 sq ft each but do not allow access to any interior spaces. No changes are proposed to the existing section of the cemetery. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so what? The project would not demolish any structures. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? SE f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Single family, low density g. If ajoolicable, what is the current shoreline master program deli nation of the site? The project area has no Shorelines of the State that are regulated under the City of Federal Way Shoreline Master Program. h. Has an art of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? if so §PecifV2 City of Federal Way's Critical Areas Map identifies two erosion hazard areas, three wetlands, and a stream system on the site, including West Hylebos Creek. King County's map of Environmentally Sensitive Areas identifies West Hylebos Creek as a Chinook Distribution area and depicts the same two erosion hazard areas. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the com leted ro ect? Approximately 6 employees work at the cemetery and this is not expected to change over time. One additional cemetery employee could be added to staff in the first five years and up to a total of 3 or 4 additional staff could be added over the 50-year term of the master plan. j. Approximately how many people would the completed Proiect displace? The project would not displace any people. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. There would be no displacement impacts. Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long Term Master Plan Process IV Master Land Use Application 13 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist 1. Prop osed measures to ensure the PROP osaI is cpm afible with existln and pro iecfed land uses and plans if any. The project would be compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans. m. Proposed measures to ensure the PE990sal is compatible with nearby a cicultural and forest lands of Ion -term commercial si nificange if any. The project would be compatible with any agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance. 9. Housing a. A29LQximatelv how manZ units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether hi h middle or low- income housing. The proposed project would not construct any housing units. b. Approximate1v how many units if any,would be eliminated? Indicate whether hi h middle or low-income housing. The proposed project would not eliminate any housing units. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housina impacts, if any. No measures are proposed because there would be no housin impacts. - 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest het ht of any pmosed structures not including antennas- what is the 60- c io ai exterior bOdin g materials) prop osed? The only structures proposed for the project are three new mausoleums. These mausoleums are proposed for a later phase of the 50 year master plan but they are expected to be designed similarly to the three existing mausoleums which were built in 1972. The Height of these buildings is -16'-10 112".-The exterior materials would be smooth and rough concrete with score lines, granite or marble shutters, and wood trellis. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The structures are proposed near Pacific Highway S (Hwy 99) to obstruct views and noise from vehicular traffic for cemetery visitors. Street trees planted ,n the right-o_f way could partially obscure neighborhood and territorial views when they attain full height and maturity. c. Pro osed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if an . The aesthetic condition of the site will be significantly improved over its present appearance. Trees and structures in proposed areas will eventually partially obstruct (or add interest to) views across the site -ward the highway. 11. Light and Glare a. What t e of Y ht or lace will the Loosalproduce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The constructed project would install new street lights along the proposed drives. They will be illuminated at night but will not produce glare for neighbors. During construction, if an emergency situation calls for Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 14 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist y � f after -dark work, the construction contractor may deploy portable lights that temporarily produce light and glare. b. Gould light or fare from the finished proiect be a safety hazard or interfere with views? The light from finished streetlights is not expected to create a safety hazard or interfere with views. c. What existing off -site sources of light Or glare may affect your Proposal? There are no existing off -site sources of light and glare that would affect the proposal. The suburban estate properties surrounding the cemetery have little -to -no development and/or light pollution. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. No measures are needed to reduce or control light and glare impacts because no impacts would occur. If an, emergency requires after -dark work during construction, portable lighting would be adjusted as feasible to minimise glare. 12. recreation a. What desi hated and informal recreaironal opportunities are in the immediate vicinitY? There are no parks or other designated recreational opportunities in the immediate vicinity. However, West Hylebos Wetlands Park is 2.5 miles to the north and it provides parking, picnic areas, restrooms, and walking trails in a natural setting. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so describe. The project would not displace any existing recreational uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control im acts on recreation including recreation aMMortunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. The project will not have any adverse impacts on recreation opportunities on the site. The proposal does include increased -recreation opportunities by creating low -impact trails through the wetland buffers and possibly down to West Hylebos Creek. These trails would be open to the public and would be designed to follow City of Federal Way wetland buffer trail requirements. 13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there an buildin s structures or sites located on or near the site that are over 45 ears 60 7isfed in or e7ribTe for li§tfrr ►n na ranal sfafe or !off reservafibn redi-located on ar� - near the site? If so specifically describe. There are no buildings, structures or sites located on or near the site that are over 45 years old. There are no places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site. Review of the Washington Heritage Register and National Register of Historic Places's WISAARD database h -//www.dahp.wa.ZQv/leam-and-research/fmd-a-bistoric-plac on 1/14/2016 showed reports for Gethsemane Cemetery and St.George's Indian Mission School Cemetery but there are no recorded places or objects formally listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers on or adjacent to the project location. No architectural inventory is required for this project because no structures would be demolished or altered. Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 15 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist b. Are there any landmarks features or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation This may -include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there anZ material evidence artifacts or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to iden& such resources. St. George's Indian Mission Cemetery is located to the southeast of the property and access easement was granted through the east side of the property in 1992. Gethsemane Cemetery, is a place of cultural importance for the Catholic Community but there is no material evidence, artifacts, or areas of historic cultural importance on or near the site that would be affected by the proposed project. The construction work done in 1972 tore down the old school, graded approximately 22.5 acres of land, and built the existing network of internal drives, burial areas and buildings. Impact to cultural and historic resources at that time was not recorded. No professional studies have been canduct.-d. Gethsemane Cemetery Cultural Timeline* Year Event Comment Source 1888 St. George's The government operated The Cushman Indian School on Dick Caster, Father Hylebos, St Industrial School for the reservation which could only handle 80 students so George's Indian School and St. Claire's the Muckleshoot there was a need for additional students and the Roman Mission Church, 8 June 2004, p. 7, Indians was founded Catholics also wanted to provide a school for teaching wwwfederalwayhistory.org/articles, and at the location of the religious principles. Father Hylebos, then operating out of Henry Sicade, The Cushman Indian present e`u`i3eTiarie T aconia, obtained financial support from Miss Katherine School, A Brief History (unknown Cemetery located just Drexel, a wealthy Catholic of Torresdale, Pennsylvania, publication source:1-927), pp. 26-28, north of the Pierce who offered to finance the school. The school was closed in Compiled from a thesis Submitted by County line. 1936. The remains of the school were tom down in 1971. Elizabeth Shackleford, The Cushman Indian School, A Brief History (Tacoma: College of Puget Sound,1918), page number not known and Federal Way News,10 October 1979' p. A-3. 1889 The first organized Both Indians and whites were buried here. (See 1888 for Dick Caster, Father Hylebos, St cemetery in the opening of St. George's Industrial School at this location.) George's Indian School and St. Claire's Federal Way area, The cemetery shared the 142 acres owned by St. - Mission Church, 8 June 2004, pp. 15, St. George's George's School. (Currently Gethsemane Cemetery 16, www.federalwayhistory.org/articles, Cemetery, received occupies the land originally occupied by the school at and Nathatie Weber, "A Century of its first burials. South 377th St. and -Highway 99.) St. George's Cemetery history, "Federal Way News, 10 was located nearlon the bank to the east of the present October 1979, p. A- 3. cemete . The iasi buriais were in the i920s. 1936 St. George's Indian (See 1888 for opening of school and 1971 for the Patricia Slettvet Noel, Muckleshoot School was closed. remaining buildings being torn down for use by Indian History (Auburn: Auburn School Gethsemane Cemetery.) District No. 40.8,1980, revised 1985), p. (See 1888 for start of school.) _ 70. Nathalie Weber, "A century of history," 1971 The Catholic Church plotted the 142-acre -Federal Way News, 10 October 1979, site of the former St. p. A-3. George's Indian School for Gethsemane Cemetery. 1980 f Catholic Church "I am delighted to be able to offer to you and your Indian Dick Caster, "Father Peter Hylebos, St. donated the land that brothers and sisters on behalf of the Church of Western George's Indian School and Cemetery" they owned, which Washington, a gift of property of approximately 17 acres I Prepared for the Historical Society of covered the original abutting your original reservation, including a portion of Federal Way, Revised July 9, 2009. St. George's Hylebos Creek and all of St. George's Cemetery." Cemetery, to the Raymond G. Hunthausen, Archbishop Puyallup Tribe. "Being able to make a gift, knowing the deep historical of Seattle, letter to Puyallup Indian significance of the property to vour tribe, dives all of us in Nation. June 24. 1980. n. 1.- in the files I Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 16 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist the Catholic Church a special pleasure. We, too, have of the Historical Society of Federal much of our history associated with this land. We will Way. welcome you as neighbors knowing your plans to pursue projects utilizing the land in an environmentally sensitive and meaningful manner.... [It] is our intention to encourage your use of the portion of Hylebos Creek located on the other part of our Gethsemane property. The Catholic Church is totally in accord with your desire to maintain the creek in its natural state and to establish fishery enhancement projects whereverpossible." *Source: Historical Society of Federal Way Time Line, Revised November 23, 2uu /, mistorlcat society or reaerai Way, Dick Caster Compiler. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential imp -acts to cultural and historic resources on or near thejoL21ect site. Exam les include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation. archaeolQ ical surveys, historic mops, GIS data etc. As owner of the cemetery, the Catholic Church is very familiar with and sensitive to potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. The church considers the cemetery to be one of these important cultural resources but as a working cemetery, the need for access to additional areas of the property necessitates new vehicular and pedestrian networks. Cemetery operators will consult Church archivists and historians, tribal outreach resources, and historic maps, surveys, and reports to avoid or minimize impacts to cultural resources on or near the project area. d. Proigosed measures to avoid minimize or compensate for loss chap es to and disturbance fa resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. The project will conduct a cultural resources inventory to determine probability of prehistoric, ethnographic, and historic Native American cultural resources in previously undisturbed areas below the ground surface. If identified, the project will commit to having a professional archaeologist monitor construction in previously undisturbed soils and soil sediments. The professional archaeologist would prepare a Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Plan (MIDP). Should evidence of cultural remains, either historic or prehistoric, be encountered during construction, work in the immediate area would be suspended and the find would be examined and documented by the archaeologist as per procedures identified in the MIDP. Decisions regarding appropriate mitigation and further action would be made at that time. 94. Transportation a. Identi ublic streets and hi hwa s servin the site or affectedgeographic area and describe ,proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any_. Theprojectwould-occur-on-GethsemaneCemeter'y.per'operty-whieh-is-eurrently.aceessed-by-two drivewa to the east of Pacific Highway S (Hwy 99). One is the paved boulevard and formal entrance to the cemetery at 37600 Pacific Highway South. The other is a gravel maintenance drive marked by a 19 ft. wide gate in the chain link fence. A future vehicular access point is proposed at the comer of S 376t' St and 87t` Avenue S. These two arterials are residential streets. The exact location of the east -side property access has not yet been identified. b. Is the site or affected eo ra hic area currently served by public transit? ff so enerall describe Jf not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Pierce Transit route 500 serves the project location and travel on Pacific Highway S (Hwy 99). The completed project would not affect muting of any bus routes. Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 17 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist c. How rnany additional arkir� spaces would the completed EMLegt or non- ro'eci P=0sai have? How many would the pLoLect or ro osal eliminate? The project proposal would add approximately 2,350 linear feet of internal. drives. The internal drives are expected to add approximately 115 parking spaces to the site that would be occasionally used in different amo"..nts during funerals. A few of those.parking spaces would be used during visitation to grave sites. d. Will the proposal re wire any new or im rovements to existing roads streets edestrian bic cle. or state transportation facilities not includin drivewa s? if so enerall describe indicate whether p ublic ar rivate . - -- - The project would not require new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle, or state transportation facilities. All project areas are internal to the private property. e. Will the proiect or proposal use Lor occur in the immediate vicinity 06 water, rail or air transportation? If so enerally describe. The proposed'project would not use or occur near water, rail, or air transportation. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed ro ect or ro osal? if known indicate when ipeak volumes would occur and what ercenfa a of the volume would be trucks Lsuch as commercial and non -passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? For each of the 5 phases, project construction would generate approximately 650 vehicle round -trips due to workers and materials being transported to and fro_- the site durng the es *mated total 100=workday construction period. Most of those trips would occur during business hours (between 7 am and 6 pm) on weekdays (Mondays -through Fridays) but trips -may -occur at other times including -weekend -days. The cemetery could generate a net increase of up to 13 PM peak hour trips (increasing from 5 to 18 trips) over the proposed long term 50-year period of the Master Plan. Please refer to the Trip Generation Analysis performed by Hef iron Transportation, Inc. (2016). g. Will the pLoj2osai interfere with affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest roducts on roads or streets in the area? If so generally describe. The proposal would not interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any, All work will be completed on private propPrty� limitinv any tra� �netnprtaf_pnp»r on Pacific High flay C (Hwy 99). Contractors would be required to use off-street areas for construction staging. 15. Public services a. Would the 2Mtect result in an increased need for public services for example: fireprotection, oJice rotection gublic transit health care. schools other ? ff sogenerally describe. The proposed project would not create increased need for public services. b. Pro osed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on Oubfic services if any. No mitigation is being proposed because there would be no impacts on public services. 16. Utilities Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 18 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist c. Underline/circle utilities currently available at the site: Electrici , natural gas, water, refuse sere tel sanitary sewer, septic system, other d. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the orpiect, the utility rovidin the service and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. The completed project would include new electric streetlights and irrigation systems. Gethsemane Cemetery is serviced by Puget Sound Energy for electricity and Lakehaven Utility District for water. The project does not propose to expand the telephone, refuse or sewer systems. No interruptions to regular utility services are expected during construction. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Printed Name of Signee: Richard Peterson Position and Agency/Organization: Director of Cemeteries, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle Date Submitted: 03/02/2016 Gethsemane Cemetery Process IV Master Land Use Application Phased Long Term Master Plan 19 of 19 SEPA Environmental Checklist 1�� CITY OF Federal Way Department of Community Development STAFF EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Gethsemane Cemetery Federal Way File: 16-101141-00-SE Related Files: 16-101140-00-UP, and 16-101142-00-CN NOTE: Technical reports and attachments referenced below may not be attached to all copies of this evaluation. Copies of exhibits, reports, attachments, or other documents may be reviewed, and/or obtained by contacting Senior Planner Jim Harris. Department of Community Development. 33325 8th Avenue South. Federal Wa .'WA 98003. 253-835-2652, orjim.harris aciivoffedera] way.com. I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION Proposed cemetery expansion of approximately 20.8 additional acres. The existing cemetery development is about 8.2 acres in size. The Archdiocese owns approximately 58 acres total, but this project proposes changes only to that 29-acre portion of the site that is west of Hylebos Creek. The project proposes five phases of incremental construction. The proposal is to further develop and expand the existing cemetery with new burial sites, driveways, shrines, columbaria, landscaping, stortnwater and utility improvements, and other associated improvements. The site contains several wetlands and Hylebos Creek. (Exhibit A) II. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Name: Gethsemane Cemetery Expansion and Master Plan Review (Exhibit A) Applicant: Richard Peterson Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle 710 9`I' Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: (206) 524-1451 Applicant's Agent: Jim Brennan JA Brennan Associates 100 S. King Street, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: (206) 583-0620 Location: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA Parcel Size: Parcel no's.; 322104-9025, -9020, -4560, -4365, and 4281. Zoning: Suburban Estates (SE) Comp Plan Designation: Low Density Single Family The following information was submitted as part of the application for the development and master plan review. l . Master Land Use Application received March 7, 2016 2. Preliminary Site Plans pages 2.1 —2.4, Preliminary Drainage Grading and ROW Plan 3.1 —3.3, Preliminary Landscape Plans pages 4.1 —4.5, Building Elevations page 5.1, Clearing and Grading pages 6.1 — 6.3, and Tree Retention Plan page 7.1, all by J.A. Brennan. 3. Environmental Checklist for Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long Term Master Plan, signed by Richard Peterson, March 2, 2016 4. Wetland and Stream Delineation Report by Otak Inc., dated February 25, 2016 5. Response to 3`d Party Review of Critical Areas and Impact Mitigation Plan by Otak Inc., dated July 11, 2017 6. Addendum to Wetland and Stream Delineation Report by Otak Inc., dated August 18, 2017 7. Preliminary Stormwater Technical Information Report (TIR) prepared by KPFF Consultants, dated April 2017 8. Cultural Resources Assessment for the Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long -Range Master Plan, Federal Way, WA by SWCA Environmental Consultants, dated January 31, 2017 9. Trip Generation Analysis, prepared by Heffron Transportation Inc., dated February 25, 2016 10. CPTED Analysis, received March 7, 2016 III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The following lists the elements of the environmental checklist (Exhibit Q and a response to each, with: 1. Whether city staff concurs or does not concur with the applicant's response to the checklist item, or 2. City staff s additional comments or clarification to each checklist item. A. BACKGROUND The project development application was submitted on March 7, 2016, and was determined to be a complete application on April 4, 2016. Following are staffs comments to the checklist: 1-5. Concur with the checklist. The applicant has proposed a 50-year timespan for the master plan approval. City staff has noted several times that City staff does not support a 50-year timespan. The Hearing Examiner will decide the duration of the master plan approval in conjunction with the Process IV review and decision as allowed by FWRC. 7. This review only pertains to the 29-acre portion of the property lying west of Hylebos Creek. There is no proposed action as part of this master plan review that is occurring on the applicant's property located east of Hylebos Creek. 8-10. Concur with the checklist. 11. See staff response to A.6 above regarding duration of master plan. 12. Concur with the checklist. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a.-h. Erosion could occur typical to any construction site. Mitigation of potential impacts will be mitigated through compliance with the City Code requirements, KCSWDM and BMP's. Compliance with local, state and federal standards will provide sufficient mitigation of potential erosion impacts. Concur with the checklist. 2. Air a.-c. Concur with the checklist. Compliance with state and federal air quality standards will provide sufficient mitigation of potential on -site construction activities and long-term site usage. The implementation of an approved Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) plan that incorporates watering of the site, wheel washing, and approved construction entrances, should adequately mitigate potential adverse construction impacts. 3. Water a. Surface 1. Concur with the checklist. 2. The Hearing Examiner will review and decide upon any proposed wetland buffer intrusions and mitigation with the Process IV review. Maintenance and repair of the existing stormwater facility located in the outer portion of wetland buffer No. 6 will be decided upon as an exemption to critical area code requirements by the Director of Community Development. 3-6.Concur with the checklist. Ground. 1-2. Concur with the checklist. C. Water Runoff. 1-2. Concur with the checklist. Final review of the stormwater quality and detention will occur in conjunction with the final engineering plan review. Compliance with local, state, and federal standards will sufficiently mitigate stormwater impacts from the project. d. Concur with checklist. The project must comply with FWRC 19.145.440 regarding the proposed intrusions within the buffet- areas associated with Wetland No. 1. The applicant is also proposing maintenance and repair of an existing 1970's era storm drainage facility which is located within the outer portion of the buffer of Wetland No. 6. Mitigation of impacts resulting from the proposed storm drainage facility maintenance and repair are contained within MDNS condition number 1, and will provide compensatory mitigation of potential wetland buffer impacts resulting from the proposed maintenance and repair. City approval of the storm drainage facility maintenance and repair within a wetland buffer is required by FWRC 19.145.1 10. The project must also comply with all local, state, and federal regulations regarding surface water impacts that are in place at the time of development. Federal Way Comprehensive Plan policies cited in the MDNS provides the basis and authority for the mitigation condition. 4. Plants a-c. Concur with the checklist. d. Concur with the checklist. An approved landscape plan in accordance with Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.125 is required for this project. In addition, compliance with the tree retention standards of FWRC 19.120, Article III "Tree and Vegetation Retention Standards" is required. A preliminary landscape and tree and vegetation retention plan has been submitted in conjunction with the application. Areas that must be landscaped include street trees along public roads, perimeter landscaping, and interior parking lot landscaping. Final review and approval of the required landscaping will occur as part of the Process IV land use review and subsequent building and/or grading permit approval. 5. Animals a-d. Concur with the checklist. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a-c. Concur with the checklist. 7. Environmental Health a. 1-2. Concur with the checklist. Compliance with applicable local, state, and federal regulations will sufficiently mitigate the potential for significant adverse environmental health impacts. b. 1-3. Concur with the checklist. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a-k. Concur with the checklist. 1. As a result of the review process, which includes SEPA review, Process IV land use review, engineering review, clearing and grading permit/ building permit review, compliance with all code requirements will ensure that all potentially adverse environmental impacts will be addressed. No further mitigation is necessary. 9. Housing a-c. Concur with the checklist. 10. Aesthetics a-d. Concur with the checklist. 11. Light and Glare a-d. Concur with the checklist. 12. Recreation a-c. Concur with the checklist. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a-c. The applicant submitted a Cultural Resources Assessment prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants dated January 31, 2017, for the Cemetery Expansion. The Report describes the pre -contact and historical land use of the project area and provides a summary of previous cultural resources work in the vicinity as background for an assessment of the potential for discovery of significant archeological resources or human remains within the project boundaries. The Report -concludes with an assessment of project effects and recommendations for construction following an inadvertent discovery plan (IDP). Mitigation of potential impacts resulting from the proposed development are contained within MDNS condition number 2, and will provide mitigation measures should cultural resources be found during on -site construction. Federal Way Comprehensive Plan policies cited in the MDNS provide the basis and authority for the mitigation condition. 14. Transportation a-h. Concur with the checklist. As a result of the review process, which includes SEPA review, Process IV land use review, transportation concurrency review, engineering review, compliance with all code requirements will be ensured and all potentially adverse transportation impacts will be addressed. No further mitigation is necessary. 15. Public Services a-b. Concur with the checklist. 16. Utilities a-b. Concur with the checklist. IV. CONCLUSION The proposal can be found to not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment if appropriate conditions are properly implemented pursuant to the MDNS. Conditions of the MDNS arc based upon impacts identified within the environmental checklist, attachments, and the above "Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist, File 16-101141-SE" and are supported by plans, policies, and regulations formally adopted by Federal Way for the exercise of substantive authority under SEPA to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. The city reserves the right to review any future revisions or alterations to the site, or to the proposal, to determine the environmental significance or nonsignificance of the project. Exhibit A — Reduced Scale Site Plan Exhibit B — Vicinity Map Exhibit C — March 20, 2016, Environmental Checklist Prepared by: Senior Planner Jim Harris (253-835-2652 or jim.harris@cityoffederalway.co►n) Date: October 5, 2017 c DEPARTNIENT OF CONIINIUNITI• DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 CITY OF 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www,dtyoffederolway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION I,'-1� ! 6'" hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) �I Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Pemnit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed X e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on nC 77 , 2017. Project Name File Number(s) Signature qf,, _ Date 5-off b /7 K:\CD Administration Files\Declorotion of Distribution.doc/Last prinled I /12/2017 10:33:00 AM (�'j �' �' 4(�O'c NNEANDERSON US ARMY CORPS/ENGINEERS ATTN REGULATORY BRANCH PO BOX 3755 SEATTLE WA 98124 suzanne.l.anderson usace.arm .mil DEPT OF ECOLOGY SEPA UNIT PO BOX 47703 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7703 JACLYN FORD DEPT OF AGRICULTURE PO BOX 42560 OLYMPIA, WA 98504-2560 'ford .agr.wa.gov RAMIN PAZOOKI CPO SDOT SOUTH KING COUNTY BOX 330310 ATTLE WA 98133-9710 nin.pazooki§wsdot.wa. ov DEPT OF ARCHAEOLOGY ISTORIC PRESERVATION PO BOX 48343 OLYMPIA WA 98504-8343 retchen.kaehler dah .wa. ov LAURi4 ARSER (saltwater] //"WDFW REGION 4 OFFICE ' 16018 MILL CREEK BLVD MILL CREEK WA 98012-1296 laura.arber dfw.wa- ov WASH ENVIRON COUNCIL 1402 3RD AVE STE 1400 SEATTLE WA 98101-2179 wec@wecprotects. org PSRC GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPT 1011 WESTERN AVE #500 SEATTLE WA 98104-1040 eharris@psrc.org MLTCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIE3E-- FISHERIES DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWER 39015 172"D AVE SE AUBURN WA 98092 k-n�wafterna muckleshoot Rsf.us VS� FISH & WILDLIFE SERVCE ' 510 DESMOND DR SE #102 Jj LACEY WA 98503 NATURAL RESOURCES CVN SVC 941 POWELL AVE SW STE 102 RENTON WA 98057-2115 REVIEW TEAM WA DEPT OF COMMERCE GROWTH MGT SERVICES PO BOX 42525 OLYMPIA WA 98504-2525 reviewteam commerce.wa. ov' JAMEY TAYLOR DNR SEPA CENTER PO BOX 47015 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7015 se acenter dnr.wa. ov ENERGY FACILITY SITE EVALUATION COUNCIL 1300 EVERGREEN PARK DRIVE PO BOX 43172 OLYMPIA, WA 98504-3172 efsec@utc.wa.gov- DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SVCS LANDS AND BUILDING DIVISION PO BOX 45848 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 hubenb' dshs.wa. ov WA ST DEPT TRANSPORTATION PO BOX 47300 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7300 h customerservice wsdot.wa. ov WA -NATURAL HERITAGE-,, DNR PO BOX 47014 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7014 sepacenter@_dnr.wa_gov_ = - ❑EPT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE WASH STATE PARKS AND REC PO BOX 43200 PO BOX 42668 OLYMPIA WA 98504-3155 OLYMPIA WA 98504-2668 se adesk dfw.wa. ov rand .kline arks.wa- ov LARK FISHER (freshwater) OFW AREA HABITAT BIOLOGIST 1775 12T" AVE NW STE 201 ISSAQUAH WA 98027 larry.f isher(@-dfw.wa.goy _, KELLY COOPER DEPT OF HEALTH ENVIRON HEALTH DIV PO BOX 47820 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7820 kell .coo er doh.wa_ ov ATTN SEPA REVIEW PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY 1904 3RD AVE STE 105 SEATTLE WA 98101-3317 WURA MURPHY TRIBAL ARCHAEOLOGIST MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE 39015 172"D AVE SE AUBURN WA 98092 PUGET SOUND PARTNERSHIP 210 11 TH AVE SW STE 401 OLYMPIA WA 98504-0900 info(aD-psp.wa.gov MASTER BUILDERS ASSOC 335 116T" AVE SE BELLEVUE WA 98004-6407 BRANDON REYNON PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS HISTORIC PRESERVATION DERT 3009 E PORTLAND AVE TACOMA WA 98404 bra lluptribe.com DENNIS-LEWARCH-- THP OFFICE SUQUAMISH TRIBE 18490 SUQUAMISH WAY SUQUAMISH WA 98392 KING COUNTY PARKS & REC KING CO TRANSPORTATION KING COBS DIVISION 201 S JACKSON ST # 700 201 S JACKSON ST KSC-TR-0815 COUNTY ROADS ENGINEER SEATTLE WA 98104 SEATTLE WA 98104 155 MONROE AVE NE matthew. erkins kin count . ov haroid.taniguchi(c�kingcoun ov RENTON WA 98056 �'— maint.roads z kingcount gov REGGIE HOLMES KC BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD YESLER BUILDING, RM 240 400 YESLER WAY SEATTLE WA 98104 reginald. hol m es(dk ingcou ntv. nov DARRELL RODGERS PUBLIC HEALTH SEATTLE/KING 401 FIFTH AVE STE 1100 SEATTLE WA 98104 darrell.rod ers kin count . ov PIERCE COUNTY HEALTH DEPT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIV 3629 S "D" ST TACOMA WA 98408 info(aD_tpchd.org LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF SOUTH KING COUNTY PO BOX 66037 BURIEN WA 98166 info __seattleiwv.org SAM PACE SEA/KING CO ASSOC/REALTORS 29839 154T" AVE SE KENT WA 98042-4557 sam pace(a)concentric. net EPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SEC (1200 6TH AVE MD-126 SEATTLE WA 98101 epa-seattle(a7epa.gov KRISTI KYLE PSE REGIONAL STRUCTURE PO BOX 97034 BELLEVUE WA 98009-9734 SOUTH KING FIRE & RESCUE 31617 1 ST AVE S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 j ris.cahan southkin ire.oa TANYA NASCIMENTO FWPS 33330 8T" AVE S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 tanya-nascimentoC&fwps.org SOLID WASTE DIV KING CO DEPT OF NATURAL RES 201 S JACKSON ST STE 701 SEATTLE WA 98104-3855 neil.fuiii(p?kin__ crcounty.go PERRY WEINBERG SOUND TRANSIT 401 S JACKSON ST SEATTLE WA 98104-2826 perry.wei n bergia7sou ndtra ns it.org PORT OF TACOMA ENVIRONMENTAL DEPT PO BOX 1837 TACOMA WA 98401-1837 ijordan _po_rtaftacoma.com PIERCE CO PLNG & LAND SVCS 2401 S 35T" ST #2 TACOMA WA 98409-7460 aclark co. ierce.wa.us POLLY DAIGLE HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT 23828 30T" AVE S KENT WA 98032 pd aigle(cD highl i newater.org SOUTH KING COUNTY REGIONAL WATER ASSOCIATION 27224 144T" AVE SE KENT WA 98042 cu stornerserviceCDwd 111.com ECON DEV COUNCIL OF SEATTLE & KING COUNTY 1301 5T" AVE STE 1500 SEATTLE WA 98101 i nfoO)edc-seaki ng.org GARY KRIEDT KING COUNTY TRANSIT DIV ENV PLANNING MS KSC-TR-0431 201 S JACKSON ST SEATTLE WA 98104-3856 gary-kriedt(a7kingcou nty. goy TINA VASLET PIERCE TRANSIT PO BOX 99070 LAKEWOOD WA 98496-0070 tvaslet@piercetransit.or_Q PIERCE CO PW & UTILITIES 2702 S 42ND ST STE 628 TACOMA WA 98409 t7ziegle c(D,co.pierce.wa.us MIDWAY SEWER DISTRICT PO BOX 3487 KENT WA 98032 ken midwaysewer-orr EARTHGORPS FRIENDS OF THE HYLEBOS 6310 NE 74T" ST STE 201 E SEATTLE, WA 98115 i nfo(a)earthcorps. org DAVID KORTHALS KC DEPT OF ASSESSMENTS METRO TRANSIT 500 4T" AVE RM 700 201 S JACKSON ST KSC-TR-0413 #ADM-AS-0708 SEATTLE WA 98104-3856 SEATTLE WA 98104 david.korthalsSNkingcountv.pov assessor.info(a7kingcounty., ov ATTN NEWSROOM TACOMA NEWS TRIBUNE 1950 S STATE ST TACOMA WA 98405 newstips&thenewstri bu ne. com FEDERAL WAY MIRROR 31919 1 ST AVE S STE 101 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 editor(a federalwaymirror.com FW CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BRIAN ASBURY PO BOX 3440 �� LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DIST FEDERAL WAY WA 98063 PO BOX 4249 rmartin&federalwaychamber.com FEDERAL WAY WA 98063 - basbu ryp lakehaven. org RYAN FLYNN TACOMA WATER DIVISION PO BOX 11007 TACOMA WA 98411 rf�n n(-ci.tacom a.wa. us TERRYLUKENS BELLEVUE COUNCIL OFFICE PO BOX 90012 BELLEVUE WA 98009-9012 council bellevuewa. ov CITY OF TACOMA. 747 MARKET ST TACOMA WA 98402-3769 J shirle .schultz ci.tacom us CITY OF PACIFIC BUILDING & PLANNING 100 THIRD AVE SE PACIFIC WA 98047 jdodge@ci.pacific.wa.us CITY OF LAKEWOOD 10510 GRAVELLY LK DR SW STE 206 LAKEWOOD WA 98499-5013 i of oCa7 c i tyof l a kewood . u s CITY OF DES MOINES 21630 11 T" AVE S DES MOINES WA 98198 d lathrop Ca)desm of neswa. qov CITY OF AUBURN 25 W MAIN ST AUBURN WA 98001 ksnyder@auburnwa.gov_ ALGONA CITY HALL 402 WARDE ST ALGONA WA 98001-8505 kenf(cDalgonawa.gov CITY OF KENT ECON & COMMUNITY DEV 400 W GOWE ST STE 300 KENT WA 98032 planning a@kentwa.gov CITY OF NORMANDY PARK 801 SW 174T" ST NORMANDY PARK WA 98166 dayidnCa7ci.norm Andy-park.wa. u s NE TAC NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL 747 MARKET ST RM 900 TACOMA WA 98402-3793 CITY OF BURIEN 415 SW 150T" ST BURIEN WA 98166-1957 chipd@burienwa.gov CFTY OF EDGEWOOD 2224 104T" AVE E EDGEWOOD WA 98372-1513 cltyhall a&btyofedgewood.org C TEVEFRIDDLE ITY OF FIFE 411 23RD STE IFE WA 98424 friddle cit offIfe.or CITY OF SEATAC E 0 WATER DISTRICT #54 4800 S 188T" ST CITY OF MILTON 922 S 219TH ST SEATAC WA 98188 1000 LAUREL ST DES MOINES WA 98198-6392 dmcciun ci.sea#ac.wa.us MILTON WA 98354 eric.clarke0kcwd54.or stimm cit ofmilton.net HOLLY WILLIAMSON JASON TESDAL PORT OF SEATTLE--airport OLYMPIC PIPELINE CO CENTURY LINK COMMUNICATIONS PO BOX 1209 2319 LIND AVE SW 23315 66T" AVE S SEATTLE WA 98111 SEAT RENTON WA 98055 KENT WA 98032 SEATsLa?portsea8111 ru holly_.william on rr bp.com lason.tesdal(r�centurylink.com JAMES IRISH SOUND TRANSIT 0ames.irish ames.irish@soundtransit.org OSP ENGINEERING WA/OR/N. ID AT&T CABLE MAINTENANCE 11241 WILLOWS RD NE STE 130 REDMOND WA 98052-1009 JERRY STEELE COMCAST CABLE COMM 4020 AUBURN WAY N AUBURN WA 98002-1315 KENT HALE SOUND TRANSIT kent.haie _.soundtransit.oLg LAND USE SVC KCDDES 35030 SE DOUGLAS ST # 210 SNOQUALMIE, WA 98065-9266 BPA TER 3 28401 COVINGTON WAY SE KENT WA 98042 MIKE BULZOMI SOUND TRANSIT mike.bulzomi soundtransit.or KC WASTEWATER TREATMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PLN OAP MS KSC-NR-0505 201 S JACKSON ST SEATTLE WA 98104-3855 MICHAEL FELDMAN AVIATION PLANNING SEATAC PO BOX 68727 SEATTLE WA 98168-0727 COVINGTON WATER DISTRICT WA DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 18631 SE 300T" PL PO BOX 47015 Updated March 2, 2017 KENT WA 98042-9208 OLYMPIA WA 98504 Tamara Fix From: Tamara Fix Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 9:25 AM To:'suzanne.l.anderson@usace.army.mil'; 'separegister@ecy.wa.gov'; 'ramin.pazooki@wsdot.wa.gov'; 'gretchen.kaehler@dahp.wa.gov'; 'laura.arber@dfw.wa.gov'; karen.walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us; 'wfwoctap@fws.gov'; 'reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov'; 'sepadesk@dfw.wa.gov'; 'Fisher, Larry D (DFW)'; 'laura.murphy@muckleshoot.nsn.us'; 'sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov'; 'brandon.reynon@puyalluptribe.com'; dlewarch@suquamish.nsn.us; 'epa- seattle@epa.gov'; Chris Cahan; 'rflynn@ci.tacoma.wa.us'; info@earthcorps.org; 'basbury@lakehaven.org';'shirley.schultz@ci.tacoma.wa.us'; stimm@cityofmilton.net; cityhall@cityofedgewood.org; 'sfriddle@cityoffife.org' Subject: Gethsemane Cemetery MDNS Attachments: 20171005085054.pdf Attached is an MDNS and SEPA checklist for the above -mentioned project in Federal Way. The Senior Planner for the project, Jim Harris, can be reached at iim.harris cit offederaiwa .com or 253-835-2652. Tamara Fix Administrative Assistant Federal Warr 33325 81h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2602 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.cityoffederalway.com DEPARTMENT OF CO\INILINIT,' DEVELOPMENT 333281Avenue South -4�kFederal Way WA 98003 CITY OF 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.citvoffeder)Iway.com Fedel C11 WE.. DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION l hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significarce (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Pemnit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was [mailed ❑ faxed 0 e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on .?&- I�Pt 00 2017. Project Name .- ( 2 9 File Number(s) ]&J Signature_ ._ Date ib - s "/-7 r,:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 1 /12/2017 10:33:00 AM Public Notice - Neighboring Parcels (within 300') Project Name: Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long Tenn Master Plan Property Address: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA 98003 Applicant: Rich Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle Owner: Corporation of the Archbishop of Seattle, A Corporation Sole Permit Application: Master Land Use Application Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision) 4/ j. a. brennan associates ri tt Landscape Architects & Planners 100 S, King St, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98104 L 206.583-0620 F. 20083.0623 v.jabren—com Parcel number Taxpayer name Parcel address Mailing address 2188203335 COOPER ALAN N/A C/O STROM ANITA FEDERAL WAY 1227 58TH AVE NE TACOMA WA 98422 2188203365 RAPACZ SARAH J 112 SW 374TH ST 112 SW 374TH ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 2188204205 CHRISTIANSON BETTY 37405 PACIFIC HWY S C/O SHIKINA CINDY L FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 1868 SW MAPLE OAK LN #B77 BEAVERTON OR 97003 2188204325 CHRISTIANSON BETTY 37405 PACIFIC HWY S C/O SHIKINA CINDY L FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 18668 SW MAPLE OAK LN #B77 BEAVERTON OR 97003 2188204245 CHRISTIANSON BETTY 37405 PACIFIC HWY S C/O SHIKINA CINDY L FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 18668 SW MAPLE OAK LN #B77 BEAVERTON OR 97003 2188204285 CHRISTIANSON BETTY N/A C/O SHIKINA CINDY L FEDERAL WAY 18668 SW MAPLE OAK LN #1377 BEAVERTON OR 97003 2188204330 CHRISTIANSON BETTY N/A C/O SHIKINA CINDY L FEDERAL WAY 18668 SW MAPLE OAK LN #B77 BEAVERTON OR 97003 2188204455 LOONEY WILLIAM A N/A PO BOX 1435 FEDERAL WAY TACOMA WA 98401 2188204480 LOONEY WILLIAM A N/A PO BOX 1435 FEDERAL WAY TACOMA WA 98401 2188204490 MARCHAND CHRIS P N/A 24408 118TH CT SE FEDERAL WAY KENT WA 98030 2188204520 LOONEY WILLIAM A N/A 7115 PACIFIC HWY E FEDERAL WAY MILTON WA 98354 3221049019 SOUTH SANDRA S 233 S 373RD ST 233 S 373RD ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 3221049021 KARILEEN LLC N/A PO BOX 847 FEDERAL WAY CARLSBAD CA 92018 3221049024 HOWES BEVERLY (AS OF 3/4/2016) 516 S 376TH ST 12523 47TH AVE E CAMPBELL NORMAN (AS OF 2/15/2016) FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 TACOMA WA 98446 3221049032 IVERSON CLARA M 7005 JOHNSON RD NE 4323 S 188TH ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 SEATAC WA 98188 3221049033 PARKE WAYNE LEROY JR WA 8408 234TH AVE E FEDERAL WAY BUCKLEY WA 98321 3221049046 PARK MIN H+DEAREASA 37305 PACIFIC HWY S 7115 PACIFIC HWY E FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 MILTON WA 98354 3221049057 MORRISON LEONARD+RICHARD N/A 11804 110TH AVE E FEDERAL WAY PUYALLUP WA 98374 3221049059 HOWES BEVERLY (AS OF 3/4/2016) 610 S 376TH ST 12523 47TH AVE E CAMPBELL NORMAN (AS OF 2/15/2016) FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 TACOMA WA 98446 3221049065 HENRICHSEN NEIL C 6927 JOHNSON RD NE 6927 JOHNSON RD NE FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 TACOMA WA 98422 3221049069 CHURCHILL SYLVIA N/A 3136 SW 302ND PL FEDERAL WAY FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 3221049070 OAKMAN COREY C 37540 8TH AVE S 37540 8TH AV S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 3221049087 CLARK ALTA M 215 S 373RD ST 215 S 373RD ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 3221049091 KOREAN-AMERICAN CALVARY 37515 8TH AVE S BAPTIST CHURCH FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 PO BOX 23238 FEDERAL WAY WA 98093 3221049101 CARVALHO JEFFREY P 700 S 376TH ST 700 S 376TH ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 3221049106 OAKMAN COREY C N/A 37540 8TH AV S FEDERAL WAY FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 3221049109 BRENEMAN HEATH+MARIA N/A 7001 JOHNSON RD NE FEDERAL WAY TACOMA WA 98422 3221049110 WSDOT/REAL ESTATE SERVICES N/A PO BOX 47440 FEDERAL WAY OLYMPIA WA 98003 3221049134 UNITED STATES 400 S 376TH ST PUYALLUP TRIBETRUST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 TACOMA WA 98404 MAR 07 2016 i Gethsemane Cemetery CM OF FMERAL WAY Neighboring Parcel Report Phased Long Term Master Plan 1 of 1 CDS Process IV Master Land Use Application PAGE 2 u is atice - e�q-Fodnq- ar�cei(wi ih n 30o'l} Project Name: Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long Term Master Plan Property Address: 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA 98003 Applicant: Rich Peterson, Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle Owner: Corporation of the Archbishop of Seattle, A Corporation Sole Permit Application: Master Land Use Application Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision) -a. brennan ;l)Sl i i11CS I'L Lt landscape Atcltitects & Plamlen 100 S. Bing St, Snute 200, Settle, WA 98104 c 206 5&1-0620 f. 206.583.0623 at jA m mcom Parcel number Taxpayer name Parcel address Mailing address King County 2188203395 KING JAMES VINCENT 372341ST- AVE SW 37234 1ST AVE SW FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 2188204105 ZEMEK MARIE E N/A 27409 220TH PL SE MAPLE VALLEY WA 98178 2188204580 COUNTY LINE EQUIPMENT N/A 8507 PACIFIC HWY E COMPANY INC TACOMA WA 98422 Pierce County 421311002 COUNTY LINE EQUIPMENT 6601 XXX 7TH STCT NE 8507 PACIFIC HWY E COMPANY INC TACOMA WA 98422 421314022 COUNTY LINE EQUIPMENT 8507 PACIFIC HWY E 8507 PACIFIC HWY E COMPANY INC TACOMA WA 98422 421314030 CEDARS RV COURT LLC 8425 PACIFIC HWY E 1118 NW 130TH ST SEATTLE WA 98177-4113 421314108 CAHILL PARTNERS LP 8410 PACIFIC HWY E 12527 23RD STREET CT E EDGEWOOD WA 98372 421314125 X-RAY LLC 8411 PACIFIC HWY E MICHAEL THOMPSON 321 WILLOW ST PORT TOWNSEND WA 98368 421314132 CAHILL MICHAEL J & MONICA J 8410 PACIFIC HWY E 12527 23RD STREET CT E EDGEWOOD WA 98372 421314177 BONDAR VAS!L!Y 8324 PACIFIC HWY E 8324-PACIFIC HWY E TACOMA WA 98422 421314025 HENRICHSEN NEIL C & BARBARA XXX PACIFIC HWY E PO BOX 459 A MILTON WA 98354 421314124 HENRICHSEN NEIL & BARBARA 6921 JOHNSON RD NE 6927 JOHNSON RD NE TACOMA WA 98422 Gethsemane Cemetery Neighboring Parcel Report Phased Long Term Master Plan 1 of 1 Process IV Master Land Use Application - I I N2 Leh `�e,• 4108 4125 4132 v ry �q 4127 124 Sic? z - I ,cam—t s� LEGEND PROJECT BOUNDARY 300'OFFSET PARCELS INCLUDED IN -PUBLIC NOTIFICATION cc 4 �- �oa.s s 37 �,d s�; ,�� , a3k� i90 0760 035E 800 0g3 r� u1 o 09.310870 r ,`�' 0910.9 r-C �, D 31•�] � s 1 rr` C _ I, o U 94 - 0,72 C n13}i O�,DQ.240420t0 O lla v le !` ~' 1 1, 0 0 8 1 C r } [zG�.b-.09.D 10 __ -'' 10 a0 -- _07i3r3 � ► I 00 05 /0010 �. c Ob r09 5016'000 }65 02�'3{0 002�D �,,5 9163 9162 9130 9139 Q02 �0910 ^' 0 70ti in60kn0E90 04'OO1a00 --- rr i�str� 0"5 2 0O" 001.1 •150 ,, .}012 1 J 00 7 I -#. i7 9 + , I. 1 s. n'n n n.-..- GETHSEIrIIIANE CEMETERY PUBLIC NOTICE MAP JORY6 516W Kate Valdez, THPO Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Dave Burlingame, Director of Cultural Resources Cowlitz Indian Tribe PO Box 2547 Longview, WA 98632-8594 Laura Murphy Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 39015 172"d Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 Jeffrey Thomas Puyallup Tribe 6824 Pioneer Way Puyallup, WA 98371 Dennis Lewarch, THPO Suquamish Tribe PO Box 498 Suquamish, WA 98392-0498 - } Easy Peel®Address Labels Bend along line to expose Pop-up Edge® Johnson Meninick, Cultural Resources Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Cecile Hansen, Chairwoman Duwamish Tribe 4705 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 Jackie Wall Nisqually Tribal Historic Pres Office 4820 She-Nah-Num Drive SE Olympia, WA 98513-9105 Kris Miller, THPO Skokomish Tribe N 80 Tribal Center Rd Skokomish, WA 98584-9748 Richard Young Tulalip Tribes-Hibulb Cultural Center 6410 23rd Ave NE Tulalip, WA 98271 Go to averycom/templates Use AveryTemplate 5160 r David Powell, TFW Cultural Resources Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation Po Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Lena Tso, THPO Lummi Nation 2665 Kwina Road Bellingham, WA 98226-9298 Annette Bullchild Nisqually Tribal Historic Pres Office 4820 She-Nah-Num Drive SE Olympia, WA 98513-9105 Rhonda Foster, THPO Squaxin Island Tribe SE 70 Squaxin Lane Shelton, WA 98584-9200 Tim Brewer Tulalip Tribes — Hibulb Cultural Center 6410 23rd Ave NE Tulalip, WA 98271 ' Pat: avery.com/patents kilquettes d'adresse Easy Peel® 1 Allez a ry' ave ca/gabarits � i I Repliez i la hachureafin de r6v6ler le rebord Poo-u& r r 1tffl— ro r—hn.ir a„ate. sirn . rl L �2 4�) ZZLLo-Ld-L--� / C _4 L -Maki �_aqq r � am �G a I V 1 1 Tamara Fix From: Tamara Fix Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 8:35 AM To: 'diana@gulliford.com'; 'bgraham@schn.com' Subject: Gethsemane Cemetery MDNS Attachments: 20171005075747.pdf As a party of record, you are receiving the attached notice. Please contact Senior Planner Jim Harris with any questions. Tamara,Fix Administrative Assistant - &I Federal Way 33325 8tn Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2602 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.citvoffederalway.com RESUBMITTED PERTEET SEP 2 6 2017 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPfAEN-1 PERTEET,COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 To: Jim Harris, Planner, City of Federal Way From: Jason Walker, PLA, PWS, Environmental Manager and Wetland Ecologist, Perteet Date: September 26, 2017 Re: 16-101141-00-SE & 16-101140-U P Gethsemane Cemetery Critical Areas and Impacts Mitigation Plan —Second Review Perteet Inc. conducted a follow-up review of resubmitted information to address findings stated in our March 24, 2017 memo. A meeting was also held at the City of Federal Way on August 8, 2017 with city staff, the applicant, and their wetland consultant. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED The following resubmitted documents were reviewed by Perteet: • Technical Memorandum: Gethsemane Cemetery —Response to 3rd Party Review of Critical Areas and Impacts Mitigation Plan prepared by Otak, Inc, dated July 11, 2017. ■ Technical Memorandum: Addendum to Wetland and Stream Delineation Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan for Gethsemane Cemetery, prepared by Otak, Inc., dated August 18, 2017. FINDINGS 1) Perteet accepts Wetland 1 (Unit 1) was revised from a Category III to a Category II classification pursuant to our prior memo and the accompanying responses to our otherfindings relating the to the probable off -site wetland feature, comments on ratings, and observations made at probable watercourses. These items are addressed and acceptable pursuant to the recent response submittal items cited above. 2) The buffer mitigation approach proposed for the stormwater pond is also acceptable with a few exceptions listed below. The mitigation provides more area (21,000 square feet) than the area of buffer impact (10,100 square feet) to address common risks associated with the success of permittee-responsible mitigation and occurs in a landscape position that will be functional to the adjacent natural system (restoring a buffer area that is presently a mowed lawn with native plant species that are appropriate for buffer restoration). Sufficient information has been provided to address FWMC 19.145,140 (Mitigation Plan Requirements) except as noted below. a. Address permanent protection of all critical areas on the site (inclusive of buffers) pursuant FWMC 19.145.150 and 19.145.170, as determined to be applicable by the City for this action. . b. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.180 —Critical area Markers, Signs, and Fences. Fence and sign installation should occur at the outer edge of all buffer areas on the property for critical areas demarcation and protection. Depict signs and fencing on the mitigation plan drawing and/or Page 1 of 2 M� ;kPERTEET PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252,7700 site plan drawings. Describe the proposed fencing method. A two- or three -rail (open rail) 4- foot high wood fence is standard. Signs can be part of the fence on fence posts that extend to 5 or 6 feet in height at sign locations. Signs should occur at approximately 100 foot minimum intervals pursuant to common best practices. [. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.14O(7)(c) — Erosion and Sediment Control and to avoid probable water quality risks pursuant to FWMC 19.145.200, clearing and soil disturbance (grading, sod stripping, and soil conditioning) in the buffer impact and mitigation areas should be limited to the dry summer months. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.140(7)(c) and 19.145.200, the site should also be stabilized (e.g. seeded and/or mulched) during the summer growing season with appropriate BMPs, presumed mostly to include seeding and mulching (precluding use of straw that can re -seed) and silt fencing at the disturbance limit. Mitigation planting should occur after soil work and seed stabilization in the wet winter dormant season. For appropriate germination, seeding should occur no later than mid -September. Provide the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) Plan depicting and describing these items and the sequence and timing of construction activities on that plan sheet. Coordinate preparation of the TESC plan with the Best management Practices section on Page 12 of the July 11, 2017 Mitigation Plan (report). e. Indicate mulching of plantings with wood chips or arborist mulch on the mitigation planting plan drawing. Describe a minimum of a 3 foot diameter by 4"-6" depth mulch ring around each plant with mulch held -back from contacting the plant stems by 4". This information is partially complete in the report but not clearly shown and also conflicting on the mitigation planting plan drawing. f- Indicate irrigation by an automated temporary system on the mitigation planting plan drawing in the "Irritation Within Buffer" notes. g. Tall -growing grasses specified in the Upland Seed Mix table on the mitigation planting plan drawing are a concern. It is recommended to use Meadow Seed Mix pursuant to the Ecology 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington Volume II - Chapter 4 - Page 282, and as included in previous Ecology manual versions and used region -wide as a common best practice method for areas where colonization by native plants is desirable: Table 11-AA-7 Meadow Seed Mix MO . Purity `Y Getmin0i+on (ed(op or Oregon lmnigrass 20 92 65 gMSV4. afba orAgmsCs oreyorrensl Red fescuB 70 98 I90 FoWca rubs WmiFe duto clover 10 98 90 TnWrum 1e04s a. Address FWMC 19.145.14000) — Financial Guarantees. Provide and address these requimrents pursuant to code as directed by City when requested. End of Memo Page 2of2 Jim Harris From: John Hempelmann <JHempel man n@Cairncross.com> Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2017 2:11 PM To: Jim Harris Cc: Richard Peterson; Ripple Gus; Jim A. Brennan; Midori Dillon Subject: Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan Jim, I am writing to confirm that the Archdiocese supports a 20 year vesting provision for the multiple phases of the Master Plan for the Gethsemane Cemetery. This vesting provision will allow the Cemetery to have the certainty it needs to plan and invest for the next 20 years. John CH& John Hempelmann Attorney Cairncross & Hempelmann 524 Second Ave., Ste. 500 Seattle, WA 98104-2323 ihemoelma nnPcairncross.com Direct phone 206-254-4400 Office fax 206-587-2308 This email message may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized use is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To comply with IRS regulations, we advise you that any discussion of Federal tax issues in this email is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used by you, (a) to avoid any penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (b) to promote, market, or recommend to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. RECEIVED AUG 2 9 2017 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY Community Development Department GOMMLINfTY DEVELOPMENT CITY OF Federa� Way WETLANDS CONSULTANT AUTHORIZATION FORM Date: August 23, 2017 Consultant: Jason Walker, Environmental Planning Manager Perteet Inc. 2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 900 Everett, WA 98201 425.252.7700 / jwalker@terte_et-com Project: Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan — Continued Review and Hearing Support Location: 37500 Pacific Highway South City File No.: 16-101141-SE & 16-101140-UP Applicant Contact: JA Rrennan Associates Carol Ohlfs Carol@jabrennan.com 206 583-0620 City Staff Contact: Jim Harris, Planner — 253.835.2652, jim.harris@cityoffederalway.com Documents Provided: • Otak August 18 2017 Technical Memorandum: Addendum to Wetland and Stream Delineation Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan for Gethsemane Cemetery Task Scope: • Review memo and included buffer mitigation plan • Prepare Perteet response memorandum • Provide follow-up coordination and consultation to city via phone and email • Attend one hearing Task Schedule: Review work will begin when authorized by city. Federal Way Campus Business Park File #16-104997-SE / Doc ID 75176 Wetlands Consultant Authorization Form Page 1 of 2 Task Cost: Not to exceed $4,680 without a prior written amendment to this Task Authorization. Work will occur on a time and expenses bases pursuant to Perteet standard hourly rates. Acceptance: 9/231)-7- Date ,+..., (City bate, f a (Applicant) Pate Federal Way Campus Business Park Wetlands Consultant Authorization Form File #16-104997-SE / Doc ID 75176 Page 2 of 2 Technical Memorandum To: Richard Peterson, Corporation of the Catholic Archbishop of Seattle From: Kevin O'Brien, Senior Ecologist Jeff Gray, Senior Wetland Scientist Copies: Jim Harris, City of Federal Way Jason Walker, Perteet Carol Ohlfs, J.A. Brennan Associates John Hempelmann, Cairncross and Hempelmann Date: August 18, 2017 Subject: Addendum to Wetland and Stream Delineation Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan for Gethsemane Cemetery Project No.: 32655 Introduction This technical memorandum is provided as an Addendum to the Wletland and Stream Delineation Report and llletland Buffer Mitigation Plan, completed by Otak, Inc. (Otak), dated January 27, 2017, for the Corporation of the Catholic Archbishop of Seattle for the Gethsemane Cemetery in Federal Way, Washington.The original report and this Addendum have been completed to support the long range planning effort and Master Use Plan to guide future development at the Gethsemane Cemetery. This Addendum updates wetland classifications on the property, and includes a buffer mitigation/enhancement plan for the maintenance and repair of the existing stormwater pond that is required per the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). The updated wetland classifications and buffer mitigation/enhancement plan have been completed following coordination with the Federal Way Planning Department staff and their third party reviewer (Perteet) from 2016 to present. The buffer mitigation/enhancement plan was developed to offset habitat conversion impacts in a wetland buffer to achieve a no net loss of function. The buffer mitigation/enhancement plan described below describes the existing conditions of the wetland buffer being impacted, steps taken during the planning design process to avoid and minimize impacts to the wetland buffer, and the proposed mitigation/enhancement to offset unavoidable iRIESU B M 1 TT E D AUG 2 2 2017 CFTY OF FEDERAi. WAY COMMUNFTY DEVELOPMENT Page 2 August 18, 2017 Updated Wetland Classifications Otak biologists delineated 14 separate wetlands on the Gethsemane Cemetery properties as shown on Figure 1 included with this memorandum. The total area of delineated wetlands is 3.50 acres, mostly occurring as forested and shrub wetland habitats along West Fork Hylebos Creek and along the northern property boundary. Wetlands 1, 4, and 6 extend beyond the property boundaries, with Wetland 1 extending onto the adjacent Karileen property. No wetlands or streams were observed on the undeveloped portion of the study area east of West Fork Hylebos Creek. The 14 delineated wetlands are variously rated as Category II and III per the 2014 Ecology Wetland Rating System (Hruby, 2014), and have buffers between 60 and 165 feet (Federal Way Revised Code [FWRC]19.145.420). Cowardin wetland classes include palustrine forested (PFO), scrub -shrub (PSS), and emergent (PEM) habitats. Wetlands 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 are classified as PFO; wetlands 4, 10, and 13 are classified as PSS; wetlands 2, 3, and 14 are classified as PEM; and, wetlands 1, 5, and 6 have PFO/PSS/PEM habitat mosaics. Wetlands were classified as depressional, riverine, and slope per the HGM classification system. Wetland 2, artificially created in a roadside ditch along Pacific Highway South, is exempt from the FWRC per Chapter 19.145.110(3), and does not have an associated buffer. Wetland 1 (Unit 1) was revised from a Category III to a Category II classification at the request of the city on behalf of Perteet, but the buffer width (165 feet) remains the same. See Table 1 for the updated list of onsite wetlands, classifications, ratings, and buffer widths. Page 3 August 18, 2017 Table 1. Delineated Wetlands within the Gethsemane Cemetery Wetland Classification Wetlands Cowardinz HGM Ecology3 Wetland Size 4 Habitat Score from Ecology Rating � System Buffer Widtb (feet)-' Square Feet Acre Wl PFO/PSS/ PEM Depressional/Slope Unit 1: II Unit 2: III Unit 3: II >64,890 >1.49 Unit 1: 6 Unit 2: 5 Unit 3: 7 Unit 1: 165 Unit 2: 105 Unit 3: 165 W2 PEM Slope III 290 0.01 4 0 W3 PEM Depressional III 580 0.01 4 60 W4 PSS Riverine II 970 0.02 6 165 W5 PFO/PSS Riverine/Slope II 7,030 0.16 6 165 W6 PFO/PSS Depressional/ Riverine/Slope II >66,750 >1.53 7 165 W7 PFO Riverine II 480 0.01 6 165 W8 PFO Riverine II 400 0.01 6 165 W9 PFO Riverine II 6340 0.15 6 165 W10 PSS Riverine II 260 0.01 6 165 W11 PFO Riverine II 330 0.01 6 165 W12 PFO Riverine II 480 0.01 6 165 W13 PSS Riverine II 910 0.02 6 165 W14 PEM Depressional III 2,940 0.07 4 60 TOTAL 152,650 3.50 Note: A. Wetlands shown on Figure 1. B. Cowardin et al. (1979). Class based on vegetation: PEbI = Palustrine Emergent; PFO = Palustrine Forested; PSS = Palustrine Scrub - Shrub. C. Ecology category according to Hruby (2014). D. Wetlands sizes measured within the study area boundaries; Wetlands 1 and 6 extend beyond study area boundaries. E. Wetland buffer width according to FWRC 19.145.420. Wetland 2 is artificially created and has no buffer because it is exempt from the FWRC per Chapter 19.145.110(3). Proposed Buffer Mitigation Related to Repair of the Existing Stormwater Pond The proposed maintenance and repair of the existing stormwater pond in buffer of Wetland 6 is exempt from FWRC 19.145 (Environmentally Critical Areas) per FWRC 19.145.110(2): Operation, maintenance, or Page 4 August 18, 2017 repair of exis&S public improvements, m iAUes, public orprivate roads, parks, trails, or drainage ystems if the activity does not further alter or increase impact to, or encroach further within, the critical area or buffer and there is no increased risk to life orproperty as a result of the proposed operation, maintenance, or repair, and no nex clearing of vegetation beyond routine pruning. However, FWRC 19.145.110 also states that an exemption is not an endorsement of any action that may cause degradation to a critical area. The maintenance and repair of the existing stormwater pond includes clearing 10,100 square feet of the outer forested buffer to Wedand 6. This clearing is within the existing stormwater pond. Mitigation for this habitat conversion within the buffer is proposed. The proposed maintenance and repair of the stormwater pond includes clearing vegetation from the inside slopes of the pond, installing a bentonite slurry cutoff wall to prevent seepage and slope failure with the existing berm, installing a new catch basin and pond inlet, installing a 12-foot wide gravel access road adjacent to the buffer, and installing a 12-foot wide emergency overflow spillway at grade. Most of the maintenance and repairs are outside of the buffer. A small area of grading (<50 SF) for the access road is within the buffer to tie into existing grades. The proposed Wedand 6 buffer mitigation plan goals, objectives, performance standards, and monitoring and reporting methods and schedule is consistent with the mitigation plan for the Wedand 1 buffer enhancement plan as documented in the Wletland and Stream Delineation Report and Wletland BuferMitigation Plan (Otak 2017). Consistency with the previously approved buffer mitigation plan will ensure that maintenance, monitoring, and reporting is effectively implemented for the whole Gethsemane Cemetery property to achieve the goals and objectives of both buffer enhancement plans. Existing Conditions in the Pond within the Wetland 6 Buffer Currently, the stormwater facility receives some stormwater from Gethsemane Cemetery, but the quantity of stormwater discharging into the facility is limited due to the broken inlet pipe as evidenced by the vegetation, soil, and hydrology conditions typical of upland habitats. The existing stormwater facility is comprised of upland habitat, and is dominated by red alder, Himalayan blackberry, and sword fern. Subdominant plant species include osoberry, trailing blackberry (Rubes ursiams), and -vine maple (Acer circinatum). The plants found within the existing stormwater facility are typical of the upland plant communities found in the early successional forested portions of the Gethsemane Cemetery site. Soil samples indicate non-hydric soils, and evidence of hydrology was limited to small depositions of sediment in the lowest portion of the facility near a catch basin. Approximately two thirds of the existing facility is located within the outer half of the Wedand 6 buffer. 1 Page 5 August 18, 2017 Photo 1. Photograph of the early successional forest community dominated by red alder trees with a dense shrub understory in the existing stormwater pond on July 29, 2016. Wetland 6 Buffer Mitigation Approach Wetland buffers primarily function to protect water quality and wildlife habitat in wetlands (Hruby, 2013; Environmental Law Institute, 2008). The proposed Wetland 6 buffer mitigation/enhancement plan is intended to increase the functional performance of the existing Wedand 6 buffer. Increasing these ecological functions in the buffer will increase water quality protection and habitat functions in Wedand 6. Because the proposed impacts are in the outer half of the Wedand 6 buffer, which is primarily associated with habitat functions, the proposed mitigation is focused on improving habitat functions. The.proposed Wedand 6 buffer mitigation plan is analogous to wetlands mitigation in that the proposed plan accounts for temporal loss and risk associated with the proposed buffer enhancement actions. A 2.1:1 mitigation to impacts ratio is proposed that is consistent with these factors when determining mitigation ratios (Ecology et al, 2006a,b). The Gethsemane Cemetery property is located within the Western hemlock vegetation zone in the Puget Trough physiographic province (Van Pelt, 2007; Franklin and Dyrness, 1973). The Western hemlock dominated forest is considered the climax forest community due to its shade tolerance in forests with established canopy cover. The main goal of the proposed buffer enhancement is to accelerate the speed and increase confidence that an existing lawn -dominated area will succeed to native climax forest. Page 6 August 18, 2017 The area to be cleared is potentially also at risk from developing into a climax forest community. Red alder trees are successful at pioneering disturbed sites, such as in the existing stormwater pond that was previously constructed and not maintained regularly. However, forest successional trends toward climax communities can be impeded by dense alder stands that make it difficult for conifers to regenerate and grow if they do not become established at the same time or shortly before (Harrington, 2006). The time for this to occur in unmanaged forests is not well documented, but Douglas -fir seedlings can easily be eliminated in favor of more shade tolerant species such as Western hemlock, Western red cedar, and Sitka spruce. According to Deal (2006), Douglas -fir, Sitka spruce, and Western hemlock can all surpass red alder at about age 50. Western red cedar may take 80 years to surpass red alder. However, mixed stands can have extremely variable growth patterns depending on abiotic factors such as soil nutrients, available sunlight, and moisture availability. The area to be cleared within the Wetland 6 buffer consists of a red alder and cottonwood canopy with a dense deciduous shrub understory. It is likely the dense canopy and shrub understory has thus far precluded the establishment of conifers. In absence of understory conifers shrubs may completely dominate the site after alder senescence at age 80-100 (Deal 2006). Dense salmonberry stands, a species present in the area to be cleared, can also form a dense shrub layer under red alder that can exclude conifer regeneration (Franklin and Dyrness, 1973). It should be noted that Douglas -fir trees are present on the hillside surrounding the existing stormwater pond, and may provide a viable seed source for future conifer regeneration, but none have established in the clearing area at this time. The proposed buffer enhancement area is currently lawn with a hedge of Himalayan blackberry. If the existing grass and Himalayan blackberry stands are left alone and preclude the establishment of trees, then the area may remain shrubland for an indeterminate amount of time. Typical succession in the Western hemlock zone following a clearing (logging, fire, etc.) is an herbaceous weedy stage followed by a shrub - dominated period until the shrubs are overtopped by tree saplings, generally Douglas -fir (Harrington, 2006). Douglas -fir is considered the sub -climax tree species because it is shade intolerant. The proposed tree and shrub planting in the existing lawn area will accelerate succession and increase the likelihood these areas will return to climax forest habitat in the future. Wetland 6 Buffer Mitigation Design Criteria As documented in the W-Yletland and Stream Delineation Report and �W'letland Buffer Plan (Otak 2017), reduction of the wetland buffer for Wetland 1 with enhancement is proposed per FWRC 19.145.440(6). The proposed reduction will decrease the buffer by 25 percent in the outer buffer, from 165 feet to 124 feet. The remaining buffer will be enhanced with native plant species installation and non-native invasive plant removal. The buffer mitigation performance standards, monitoring, maintenance, and contingency standards met the requirements of FWRC 19.145.140 per the letter from Perteet dated March 24, 2017. As such, this memorandum addresses the proposed impacts and mitigation associated with the repair of the existing stormwater pond in the buffer of Wetland 6. The performance standards, monitoring, maintenance, and contingency standards detailed in the Wetland and Stream Delineation Report and WYletland W Page 7 August 18, 2017 BufferMitigatian Plan (Otak 2017) will also be used for the proposed buffer mitigation area as described below. ` No net loss of ecological functions to the Wetland 6 buffer or to Wetland 6 itself will occur on the Gethsemane Cemetery property as a result of the proposed mitigation, and it is anticipated that overall buffer function will be enhanced through the proposed buffer mitigation. Steps to avoid, minimize, and compensate for unavoidable impacts (i.e., the mitigation process) are described below. Avoidance and Minimization Measures Direct impacts to the on -site wetlands will be avoided altogether as a component of the Cemetery Master Plan and future land use decisions and activities related to implementation of the Plan. No modifications, including excavation, fill, and/or removal activities will occur in the onsite wetlands. No modifications will occur to off -site wetlands associated with the Karileen property to the east. Action items related to the repair and maintenance of the existing stormwater pond that have been located outside of the buffer to avoid impacts include: • Install catch basin type 2 with flow control structure • Install 12" pond inlet • Install and grade 12' wide gravel access road • Install 12' wide emergency overflow spillway at grade (partially outside buffer) • Eliminated the splash pad at the pond inlet in the buffer, and replaced it with a water quality settling cell outside of the buffer • Install gravel access road for stormwater pond maintenance Actions to minimize impacts to the buffer include: • Installing bentonite slurry cutoff wall in the berm rather than using a pond liner that would otherwise prevent groundwater infiltration • Limiting the gravel access road in the buffer to very minor grading (<50 SF) to tie in the terminus of the access road • Installing 12' wide emergency overflow spillway at grade (partially within buffer) Unavoidable, Minimized Impacts Unavoidable, minimized impacts to the buffer of Wedand 6 resulting from the maintenance and repair of the existing stormwater pond will be limited to those necessary to meet the requirements of the 2009 KCSWDM. Existing deciduous trees must be cleared from the interior side slopes and basin bottom within the existing pond footprint. Approximately 10,100 square feet of red alder, successional forest habitat will be cleared within the Wedand 6 buffer. Improving the function of the stormwater pond will have a significant positive effect on Wetland 6 by improving water quality. Currently, the stormwater discharge bypasses the pond due to the broken pipe, and flows directly into Wetland 6 in a manmade channel. Repairing and maintaining the stormwater pond Page 8 August 18, 2017 will improve the water quality of stormwater by improving settling and infiltration in the pond prior to discharging to Wedand 6. Compensatory Mitigation Compensatory mitigation for the project impacts to the buffer of Wedand 6 is proposed. Approximately 21,100 square feet of existing degraded buffer will be enhanced to upland forest. A mitigation ratio of 2.1:1 is proposed. Buffer averaging was considered as a form of compensatory mitigation for the proposed buffer impacts. Buffer averaging is frequently the preferred option for buffer mitigation so long as the proposed averaging does not result in adversely affecting wetland functions and values (Environmental Law Institute, 2008). During the mitigation planning process it was determined that enhancing existing degraded buffer areas was more beneficial to protecting water quality and habitat functions in Wedand 6 than averaging. The width of the wetland buffer south of the existing stormwater pond could be extended so that the aggregate area within the buffer would not be reduced. However, increasing the successional rate and development of forest habitat in the wetland buffer adjacent to where future cemetery development is proposed would better protect the wetland. Existing Conditions within the Buffer Enhancement/Mitigation Area The proposed buffer enhancement area is an upland grass lawn bordered by a hedge of Himalayan blackberry along the outer edge of forest at the top of a steep incline. Non-native grasses in the lawn habitat include a mix of bentgrass (Agrostis sp.), ryegrass (E1 mus sp.), and fescue (Festuca sp.) as shown in Photo 2. The existing buffer in the mitigation area currently provides a minimal level of habitat functioning relative to Wedand 6 that is located at the toe of slope beyond the forest edge. The proposed buffer enhancement is intended to convert this lawn area to upland forest habitat to increase protection of the Wedand 6 habitat functions. Photo 2. View of the grass meadow habitat in the proposed Wetland 6 buffer enhancement area at the forest edge; view looking east-southeast. -1 Page 9 August 18, 2017 Proposed Wetland 6 Buffer Mitigation Plan This section presents the Wetland 6 buffer mitigation plan, including goals and objectives and the performance standards by which to assess their achievement. A five-year monitoring and maintenance plan is proposed for the Wetland 6 buffer enhancement mitigation area. The monitoring plan in the following section outlines monitoring protocols and the reporting schedule to track the progress and success of the buffer enhancement areas for Wetlands 1 and 6. Maintenance plans include recommendations for irrigation for at.least the first two years after installation, and specifications for removal of non-native invasive species, replacement of installed plants that fail, and other activities including contingency actions that will be taken if the restoration areas do not satisfy performance standards. The effectiveness of this plan is substantially enhanced by the fact that the cemetery has full time on site staff that maintain the cemetery grounds. This Wetland 6 buffer mitigation plan proposes several actions to enhance approximately 21,100 square feet (0.48 acre) of the Wetland 6 buffer as shown on the attached Buffer Modtftcation and Enhancement Plan for Stormzvater Pond Miligaaion (dated 8 / 11 / 17) plan sheet, including: Removal of non-native invasive species Installation of native woody species for an upland forest community within the buffer enhancement area • Install fencing and signage around the mitigation area Buffer Mitigation Goals and Objectives 1. Successfully remove invasive species from the existing wetland buffer enhancement area. 2. Restore and enhance native vegetation within the wetland buffer for a successional trajectory towards establishing a multi -strata forest habitat. 3. Install fencing to provide a barrier between the wetland buffer and developable areas on the property. 4. Provide signage notifying public of sensitive mitigation area for the purpose of keeping visitors out of the mitigation area and also to educate visitors about wetlands and buffers. Mitigation Timing The proposed mitigation shall be completed concurrently with project construction. The proposed Wetland 6 buffer mitigation plan and associated planting, under the Cemetery Master Plan, will be executed prior to any alteration of the area required for the repair and maintenance of the existing stormwater pond. All activities associated with future grave and internment sites in the vicinity of the buffer enhancement will occur many years after the buffer enhancement area have been established and the subsequent monitoring period has been completed. Page 10 August 18, 2017 Mitigation Performance Standards Performance Standards are the means to quantify whether the Mitigation Goals and Objectives listed above are being met. The City of Federal Way typically requires monitoring for five years after installation to ensure success. The following parameters will be assessed for the required monitoring period: 1) Non-native invasive Species • ALL YEARS: Throughout the designated planting areas, the following species must be eliminated: all species included in the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board Class A Noxious Weed List; non-native invasive knotweeds including Japanese, Boehemian, giant, Himalayan, and hybrids (Palygonum cuspidatunr, P. bohemicum, P.sachalinense, and P. podystathymm); and other species as determined by the City of Federal Way and other agencies according to permit conditions. • ALL YEARS: Throughout the designated planting areas, there will be less than 10 percent total aerial cover by non-native invasive species including:, field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) and morning glory (Calystegia sepium); Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius), bird's -foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), English ivy (Hedera helix), policeman's helmet (Impatiensgland�rlsf ra); yellow flag iris (Iris preadacorus); yellow archangel (LamiastmAtigaleobdolon); purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) and garden loosestrife (Lysimachia vulgaris); reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), Himalayan and evergreen blackberries (Rebus armeniacus and B. lacinriays); bittersweet nightshade (Solanum dulcamara); tansy (Tanacetum aulgan); and other species as determined by the City of Federal Way and other agencies according to permit conditions. 2) Suivivaf of Installed Woody Plants • Year 1: there will be 100 percent survival of installed woody plants due to installation warranty. • Year 2: there will be at least 80 percent survival of installed woody plants. • Year 3: there will be at least 75 percent survival of installed woody plants. 3) Percent Cover • By Year 1: There will be at least 30 percent cover by native woody species in the buffer mitigation area, including both installed species and desirable volunteer native species. • By Year 2: There will be at least 40 percent cover by native woody species in the buffer mitigation area, including both installed species and desirable volunteer native species. • By Year 5: There will be at least 60 percent cover by native woody species in the buffer mitigation area, including both installed species and desirable volunteer native species. 4) P1ant.Health • ALL YEARS: There will be visual evidence that installed plants are vigorous (eg. new growth and few visible signs of stress). Page 11 August 18, 2017 5) Establish and Maintain Species Di�ersi[�r • Years 3-5: At a minimum, a total of five (5) native woody species will be established in the designated planting areas. To satisfy this Performance Standard, a particular species only has to be established in the mitigation site, and desirable native volunteer species can be counted. Non-native Invasive Species Removal Himalayan blackberry within the existing wetland buffer shall be removed by Gethsemane Cemetery staff using their preferred method. Removal is recommended to be completed during construction and before planting with native species. Recommended removal strategies include the following: • Removal by hand. Cut the stalks, remove the root crowns, and dispose of the plant material off - site. This control method can be implemented in the spring/summer prior to or concurrent with construction. • Herbicide treatment. Cut the canes and dab a glysophate-based herbicide on the cane stump immediately after cutting. Remove the canes once dead and dispose of the plant material off -site. This control method is most successfully implemented in the fall. Plant Species Selection and Specifications A variety of native species are included in the buffer mitigation plan plant palette shown on the 1\/iidgation Plan Sheet included with this memo. The palette includes a total of 15 native shrub or small tree species, four native conifer tree species, and four native deciduous tree species. Native plant species were chosen for the following characteristics: • native to the Puget Sound area; • established presence of source populations at the project site; • suitable for expected site hydroperiod, light, and soil conditions; • known plant community associations in the native forest climax community in the Puget Sound lowlands ecoregion; • ability to provide structural complexity, food, and shelter for wildlife; • availability from local sources; and • aesthetic appeal. Plants will be purchased from reputable regional nurseries that provide local genetic ecotypes of plants native to western Washington and the Puget Sound area. Plant Installation and Specifications Plants will be installed according to planting plan diagrams and schedules specified in the Mitigation Plan Sheet and the following recommendations: • Amend the designated restoration planting areas by tilling in a minimum of six (6) inches of compost into the top twelve (12) inches of soil. • The planting hole should be no deeper than the rootball, and the bottom of the football should rest on undisturbed soil. The planting hole should be a minimum of three (3) to four (4) times the width of the rootball. 0 Spread the roots and straighten circling roots as possible. Page 12 August 18, 2017 • The top of the rootball should be at, or approximately'/2 inch above, the soil surface. • Backfill the hole with the excavated amended soil. Apply four (4) to six (6) inches of arborist mulch or wood chips to the designated restoration planting areas. Pull mulch four (4) inches away from stems - mulch shall not touch plant stems or trunks. Best Management Practices To minimize potential impacts to critical areas and critical area buffers, best management practices (BMPs) will be followed, including strict adherence to Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) measures during construction of the project. BMPs include flagging all clearing limits and installing silt fences before the start of any grading activities adjacent to critical areas. After project construction and plant installation is completed and the site has stabilized, all silt fences and any other temporary erosion protection structures will be removed. Fence and Sign Installation Following installation of native plants in the enhanced buffer, fencing will be installed around the outer extent. The purpose of the fence is to provide a barrier between the wetland and wetland buffer mitigation area and visitors to the cemetery. The fence will be installed on the outside border of the proposed mitigation planting area. Up to three metal signs are recommended for installation along outer edge of the buffer enhancement area for Wetland 6, indicating that the buffer is a mitigation area and entry beyond the fence is prohibited. The signs may be installed on fence posts or the fence itself. Ecological Lift Provided by the Proposed Buffer Mitigation The ecological lift provided by the proposed Wedand 6 buffer enhancement includes converting 0.48 acre of upland lawn habitat to native forest to offset impacts from clearing 0.23 acre of successional alder forest habitat. The short term effects of clearing 0.23 acre of deciduous forest habitat are intended to be offset by accelerating the successional development and trajectory of 0.48 acre early successional grass habitat towards the native climax forest community dominated by conifers. Lawns and other grass habitats if left alone take longer to develop towards a coniferous forest compared to managed/planted areas (Van Pelt, 2007). And in some cases, early successional areas overrun by aggressive shrub species (i.e., Himalayan blackberry) can prevent or greatly delay the establishment of any forest canopy cover at all (Harrington, 2006). The long term ecological benefits provided by the proposed Wetland 6 buffer enhancement plan include a net gain of 0.25 acre of climax forest habitat within the Wetland 6 buffer and the aquatic system along West Hylebos Creek. Increased forested buffer habitat to Wetland 6 will improve protection of the habitat functions provided by Wetland 6 for certain wildlife species, and increase the quality of wetland vegetation (Hiuby, 2013). The additional 0.25 acre of buffer enhancement is proposed to offset the temporal loss of functions while the new forest habitat establishes, and address the potential risk of failure for any portion Page 13 August 18, 2017 of the enhancement area. The proposed 2.1:1 mitigation ratio is analogous to wetland mitigation ratios stipulated in the Best Available Science from Ecology et al. (2006a,b). As noted previously, the proposed project will improve water quality from existing conditions. The proposed plan will restore the water quality functions that were originally provided by the stormwater pond. Restoring the stormwater pond will improve water quality discharging to Wedand 6 because detaining the surface water flows will allow particulates collected in the runoff to drop out of the water column. Stormwater currently discharges directly to Wedand 6 because the inlet to the stormwater pond is broken. The stormwater pond will not be lined, and water will be allowed to infiltrate to support groundwater levels in Wedand 6 at the toe of slope. Additionally, increasing the amount of forested buffer to Wedand 6 will generally increase water quality protection for Wedand 6 (Hruby, 2013). Proposed Wetland 6 Buffer Mitigation Monitoring Plan The purpose of monitoring is to determine whether Performance Standards are being satisfied, whether the mitigation area is being maintained properly, and if contingency actions are necessary. The mitigation areas in the buffer enhancement area will be monitored for a minimum of five growing seasons after the plants are installed. Monitoring visits will occur according to the schedule below. Vegetation monitoring Plots A minimum of four permanent monitoring plots are recommended to be established to accurately reflect the conditions of the communities. Metal fence posts or other permanent markers may be installed to establish the permanent monitoring plots during the as -built site visit. It is recommended that rectangular monitoring plots be used, five meters by five meters in size. All installed woody plants will be flagged to track plant survival during the first three years after installation, and to distinguish between installed woody plants and volunteers from rhizomes, seeds, etc. During each monitoring visit, data will be collected from the plots including: which species are present (including volunteers); percent aerial coverage by species; and the condition and vigor of plants. Survival of installed plants as required by Performance Standards will also be determined. In addition to presence and percent cover by non-native invasive species in the plots, their general locations and extent of cover throughout the mitigation area will be estimated and noted. General conditions of the entire buffer mitigation area, as well as the surrounding habitat, will be noted. Photo Points Photographs provide an important visual record. A minimum of four permanent photo -points will be established to accurately show the vegetation and habitat status of the mitigation areas. Metal fence posts or other permanent markers will be installed to establish the photo -points. Photographs will be taken during each vegetation monitoring visit, and they will be labeled with photo station location, date, and compass bearings. Page 14 August 18, 2017 WjIdlrfe Presence Wildlife presence and use of the mitigation area will be noted during the monitoring visits. The monitoring staff will record any species present, as well as wildlife indicators such as scat, prints, nests, holes, browsing marks, etc. Maintenance/Contingency Observations Observations on the need for and extent of maintenance/contingency actions will be noted during each monitoring visit and reported immediately to the appropriate maintenance staff at Gethsemane Cemetery and/or the Director of Cemeteries at the Associated Catholic Cemeteries. Maintenance actions may include (but are not limited to): repairing any damage from vandalism; removing trash; replacing/repairing buffer signs; augmenting irrigation; replacing mulch; weeding;-- removing non-native invasive species; and, replacing plants. Monitoring and Reporting Schedule Monitoring visits will occur for a minimum of five growing seasons after installation to determine whether the Performance Standards are being met. An As -Built report will be completed following installation of the mitigation plantings. The monitoring schedule may be adjusted accordingly to match construction of the mitigation project and installation of mitigation plantings: • Following construction and installation of mitigation plantings. • Year 1: vegetation monitoring near the end of the growing season of the first year after installation (August/September). • Year 2: vegetation monitoring near the end of the growing season of the second year after installation (August/September). • Year 3: vegetation monitoring near the end of the growing season of the third year after installation (August/September). • Year 5: vegetation monitoring near the end of the growing season of the fifth year after installation (August/ September) . Monitoring reports will be submitted after each monitoring visit to the Associated Catholic Cemeteries and the City of Federal Way. These reports will describe the conditions on site, the level of success of the mitigation plan in satisfying the Performance Standards, whether contingency actions are warranted, and recommended maintenance actions. The reports will include: data collected on plant species present, and their percent cover and vigor; survival of installed plants and probable causes for any losses; percent cover by non-native invasive species; photographs from the permanent photo -points; wildlife usage of the restored areas; a list of recommended maintenance actions; and observations of general site conditions. A final monitoring report shall be submitted to the City of Federal Way Community Development Director for review upon completion of the mitigation activities in Year 5. Page 15 August 18, 2017 Maintenance, Contingency, and Long-term Management Maintenance The designated mitigation planting areas will be maintained for a minimum of five growing seasons after installation by full time maintenance staff at the cemetery. Having full time maintenance staff at the cemetery will ensure that project goals are achieved during the monitoring period and for the long-term. Maintenance activities are specified below, but generally, maintenance will include irrigating, removing non-native invasive species, replacing mulch, and installing plants as necessary to achieve the Performance Standards. Maintenance will also include replacing/repairing buffer signs, repairing the fence, removing trash, etc. Maintenance is expected to be performed by the maintenance staff employed at the cemetery. Irrigation Watering is critical for plant survival and establishment, especially at planting time and for at least the first summer after installation. If possible, all plantings in the designated mitigation planting areas should be watered at a rate of at least one inch per week during the dry season (approximately June through September) for the first year after installation at a minimum. Under especially hot and dry conditions, the plantings may require more water. Any replacement plants installed subsequent to the initial installation, or plants that are installed in the designated restoration planting areas as the result of maintenance or contingency actions, will require irrigation until they become established. Watering frequency may be tapered off during the second year after installation. If installed, temporary irrigation systems may be removed after Year 2. Plant Replacement Plants will be replaced or additional plants will be installed as required to satisfy Performance Standards for percent survival, percent cover, and vigor in the designated mitigation planting areas. Plant species appropriate to the conditions will be selected from the mitigation plan plant palette shown on the Mitigation Plan Sheet. Non-native Invasive Species Control The non-native invasive species listed in the Performance Standard will be controlled throughout the designated restoration planting areas. At a minimum, control efforts will satisfy the Performance Standards of either no cover or less than 10 percent cover for the specific species. Control will occur a minimum of two times per year (in the spring and late summer) for Years 1 through 5. More frequent maintenance will prevent non-native invasive species from becoming established (or re-established in the case of Himalayan blackberry). Infestations around the edge of the mitigation areas will also be controlled to prevent encroachment and establishment within the buffer enhancement area. Invasive plants (including roots and crowns) will be removed by hand or with manual tools. All cut and pulled non-native vegetation will be removed from the mitigation area and disposed of properly offsite. If manual control methods prove to be ineffective for certain species (e.g. Japanese knotweed, Himalayan blackberry, etc.), herbicide use may be necessary. Only herbicides approved for use in or near aquatic areas (e.g. Rodeo®, AquaMaster) may be used, and only licensed applicators with endorsements for aquatic pest Page 16 August 18, 2017 control shall apply herbicides. Herbicide application methodologies should be those recommended by the City of Federal Way. Application techniques include: cutting the invasives and dabbing stems; foliar wiping; etc. Stem injection is not recommended. The least amount of herbicide necessary should be applied at the most effective time(s) of year, and adjacent desirable native species must not be damaged. Other Maintenance Actions Repair any damage from vandalism and remove trash from the designated mitigation planting areas. Repair and/or replace any damaged signs or fence segments. Repair/replace habitat features as necessary. Con tingen cy A c tion s Based on the monitoring data and photographic record, it may be necessary to implement contingency measures to ensure that the Performance Standards are met. The proposed restoration plan can fail under certain circumstances such as unplanned human activity; fire; extreme cold, heat and/or drought; plant loss by disease and/or insect attack; browsing by deer; etc. The monitoring reports will include observations of which plants are lost and the probable cause for the loss. If necessary, plants will be replaced during the dormant season. Care will be taken to correct for the cause of the loss (e.g. providing better maintenance or increased irrigation); replanting species better adapted to actual site conditions; replacing diseased plants with resistant native species; installing herbivory protection devices; etc. Any damages caused by erosion, settling, or other geomorphological processes will be repaired. Long-term Management The purpose of the Master Use Pan is to ensure that no new encroachments into critical areas or their buffers on the Gethsemane Cemetery will occur as the site is developed. The Gethsemane Cemetery employs full time on site maintenance staff that currently performs grounds maintenance and landscaping duties as part of their overall responsibilities. The maintenance staff will ensure that the goals of the buffer mitigation areas will be achieved in longevity after the 5 year monitoring and reporting period has ended by including the buffer mitigation areas in their regular maintenance activities. References Deal, R.L. 2006. Red alder stand development and dynamics. Published in Red Alder — State of Knowledge, Deal, R.L. and C.A. Harrington (eds.). General Technical Report PNW-GTR-669. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Environmental Law Institute. 2008. Planner's guide to wetland buffers for local governments. 25 pp. ISBN 978-58576-137-1. Franklin, J.F and C.T. Dyrness. 1973. Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Harrington, C.A. 2006. Biology and ecology of alder. Published in Red Alder — State of Knowledge, Deal, R.L. and C.A. Harrington (eds.). General Technical Report PNW-GTR-669. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Page 17 August 18, 2017 Hruby, T. 2013. Update on Wetland Buffers: The State of the Science, Final Report, October 2013. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #13-06-11. Van Pelt, R. 2007. Identifying Mature and Old Forests in Western Washington. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, WA. 104 p. Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10. 2006a. Wletland Mitigation in Washington State - Part 1: Agency Policies and Guidelines (Version I). Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #06-06- 011 a, Olympia, WA. Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10. 2006b. Wletland Mitigation in Wlasbirloton State - Part 2: DevelopingMitigution Plans (Version 1). Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #06-06- 011b, Olympia, WA. J - _' :,�;�, O I�Llll, O I I � GENERAL NOTES: i' DATA NOTES: • \� t r� _ " . •-i'- J • ' - - ; L 1 I - ,.� • • { • J^y' ` ,/ ; r - •r", ,'' C: - SEE LANDSCAPE SHEETS FOR PLANTING DETAILS- AssocIATCDcnnjouc 1)SURVEY BY GOLDSMITH (2016)-A f�CEMETERIES 2) WETLAND DELINEATION BY OTAK (2016). Of.BUFFER IMPACTS NOTES:.^•___.zoaa ra.�r.lrenxay so.ib SCALE: l" 40' 'F: " r - --- • , , -- r j, Deacml1 1 1196003 { -S ;r ••� r'y v AREA OF STORMWATER POND MODIFICATION (IMPACTED x�ana,au.i,rsxx:ia�szzom�c D 40 SO r7 Cl + •� • BUFFER):10.1005F NUMBER OF TREES TO REMOVE IN THE IMPACTED BUFFER: y . tiLJ •.EDGE OF PROPOSED BUFFER _ 49 DECIDUOUS & 0 CONIFER. EXISTING CONDITION OF L ] •4-.- • • - ENHA DEMENT AREA DEMARCATED c: O •� r'• r (r O BUFFER AREA IS UPLAND FOREST, w a. ��1y. �._.�. •.. 2.. •$Y FENCE WITH SIGNS•NOTING p f `� 1• ""PROTECTE ,�NETL,4ND BL)FFER"• v f t • BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PROVIDED AS MITIGATION FOR - i - O,� (. ��` HABITAT CONVERSION (2:1 MITIGATION RATIO)¢ m �^- _ r � �=i�• I '� . � +'ti r` L' � rr � � BUFFER ENHANCEMENT NOTES: t AREA OF VEGETATION ENHANCEMENT: 21.100 SF g LU Z _ y . TREE REPLACEMENT PROPOSED: } �. � _ j a �- . •. 31 DECIDUOUS & 28 CONIFER LU /•� r - -,• .• BUFFER ENHANCEMENT FUNCTIONS INCLUDE: NATIVE TREES w H U AND UNDERSTORY VEGETATION, EROSION CONTROL, u) Z — � � ; - •1 C? HABITAT FUNCTIONS SUCH AS FOOD AND NESTING COVER, (!J � 0_ '� •'' ' 1 y it d n '1 ``.!] AND WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT W } Q +� . r. Ui Q bl I r•�0 r • . _ _ , r . .• _ -'r • Y - - - - ""' 1 ` v 'y ^ ,'n - ' '�r • GRUB AND REMOVE HIMALAYAN BLACKBERRY BIOMASS AND (� (D �j = / • . y;. _ _ _ 1 _ - •++ y REMOVE OTHER INVASIVE PLANTS ACCORDING TO PLAN. Lu Q J U! LU IRRIGATION WITHIN BUFFER: O 0 O •• .. t - F _ _ '. ' ('' - `��,` • AREA OF DROUGHT TOLERANT LANDSCAPE WITHIN THE �_• i - : _ - • • - - • • - - - - - - -'•r "-,R••_ ram- �'LL i7 .. -_� O `�� ', BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLAN:21,100 SF (100%) (MINIMUM U =Lu S' - .. _ - r�- ,C• 5 { p �- REQUIRED25%) w co } p.'� I1 . L l - - -- I•n • �'r_:-r - c• _ -4,- • AREA OF TEMPORARY IRRIGATION WITHIN THE BUFFER TO L1.1 = ~ W _`.�-. r '� ._ £Ni-WNCED,B4IFR O + a 0_ U D_ ! - _ - _ - .�• p tii 1 - t ENSURE VEGETATION ENHANCEMENT ESTABLISHMENT: ` ,J + :� �y. rrr�+,�".� AREA21.]00,SF - O•IJ p ,Y «'^ 21,1005F(0.48AC) 91 1 _ f .O{O. I LEGEND i -rr• ~_, L r r rrz i I EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN p y.� _ `.;.'_ - ,- --- .- 1 .: - • ' . p 57QRMNlATR LIJ t= _^o. i ` o �`;r • �` g 't PON[). ��i"` �G ,k J •r` 1 LAWN WITH TRADITIONAL BURIALS o U a .1 1 { a• +r Q z Kz <l R r } �`•---. I _ y EROSION CONTROL WITH NATIVE SEED MIX p 9 P. rEBUFFE Q 1 v 1. r' t ` U p f— ' '-z [ - � `-.�:.:�r �' ;.7,(7 RE¢. 100•$F + i r I Q 1•,y«.y ~ �l �t 3O •;/Sr O p �� z �r LL Q V) Q O + i `ti 1 O.O 11 (D J. O'. R rt 5 0 - is i q t �a - _ i Y1` LL 2 IY — o i ;� _ J °r4 C m W LL -0 it BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANTING LIST CONIFEROUS TREES SPACE 8' - 30' O.C. SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING ACC IOU owm CO 11— AS sHDIN RE Ip stp mF r.r EC-1 ER ns sH —EIN RED cEww z.r LARGE DECIDUOUS TREES SPACE 8' - 30' O.C. SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING rFc. R,trc..nuw nc ur+ wn. rx C-- K vn•+1 swwe rcro.wtp. sy. Iww.w•. •.rcK cw>oww-vr cu o • • re re.11 e.:,• wnruana.SCOULERS I'— OLN*anl• ws RC•il SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING E. a�va.uM - W—ER ca•n,e ie•r. - cplo.u. w n .wwn v.w6.w smA c.tw*3-4, CCUTAINER+r aww ••wR raaw. s.•' tan..x• ns >alar O I AR(_F SHRI IRS SPACF 5' - 6' 0— (-- SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING „ "-DW4 p Co s-6 oc "WI DRECON CRAR-- Co 5-5 oc 11.1 .—E C v-6 oc •t0004A-S. y,4-IMKJ;y rwvpEq •CAGEde c 5-6 oc 4K5 >1 ®INrttmC pV M CC —ER 5-6 0 SMALL SHRUBS SPACE 3' - 4' O.C. SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE CONDITION SPACING CE LxaMGRa 9M104 Jy' R� ��>, Mnly .•ap rrw Yti' Rei N WYI iURI = 1 6e1 R Yam• oc �•p,KM R S-t oc wcr C~ nr.uar. + lrw- k Cc S-t oc IIPI AND SFFD MIX % SCIENTIFIC NAME •COMMON NAME Sox ••wut RNII.ID6 rawww'M+,¢ lol. RED FESCUE PLANTING NOTES: 1) MULCH SHRUBS AND TREES WITHIN 1.5' OF EACH STEM, 2) SEED REMAINDER OF BUFFER ENHANCEMENT AREA WITH UPLAND SEED MIX. LARGE DECIDUOUS TREE CONIFEROUS TREE LARGE SHRUB SMALL SHRUBS SMALL DECIDUOUS TREE A TYPICAL BUFFER 1"=19 NG LAYOUT ,o-b ,rT I7911 � nol Frsi:�,nma sum vo SeaNe, \4'A 9AI21 i ±a sel66.D czD6 ser a±± x� .jabmman com REVISION: DATE: DESCRIPTION: 01/23/17 DESIGN CHANGE IN RESPONSE TO SEP/ COMMENTS 4/5/2017 RESPONSE TO PW commENTZ 4/24/2017 ISTOR MW ATER POND REDESIGN 8/11/2017 !BUFFER 1=NHANCEMENT FOR SW POND SCALE: 1- 40' DATE: DOMV2017 DRAWN BY: CO DESIGNED BY: JB APPROVED BY: JB I, • lo u —. AT FULL SIZE, IF NOT ONE Technical Memorandum To: From: / 1241lVillow Road NE Copies: Sarete 200 Redmond, IY/A 98052 Phone (425) 8224-446 Date: Fax (425) 827-9577 Subject: Project No.: CITY OF FEpF-R VIM -. C mlmllu ITY CEyf.L4�', _ Jim Harris, Planner City of Federal Way Kevin O'Brien, Senior Ecologist Jeff Gray, Senior Wetaand Biologist July 11, 2017 Gethsemane Cerneteiy — Response to 3`d Party Review of Critical Areas and Impacts Mitigation Plan 32655 This memo is provided in response to the third party review memo titled "Gethsemane Cemetery — Critical Areas and Impacts Mitigation Plan Review" from Perteet, dated March 24, 2017. We offer the following information and responses regarding the Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan and critical areas assessment [Wetland and Stream Delineation Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan (Otak 2017)] relative to Perteet's review of the application materials. We appreciate the thorough review by the City to ensure the proposed 50 Year Master Use Plan for the Gethsemane Cemetery complies with the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC). In summary, no changes to wetland or stream boundaries or buffer widths are required, and the buffer reduction with enhancement plan meets the requirements of FWRC 19.145.130 Mitigation Sequencing), FWRC 19.145.140 (Mitigation Plan Requirements), and FWRC 19.145.440(6) (Buffer Reduction with Enhancement) as proposed. It is our opinion that the proposed maintenance and repair of the previously constructed stormwater pond within the buffer of Wetland 6 meets the criteria for an exemption from FWRC 19.145 (Environmentally Critical Areas) per FWRC 19.145.110(2). The activity will not further alter or increase impacts to, or encroach further within, the wetland buffer as no grading or new vegetation clearing outside of the existing pond footprint will be required. See responses to Items #11 and #12 below for more project details about use of the existing stormwater pond. The detailed responses below correlate with the numbered items in Perteet's memo. Item #1 Response: No response. W .-1 Jim Harris, City ofFedetal Way Page 2 Gethsemane Cemetery — Critical Areas Report Review Response ju# 11, 2017 Item #2 Re.ponse: We agree that this area likely has wetland characteristics. However, we refrained from estimating the extent during the November 2015 field investigation because the property owner manipulates the water levels using a stand pipe and wood slats in order to use a homemade stationary rowing machine near the outlet. The wet area visible on aerial imagery is located in a grass swale that slopes west towards the stand pipe along the western property boundary and away from the cemetery. This artificial and manually controlled hydrologic regime would make any formal wetland boundary delineation difficult for determining normal hydrologic conditions for delineation purposes per the 1987 Corps Delineation Manual (USACE 1987)and the 2010 Regional Supplement (USACE 2010). The property was formerly used to raise cattle, and the agricultural fields are now only mowed. The manual water manipulation also raises the possibility that this wetland was created purposely as a farm pond to support raising cattle, and possibly does not meet the definition of a wetland per FWRC 19.05.230 that excludes "...irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities...". After visiting with the property owner and observing this area in person in November 2015, it is my opinion that this wetland area is much smaller than what is shown on the 1998 City Survey and the current City critical areas maps if the stand pipe were removed and the site allowed to drain as it has since 1920 per the Wetland Inventory Form from 1998. No standing water was observed in November 2015. The wetland area near the stand pipe would be rated Category III per Ecology's Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington — 2014 Update (Ecology Publication No. 14-06-02) and as required by FWRC 19.145.420. The wetland area per FWRC 19.145.420 would be afforded a 60-foot buffer due to low habitat score (3), and the buffer would not extend onto the Gethsemane Cemetery property (Figure 1). Available published information was also reviewed. No wetlands are mapped at this location in the National Wetland Inventory (USFWS 2017). Based on a review of aerial photography on Google Earth Pro from 1990 to present, the area of ponding water and saturated soils varies greatly from year to year. The area is described on the Wetland Inventory Form from 1998 City Survey as draining through a 2-foot culvert. The estimated boundary is shown on City critical areas map, which is provided for illustrative purposes and used for planning level purposes only. The ponding shown in the photographs in Perteet's memo reflect an unusually wet winter with wetter than normal conditions prior to the March 13, 2017 field visit, with abundant precipitation on the day of (0.68 inches) and above normal precipitation for the 1.5 months preceding the field visit (12.61 inches). Climate data for this period documents the wetter than normal conditions as explained below. .-1 N Jim Harris, City of Federal Way Page 3 Gethsemane Cemetery — Critical Areas Report Review Response ju< 11, 2017 WETS Tables are commonly used to determine whether the amount of rainfall that occurred in the 2 to 3 months preceding the site visit was normal, above normal, or below normal (USACE 2010). WETS Tables are developed by the NRCS National Water and Climate Center, and calculated from 30-year weather records to help evaluate field conditions for wetland delineations. Normal precipitation in WETS Tables is identified by month as the interval between the lower 304% value and the upper 30% value over the 30-year period. The WETS Table (Table 1) below was completed for the previous three months for years 1986 to 2016 based on historical precipitation data from National Weather Service (NWS) weather station (D TACW1) located approximately 3.9 miles west of the Gethsemane Cemetery along the Puyallup River in the City of Tacoma. Table 1. WETS Table for the Gethsemane Cemetery Location from 1986 to 2016 Month 30% chance less than Average 30% chance more than 2017/201.6 Rain M Comparison to Normal Range February 2.37 3.78 4.57 9.24 Above normal January 4.70 6.08 7.05 2.93 Below normal December 1 4.29 5.81 6.82 3.75 Below normal The year- and month -to -date observed precipitation amounts also exceeded normal conditions prior to March 13, 2017 (Table 2). Precipitation on the day of the site investigation measured 0.68 inches. Precipitation for the month was 3.37 inches, which was 191% of normal. Precipitation for the year was 15.54 inches, or 135% of normal (MRCS 2017). Table 2. Precipitation Summary for March 13, 2017 from NWS Weather Station TACW1 Precipitation Observed (inches) Normal (inches) Percent of Normal 03/13/17 0.68 - - Month -to -Date 3.37 1.76 191% Year -to -Date 15.54 11.55 135% Note: Precipitation data from NWS Station TACW1, available at: ztt s: w =."G •c.ur�S.tn la. gnu li rej t7, vi gate \v %.hnn For the reasons listed above, it is our opinion that the wetland buffer from this offsite wetland area does not extend onto the Gethsemane Cemetery property as shown in Figure 1. Jim Harris, City ofFederal Way Page 4 Gethsemane Cemetery — Critical Areas Report Review Response July 11, 2017 Figure 1. Estimated offsite wetland area and illustration depicting potential 60' wetland buffer not encroaching on the Gethsemane Cemetery property. Item #3 Response: See response to Item #4 below. Item #4 Response: We do not agree that the three watercourses mentioned in Perteet's memo meet the definition of stream per FWRC 19.05.190. The flow paths in Wetland I (Unit 1) are typical of flow - through depressional wetlands that receive point discharges. The wetland flow paths identified in Figure 5 in Perteet's memo were observed during the field investigation in November 2015 (see Figures 2 and 3 below). The culverts shown on Figure 7A are not observable on the ground surface, and were assumed to be historical and buried due to deep (3-5 feet water depth) pits at both locations at the toe of slope along the Highway 99 embankment. They may simply be concentrated Jim Harris, City of Federal Way Page 5 Gethsemane Cemetery — Critical Areas Report Review Response July 11, 2017 groundwater seeps flowing through the road subbase. However, what distinguishes stream from wetland habitat is the presence of vegetation. The flow paths are clearly and heavily vegetated and do not provide stream habitat, not do we agree that they should be classified as streams. All of the flow paths occur within the boundary of Wetland 1 (Unit 1), which has a 165-foot buffer, and the largest buffer for any stream per FWRC 19.145.270 is 100 feet. Even if the City determines the flow paths to be streams the wetland buffer would supersede any stream buffer. Figure 2. View of flow path along the southern boundary of Wetland 1 near Highway 99. The flow path is overgrown and vegetated with Sitka willow, reed canarygrass, and horsetail. The flow path is indicated by the blue line in the photograph. Jim Harris, City of Federal Way Page 6 Gethsemane Cemetery — Critical Areas Report Review Response July 11, 2017 Figure 3. View of flow paths near the center of Wetland 1 in palustrine emergent wetland habitat. The wetland flow paths are overgrown with reed canarygrass, and do not provide stream habitat. The flow paths are indicated by the blue lines in the photograph. The flow paths coalesce near the eastern boundary of Wetland 1 (Unit 1), and flow in an incised, straight -lined ditch at the property boundary. The ditch was believed to be off property at the time of the field investigation. The ditch flows along the northern edge of Wetland 1 (Unit 2) for approximately 150 feet before discharging into Wetland 1 (Unit 3) beyond a barbed wire fence. The ditch was likely manmade to drain the upslope wetlands in the past as remnants of clay tiles were observed in the ditch. Ditches created in uplands are excluded from regulation as streams per FWRC 19.05.190, similar to the roadside ditch that drains from Wetland 2 to Wetland 1 and the stormwater discharge channel that flows into Wetland 6 near the previously constructed stormwater pond. The Wetland 1 boundary on the Gethsemane Cemetery property is located much further south from the ditch, and any regulatory boundaries that may be associated with the ditch are superseded by the wider Wetland 1 boundary. The intermittently flowing ditch is shown on the Wetland 1 (Unit 2) rating form in Appendix B of the wetland delineation report because, regardless of its classification under FIVRC, the Ecology rating form acknowledges the different hydrologic regime in its wetland rating formula. During the November 2015 field investigation, a stream was not observed in the south central corner of the Gethsemane Cemetery property east of Wetland 14. The shallow drainage flow path was dry, and it was determined at the time that it did not have defined bed and banks, gravel sorting, Jim Harris, City of Federal Way Page 7 Gethsemane Cemetery — Critical Areas Report Review Response July 11, 2017 or other indicators of an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) that would indicate more than ephemeral flows in response to precipitation events. The drainage is located at a topographical highpoint with no obvious contributing basin. The flows observed during the March 13, 2017 site investigation were likely the result of concentrated surface runoff from the heavy precipitation occurring along the natural slope contours as suggested by Perteet. Item #5 Response: Question D3.3/R3.3/S3.3 of Ecology's rating system (Hruby 2014) asks whether the wetland being rated has been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality. The rating form and manual indicate an affirmative response to this question if the basin in which the wetland is found has a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) plan developed for it. The TMDL developed for Commencement Bay in 1992 is for dioxin because the Simpson - Tacoma pulp mill was found discharging dioxin into inner Commencement Bay (Ecology 2017). The TMDL set a waste -load allocation for the amount of dioxin that the Simpson NO at Tacoma could discharge. Palustrine wetland water quality functions typically would provide no amelioration for downstream contaminants that are largely associated with sediment adsorption and direct discharge into marine waters. If this question on the rating form is interpreted in the most literal sense then every wetland in the 121h field hydrologic unit code (HUC) would rate high for the value of the water quality functions provided to society relative to the permitted Simpson Mill waste -load allocation amount for dioxin. Regardless, Wetlands 1 (Units 1, 2, and 3), 2, 3, 6, and 14 are already rated high because they discharge to the West Fork Hylebos Creek that is on the 303(d) list. The riverine wetlands (4,5, 7-13) ratings and their buffers would not change (Category II) if the Commencement Bay TMDL were to be considered. No alterations to any of the Gethsemane wetland ratings or buffers would result, even if the Commencement Bay TMDL is considered as a component in wetland rating scores. Item #6 Response: We agree that Wetland 1 (Unit 1) should be rated Category II based on points due to the septic system on Parcel 3221049087 within 250 feet of the wetland boundary. However, the buffer width remains 165 feet for Category II wetlands with a habitat score of 6 points as the habitat score does not change even if all of the other requested revisions were incorporated. The comments listed for Wetland 1 (Unit 2) are not relevant because this unit was rated as a slope wetland. The wetland flow constriction caused by the ditch along the northern property line between Units 1 and 2, along with the drop in elevation, justifies rating these wetlands as separate units per Amy Yahnke at Ecology (personal communication on December 21, 2015). Ms. Yahnke is Ecology's lead trainer for using the 2014 rating system. Wedand 1 (Unit 2) remains a Category III wetland with a 105-foot buffer. Jim Harris, City of Federal Way Page 8 Gethsemane Cemetery — Critical Areas Report Review Response July 99, 2097 Item #7 Response: We disagree with the requested change, and would refer the third party reviewers to reexamine question H.2.3 and the preceding questions H.2.1 and H.2.2. The 48% listed on the rating form for this question pertains to total undisturbed, moderate, and low intensity habitat. The remaining 52% of land use within the 1km polygon is in high intensity and scores a -2, which results in "0" points for Section H2.0 for Wetland 1 (Unit 3). Item #8 Response: No changes to the wetland buffers are required. Only Wedand 1 (Unit 1) has been revised to Category II as suggested, but the buffer width remains 165 feet because the habitat score remains a 6. Item #9 Response: No response. Item #10 Response: Perteet acknowledges that the proposed buffer reduction with enhancement meets the requirements of FWRC 19.145.440(6). Because no changes to buffer widths are required per the contents of this response memo, the buffer reduction with enhancement plan is considered complete as it meets the requirements of the FWRC. Item #11 Response: Based on recent communications with the City of Federal Way Planning Division, it is out opinion that the proposed maintenance and repair of the previously constructed stormwater pond within the buffer of Wetland 6 is exempt from FWRC 19.145 per FWRC 19.145.110(2): Operation, maintenance, or repair of 8xtstin,g public improvements, v ides, public or private roads, parks, trails, or drainage systems if the activity does not further alter or increase impact to, or encroach further within, the critical area or buffer and there is no increased risk to life or property as a result of the proposed operation, maintenance, or repair, and no new rlearing.of native vegetation beyond routine pruning. A memorandum from J.A. Brennan and Associates dated June 22, 2017 specifically addresses the stormwater pond design update and FWRC exemption. The proposed activity will not further alter or increase impacts to, or encroach further within, the wetland buffer, and no new clearing will occur outside of the existing pond footprint. The drainage system needs repair to correct the flows back into the pond structure to improve water quality as originally designed. No grading within the buffer is proposed. The proposed bentonite slurry cutoff wall will be installed within the current profile of the existing berm. The pond inlet will be located outside of the existing buffer, and the previously proposed rock -lined spillway has been replaced with a water quality settling cell outside of the existing buffer. Woody vegetation that has established Jim Harris, City of Federal Way Page 9 Gethsemane Cemetery — Critical Areas Report Review Response Daly11,2017 on the pond bottom and the interior side slopes will be cut and their stumps left in place as required by the 2009 King County Stormwater Design Manual (KCSWDM). Repairing the previously constructed stormwater pond will improve water quality in surface water discharging to Wetland 6. Currently, stormwater is collected in catch basins from the cemetery property and discharges without any flow control or water quality treatment because the inlet pipe to the pond has become detached. Repairing the inlet pipe and redesigning the outlet flows in accordance with the 2009 KCSWDM, all within the footprint of the existing structure, will benefit water quality conditions within Wetland 6. The preferred bentonite slurry cutoff wall, relative to a pond liner, will allow stormwater in the pond to infiltrate and support groundwater levels in Wetland 6 down slope. The proposed design includes activities within the wetland buffer and outside of the buffer. Activities within the buffer have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable following comments received in recent correspondence and at our meeting with City staff on June 15, 2017. Proposed activities within and outside of the buffer necessary to use the existing stormwater pond in accordance with the 2009 KCSWM include: Activities outside of the buffer ■ Install catch basin type 2 with flow control structure • Abandon existing outfall • Install 12" pond inlet ■ Abandon 2 existing SD lines • Install and grade 12' wide gravel access road ■ Install 12' wide emergency overflow spillway at grade (partially outside buffer) Activities within the buffer • Install bentonite slurry cutoff wall in the berm • Very minor grading (<50 SF) to tie in the terminus of the access road • Clear trees from interior side slopes and basin bottom within the existing pond footprint • Install 12' wide emergency overflow spillway at grade (partially within buffer) Item #12 Response: See response to Item #11 above. Item #13 Response: Perteet acknowledges that the proposed actions for the 50 Year Master Plan described in the Delineation Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan meets City requirements for mitigation K� Jim Harris, City of Fedetal Way Page 10 Gethsemane Cemetery — Critical Areas Report Review Response Juy11, 2017 sequencing and mitigation plan requirements. The buffer reduction with enhancement plan is considered complete. Item #14 Response: The performance standards, monitoring, maintenance, and contingency standards do not need to be updated because no changes to wetland buffer widths or the wetland buffer reduction with enhancement plan are required. These portions of the buffer reduction with enhancement plan are considered complete. Item #15 Response: A fence is proposed along the reduced buffer edge along Wetland 1 in the northern corner of the property, and will include signs that state "Protected Wetland Buffer" per FWRC 19.145.180(3). The purpose of the 50 Year Master Plan is to establish development boundaries so no additional intrusion into critical areas will occur during that time period. Construction plans will incorporate signage along critical area buffers on the property as needed to prevent future intrusions into critical areas during normal maintenance activities. Item #16 Response: A construction stormwater general permit will be required for the major land disturbing activities proposed under the 50 Year Master Plan. Protection of critical areas and their buffers through the use of physical barriers, such as construction silt -fencing, silt cloth socks on storm drains, and other Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be employed to protect sensitive areas from runoff and erosion during construction as part of the soil erosion and sediment control plan developed for the project. Jim Harris, City of Federal Way Page 11 Gethsemane Cemetery — Critical Areas Report Review Response Ju# 11, 2017 References Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington — 2014 Update. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 14-06-029. Olympia, Washington Natural Resources Consen-ation Service (MRCS). 2017. Agricultural Applied Climate Information System for Pierce County, weather srarion Tacoma #1 [Coop ID 458278, GHCN ID USC00458278, NWS LI ID TACW11. United States Department of .\griculture. Accessed on April 17, 2017, and available at: hrtpi jlgcis�'c acis.czgr/%Fi/ ms5311?3_ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report. Y- 87-1. Vicksburg, Mississippi: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Laboratory. US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wedand Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, Version 2.0, ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, Mississippi: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2017. National Wetlands Inventory website. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington D.C. Available at: http:l/�vww.f�vs• n �bctlancls Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2017. Water Quality Improvement Project, Commencement Bay Area: Dioxin. Accessed on April 17, 2017, and available at: h �nv.ecv.w .�•n �1 � ms w t C'ummrn : • . �'Tlllal..I7t DEPARTMENT OFCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMFN'T FO py1t�A�h� 33325 8"' Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 CITY OF�uN1N 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 FederalWay ww►v.ciLmffe4raln.avxur1 RESUBMITTAL INFORMATION This completed form MUST accompany all resubmittals. "Please note: Additional or revised plans or documents for an active project will not be accepted unless accompanied by this completed form. Mailed resubmittals that do not include this form or that do not contain the correct number of copies will be returned or discarded. You are encouraged to submit all items in person and to contact the Permit Counter prior to submitting if you are not sure about the number of copies required. ** ANYCHANGES TO DRAWINGS MUST BE CLOUDED. Project Number: 16-101141-00-SE & 16-101140-UP Project Name: Gethsemane Cemetea Phased Long Range Master Plan Project Address: 37600 Pacific HigbwU South. Federal Way Project Contact: Rich Peterson Phone: 206-522-0996 RESUBMITTED ITEMS: # of Copies ** Detailed Description of Item Technical Memorandum: Gethsemane Cemetery - Response to 3" Party Review of Critical Areas and [mpacts Mitigation Plan (Dtak, July 11, 2017) Always submit the same number of copies as required for your initial application. *' Resubmittal Requested by : Jim Harris/Doc Hansen Letter Dated. _ 4 / 20_1 2017 to e- er OFFICE USE ONL Y RESUB #.• Distribution Date., By Dept/Div Name # Description Building Planning PW Fire Other Bulletin #129 -January 1, 2011 Page 1 of 1 k:\Handouts\Resubmittal Information CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 3, 2017 TO: Kevin Peterson, PW Development Services FROM: Jim Harris FOR DRC MTG. ON: NA FILE NUMBER(s): 16-101140-00-UP RELATED FILE NOS.: None PROJECT NAME: GETHSEMANE CEMETERY PROJECT ADDRESS: 37500 PACIFIC HWY S ZONING DISTRICT: SE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Cemetery Master Plan with Phasing LAND USE PERMITS: PROJECT CONTACT: RICHARD PETERSON MATERIALS SUBMITTED: June 29, 2017 resubmittal from Brennan, Including revised civil concept plans, geotech report, Bentonite Slurry Wall concept, 1972 Plan sheets. Please review and let me know if you consider this as maintenance work under the KCSWDM. I set up an internal staff meeting on July 10, 2017. AE8Uf5r0f'1--frEa JUN 29 2017 C17Y OF F'ED�RkL VdAy Memo C0MMUN1 YDEVELOPMENT Jim Harris, Planner; City of Federal Way To: Doc Hansen, Planninq Manager; City of Federal Way Date: :06 �.a. brennanr<« landscape architects & planners 2701 First Avenue I Suite 510 1 Seattle, WA 98121 t 1206.583.0620 1 w I jabrennan.com 6/22/2017 From: Jim Brennan, RLA, J.A. Brennan Associates Project: Gethsemane Cemetery Re: Stormwater Pond FWRC exemption request and design update Mr. Harris and Mr. Hansen, In response to your letter on April 20, 2017 "RE: File No's 16-101141-00-SE & 16-101140-UP; PLANNING DIVISION 2ND TECHNICAL REVIEW; Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long Range Master Plan; 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way" and our meeting with you at your office on June 15, 2017, this letter seeks to clarify the design of Gethsemane's stormwater pond and applicable exemptions for the facility in FWRC critical area regulations. Exemption Request We believe use of the pond and repair of the pond structure should be exempt from the critical area code and allowed by FWRC 19.145.110(2):Operation, maintenance, or repair of existing public improvements, utilities, public or private roads, parks, trails or drainage systems if the activity does not further alter or increase impact to, or encroach further within, the critical area or buffer and there is no increased risk to life or propertyas a result of the proposed operation, maintenance, or repair, and no new clearing of native vegetation beyond routine pruning. Ongoing Use The design intent is to improve and continue use of an existing drainage facility. Using this facility, which was designed by RCA Landscape Architects and Engineers in 1972, permitted by King County, and built in 1975 is a sustainable land use approach. The site design, permitting, and development used considerable public and private resources and still has value in modern design and engineering. While it was designed in the 1970s, the original designers provided extra capacity for future phases of cemetery burials. Cemeteries are inherently long term, multi -phased land use properties which function as open space while providing a cultural connection to nature and history. J.A. Brennan Associates has been providing consulting services with the Catholic Cemetery since 2004 and since the first site visit and meeting with Director Rich Peterson, we have been recommending the continuous use of Gethsemane's drainage facility. Please note that the facility was noted on the 2004 site analysis plan attached. We are proposing maintenance and repair of the existing facility and the work includes pruning of vegetation inside the existing facility. Vegetation was previously cleared from the facility when it was constructed. There will be no new clearing of vegetation outside of the existing drainage facility. Please see 3 attached documents establishing ongoing use of the pond facility: C 1972 Gethsemane Permit Set Plan Sheets (A-1, A-2, A-3, A-19) a 2004 Suitability Plan ■ Site photos of facility taken on January 8, 2016 Page 1 of 3 Master Plan Design Update for 2009 King County Surface Water esign Manual Standards Please see the revised site plans 3.1 and 3.3 which demonstrate how the existing drainage system maintenance and repair will bring the facility up to 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) standards while not further altering or increasing impact to, or encroaching further within the critical area buffer. There will be no increased risk to life or property as a result of these repairs. Vegetation removal and pruning will occur within the existing footprint of the drainage facility as is typical of drainage system maintenance. The design proposes to install a bentonite slurry cutoff wall approximately 8' deep on the top of the berm. This design will provide additional slope stability when the pond fills with water, and enhance flows to the wetland. See attached design concept section and Geotechnical analysis memo for more detailed information on the bentonite slurry cutoff wall. Other repairs to the stormwater pond include: • Access road extending to a point 4.0' above the bottom of the pond. • Access road with 12' width on straight sections, 15' width on curves, and 40' outside radius on curves. • Max 12% access road grade for gravel, max 15% grade for pavement. • No trees within the pond (requires tree trimming down to stumps). • Geotechnical approval for pond berm stability. (Addressed by bentonite slurry cutoff wall in berm. Depth, width, and slurry specifications will be provided by the Geotech.) To address City staffs concern at the June 15, 2017 meeting about short-circuiting with the close -proximity of the inlet and outlet to the pond, the revised design includes the following changes. These grading updates will occur within the footprint of the existing pond facility and outside of the 165' critical area buffer. • A closed -cell depression to promote settling between the pond inlet and outlet. • Pond outlet extending centrally in the pond to provide additional distance from the inlet and outlet to reduce the potential for short-circuiting. The pipe is also lower in the pond, which provides ease of maintenance for draining the pond from the new control structure. Work within the existing stormwater pond facility that would also fall within 165' of the wetland (currently shown as a critical area buffer) includes: • Installation of the bentonite slurry cutoff wall in the berm • Installation of the pond outlet from the control structure to the center of the pond. • Abandoning existing outfalls in the pond. • Removal of trees in the pond (cutting trees down to stumps close to grade). • Very minor grading to tie in the terminus of the access road. Please see 3 attached documents for updated design drawings of the pond facility: Y Site plans 3.1 and 3.3 • Cutoff wall concept section ■ Geotechnical engineering report 6/20/2017 Vegetation Management As mentioned above, vegetation management will occur within the existing drainage system. As shown on the original 3/7/2016 submittal (sheet 7.1), the tree removal plan shows 60 small trees (99 tree units) will need to be pruned down to stumps within the pond in accordance with KCSWDM Section 5.3.1 Detention Ponds and Section 6.4.1 Wetponds. Vegetation on the berm will need to be pruned for installation of the bentonite slurry cutoff wall. Sheet 7.1 also shows that the Gethsemane Cemetery master plan provides 2024 tree units, vastly exceeding FRWC requirement of 1397 tree units. In addition, the North Arm wetland mitigation proposal submitted 1/30/2017 shows additional tree planting enhancement above and beyond FWRC requirements:101 new trees planted, 0 trees removed. Please see 1 attached document for tree removal proposed in the existing drainage facility: • Tree Retention Plan 7.1 (3/4/2016) Page 2 of 3 Wetland & Creek Health The stormwater pond bentonite slurry cutoff wall installation on the existing pond berm is proposed to occur approximately 50' from the closest edge of Wetland 6 and 360' from Hylebos Creek OHW. There are no proposed impacts to the wetland buffer, wetland, or creek. Updates will only occur in the existing footprint of the exempt drainage system. There will not be any negative impacts to groundwater as a result of this action. The proposed design will upgrade the entire cemetery to current stormwater design standards while slowing water flow and feeding the wetland more continuously than the existing pipe outflow condition. The proposed design will allow for continuous water seepage which will enhance the ecological function and down -gradient hydrology of wetland 6 and its buffer. Please let us know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jim Brennan, RLA Page 3 of 3 Q w i13 ir X 00 J Q W Uj w a in u- D m w Z 4 a z �I J J V1 J w Q w ~ N Z IL O a aP0 a w a m V ¢Q Q 0 d �7LUOz 0 m 0 Z Q N Z in u 0 Lu a v=i 0 Z a M 00,wn� z zz0_ w a X m w an a l7 0 Z a w w N V a Oa m D a Ln 0 Z a J w /I I I LU I Q CC V X CC 0 OR CCN a I 2 Q i 0 a Z In LU Z 0 O z Ln 0 < w m a l7 V C ti AIM Ee 1. KOO, 41-4 Get��s& any 00ge System Jan Ao takp,,n ."fri" . rpoTrd,,1doki Ma IFZ! tie, ilk - -2 Gethsemane Cemetery Drainage S P4. . - - � Pnoav-Y.14,� Photo taken from r 4p 4r -7- Inv/ 4o NO. ?94 tom'{. V qeA V 'A 4 - Getfisefnane Cemetery'D.rainag4y�rei;;!;��'JaLr�7-, 41;?,&��r_�. i6�- Ph Ot o t ken Tro toprof e lnei�h, loo ki nq,.So6tN8it- Site Suitability for Cemetery Use Grove sites, Mausoleums, Roads, Paths High Suitability: These areas are planned to be largely developed for cemetery use, Slopes are generally in the 2-8% range wMh no critically steep slopes. The soils are composed of silt loam, which are moderately well dralned, though a seasonally high water table may preside. Thesa places are not wlthln Welland buffers or stream buffers, Moderate Suitability - I Li These areas are planned to be selectively and partially developed for cemetery use, A variety of conditions exist, In sw .e cases, moderately suitabte areas meet Me criteria of high suilahiljty, except that they exist within wetland or stream buffers. In other cases, a possible high water table and+cr soils prone to slippage of with limited structural strength create limitations for cemetery use. Low SW104::y These areas wOI be developed only as pennssable by law in order to accomodate or access usable cemetery property. Wetlands, streams and sloped areas with slopes predominantly greater than 33% — �Ytwwr i' :% I = � ./• ' ' � � 4� f 1, ti 1 16 wy,�� A ` l-� r�"1 �l ��iGM1wly ,t \ ; rJ ` I AS. UF3M17TED JUN 2 9 2017 Gethsemane Cemetery I IIAY Archdiocese of Seattle i 1= brennar. .... :O/ 11, 11 t , % t• t t t. N d 10d 20D Scale 1 "=200' Date May 6, 2004 Site Suitability and Conceptual Development Plan /-) RESUBMITTED GeoResources, LLC Ph. 253-896-1011 J U N 2 9 2017 5007 Pacific Hwy. E, Suite 16 Fx. 253-896-2633 Fife, Washington 98424 CITY GAF FPDESAI - -W&- ----CWMUN7Y DEVELOFMENT June 20, 2017 J. A. Brennan Associates, PLLC 100 South King Street, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98104 (206)583-0620 Attn: Ms. Carol Ohlfs Geotechnical Engineering Report Addendum Existing Stormwater Pond Gethsemane Master Plan 37600 Pacific Hwy S Federal Way, Washington PN: 322104-9025, -9020 Doc D: JABrennan.GethsemaneCemetery.RG(A1) INTRODUCTION This addendum report summarizes the results of our recent site reconnaissance, supplemental subsurface explorations, and geotechnical engineering analyses of the existing stormwater pond on the east side of the parcel. We previously prepared a Geotechnical Engineering Report for the Gethsemane Master Plan on February 26, 2016. We understand that during plan review, the City of Federal Way in their internal review letter dated April 18, 2017 indicated that the pond had not been maintained for several years, and that any proposed use of the pond in the new proposed master plan would require the pond to brought up to the requirements of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), currently used by the City of Federal Way. The letter also stipulates that any proposed use of the pond should be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer. Furthermore, according to the City's April 20, 2017 letter, since the pond is located within a wetland buffer, improvements to the pond are not feasible because of the anticipated intrusion and disturbance of the wetland buffer. The letter further stated that according to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.110 (3) an exemption to reusing the pond because it was constructed as a sediment pond that subsequently took on wetland characteristics is not applicable since the pond is within a buffer of a natural wetland (wetland #6). However, in our opinion, use of the pond and improvements to the interior of pond should be allowed by FWRC 19.145.110(2). This section of the FWRC states that: (2) Operation, maintenance, or repair of existing public improvements, utilities, public or private roads, parks, trails, or drainage systems if the activity does not further alter or increase impact to, or encroach further within, the critical area or buffer and there is no increased risk to life or property as a result of the proposed operation, maintenance, or repair, and no new clearing of native vegetation beyond routine pruning. In order to address the concerns by the City in their April 18, 2017 letter, we returned to the site on May 15, 2017 and excavated a series of hand auger explorations within the pond and pond berm. We created a general cross section showing the surface and subsurface conditions of the pond, and then modeled the pond berm slopes for stability in a JABrennan GethsemaneCemetery ARG June 20, 2017 Page 2 full pond / saturated berm condition. Our supplemental services were originally outlined in our email dated May 4, 2017. We received authorization from JA Brennan on May 5, 2017. We then received authorization to perform our field work within the Critical Area Buffer from the City of Federal Way in their Administrative Approval dated May 11, 2017. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions As stated in our original report, the subject site is located between SR-99 and 1-5, and is generally south of South 373rd Street in the Hylebos area of Federal Way, Washington. The site is irregular in shape, measuring approximately 1,700 to 1,800 feet wide (north to south) by about 2,700 feet deep at its longest portions and encompasses approximately 76 acres. Portions of the site are developed and are in use as an active cemetery. The developed portions are generally limited to the western, center portion of the site. The site is bounded by SR-99 to the west, existing large -lot residential development to the north, 1-5 to the east and large -lot residential development to the south. The site is located on the southern margin of the Federal Way glacial upland area. A large portion of the site, including the existing developed areas, generally slopes down gently from south (main cemetery parcel) to a low lying wetland area north of the site. The central portion of the property slopes up from the main building to a flat grassy area, and then slopes back down toward Hylebos creek that generally bisects the parcel. The western slope and steeper eastern slope are cut/fill slopes associated with previous stages of development as shown on the as -built drawings from 1971. These constructed slopes are about 50 percent, or 2H:1 V. The eastern most side of the property, east of Hylebos Creek, is generally flat. The total topographic relief across the site is on the order of 125 feet. The pond is located east of the main, developed portion of the site on the slope west and above Hylebos Creek, as shown on Figure 1. No surface water was observed on the flatter, central portions of the site or on the steep slope areas on the site. There are several mapped wetlands and wetland buffers on the north side and south central portions of the site. At time of our recent site visit, no water was noted within the pond. No water was observed in the pond during our previous 2016 site visits either. The wetland/habitat assessment and survey (by others) shows a portion of the pond within the mapped buffer of wetland, as shown on Figure 2, but the existing access to the pond and western portion of the pond appear to be outside of the mapped wetland buffer. Site Soils Our previous report describes the pond area as being underlain by Kitsap silt loam. The Kitsap soils are described as derived from silty lake sediments that form on slopes of 2 to 30 percent and have a "slight to severe" erosion hazard when exposed, depending on slope inclination. The area below the pond and Hylebos creek is mapped by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) web soil survey as being underlain by the Bellingham silt loam (Bh) soils. These soils are derived from alluvium, form on slopes of 0 to 2 percent, and have a slight to no erosion potential. Site Geology The Geologic Map of the Poverty Bay 7.5-minute Quadrangle, Washington by Booth, Waldron, and Troost (2003) indicates the pond area is primarily underlain by recessional lacustrine deposits (Qvrl) and Glacial till (Qvt). These glacial soils were deposited during the most recent Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation, approximately 12,000 to 15,000 years ago. The recessional lacustrine deposits consist of a well -sorted lightly stratified mixture of silt and sand that may contain localized deposits of clay that were deposited in low -energy, ice- JABrennan GethsemaneCemetery ARG June 20, 2017 Page 3 marginal lakes formed during the recession of the continental ice mass. The recessional lacustrine deposits are considered normally consolidated and typically have low to moderate strength characteristics. No areas of landslides or landslide debris are mapped on or within the vicinity of the site. The near surface soils at the site have been disturbed by natural weathering processes that have occurred since their deposition in addition to previous earthwork activities and site grading. Subsurface Explorations On May 15, 2017 GeoResources personnel visited the pond site and excavated three hand auger explorations. A field engineer from our office continuously monitored the excavations, maintained logs of the subsurface conditions encountered, obtained representative soil samples, and observed pertinent site features. Representative soil samples obtained from the hand augers were placed in sealed plastic bags and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing as deemed necessary." Each test hole was then backfilled with the excavated soils. The hand augers excavated as part of this evaluation indicate the subsurface conditions at specific locations only, as actual subsurface conditions across the pond and pond berm may vary. The nature and extent of such variation would not become evident until additional explorations are performed or until construction activities have begun. The approximate locations of the hand augers are indicated on the attached Site and Exploration Plan as Figure 1. Descriptive logs of our hand augers are presented as Figure 3. Subsurface Conditions The stratigraphy across the site as observed in our hand augers generally consisted of a few inches to about 1 foot of topsoil overlying 2% to 10 feet of light brown to gray occasionally mottled silt with variable amounts of sand, gravel and organic debris that was in a soft to stiff and wet condition. We interpret these surficial soils as fill material associated with prior grading activities at the site. Underlying the surficial soils we observed medium dense to dense gray - brown gravelly sand or stiff to very stiff blue -gray clayey silt in a moist to wet condition to the full depth explored. We interpret these lower soils to be native recessional lacustrine deposits. Groundwater Conditions Groundwater seepage was observed in all of the hand augers at the time of excavation. We expect that perched groundwater may develop seasonally atop the stiff glacial-lacustrine deposits that underlie the site. We anticipate fluctuations in the local groundwater levels likely will occur in response to precipitation patterns, off -site construction activities, and site utilization. CONCLUSIONS As described below, the pond needs to be improved prior to being reused as stormwater detention pond. The pond is a private stormwater facility that has been in place since before 1972. As outlined in FWRC 19.145.110(2), necessary improvements to the pond that will be required to bring it up to the current codes and safety requirements should not require any activity that will further alter or increase impact to, or encroach further within, the critical area or buffer of wetland number #6. A summary of our pond and slope stability analysis as well as recommendations for pond lining is presented below. JABrennan GethsemaneCemetery ARG June 20, 2017 Page 4 Slope Stability We analyzed the stability of the existing slope geometry using subsurface profile A -A', as shown on Figure 1. We used the computer program SLIDE version 7.016, from RocScience, 2016, to perform the slope stability analyses. The computer program SLIDE uses a number of methods to estimate the factor of safety (FS) of the stability of a slope by analyzing the shear and normal forces acting on a series of vertical "slices that comprise a failure surface. Each vertical slice is treated as a rigid body; therefore, the forces and/or moments acting on each slice are assumed to satisfy static equilibrium (i.e. a limit equilibrium analysis). The FS is defined as the ratio of the forces available to resist movement to the forces of the driving mass. A FS of 1.0 means that the driving and resisting forces are equal; an FS less than 1.0 indicates that the driving forces are greater than the resisting forces (indicating failure). We used the Morgenstern -Price method to search for the location of the most critical failure surfaces and their corresponding FS. The most critical surfaces are those with the lowest FS for a given loading condition, and are therefore the most likely to move. We modeled the existing condition based on our literature review, recent subsurface explorations, and site observations. Our analyses indicated that with a full pond and saturated berm, the calculated FS are 1,366/1.109 in static and seismic conditions. In general, these results indicate the pond and embankment to be marginally stable in their current condition, but not industry or jurisdictional requirements that typically require FS of 1.5 and 1.1, respectively. With a liner or bentonite slurry cut-off wall that prohibits the lateral migration or seepage of water through the embankment, the FS of the outside slope of the embankment increases to 1.504/1.146 for static/seismic, respectively. Results of our slope stability analyses are included in Appendix "A". Pond Considerations Without having documentation about how the pond embankment was constructed and based on the results of our model, we recommend that the pond be lined in order to prevent seepage through the embankment that could result in a pond embankment failure. Lining the pond will address the requirements of FWRC 19.145.110(2) by decreasing the risk of failure or risk to life or property. The lining will only need to occur on the inside of the pond and extend up the interior slopes of the pond. Vegetation removal as a result of the proposed repair (lining) would only occur within the pond footprint, but this would only affect invasive species that have grown into pond since the pond was constructed or last maintained. No new or additional clearing of native vegetation would be necessary outside of the pond. The least intrusive option would be to line the pond with a geo membrane (PVC or HDPE) pond liner, per section 4.4.3 of the manual. Access to the pond would be from the existing access road in the northwest corner of the pond that appears to be outside of the wetland buffer. The liner should extend up the interior slope and be placed in an anchor trench excavated in the top of the pond embankment. To mitigate for vegetation removal required to install the pond liner, the liner could be covered with amended soils and hydroseeded. Section 4.4.1 of the manual says that where the grass will be planted over a low permeability liner, a minimum of 6 inches of topsoil or compost amended soils must be placed over the liner, and that 12 inches is preferred. Section 4.4.3 states that where geomembrane liners are used, they shall be installed so that it is covered with 12 inches of top dressing. The top dressing shall consist of 6 inches of crushed rock covered with 6 inches of native soils. Amended soils discussed previously should be suitable. The crushed rock layer is to mark the location of the liner for future maintenance. Twelve inches of native or amended soils can be used in lieu of the crushed rock section provided orange safety fencing, or other highly -visible marker is installed 6 inches above the membrane. Texture membrane is required on interior side slopes between 5H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical) to prevent sloughing. JABrennan GethsemaneCemetery ARG June 20, 2017 Page 5 A lower -impact to installing a liner in the pond would be to install a low -permeable bentonite slurry cut-off wall or trench. The slurry wall would be installed through the center of the pond berm (embankment) and would extend through the embankment fill and into the underlying native soils. The low -permeable trench should be backfilled with a bentonite slurry, bentonite amended soils, or low permeability concrete mixture. The low -permeability cut-off Wall will reduce or prevent seepage from flowing through the embankment and daylighting on the outside slope of the pond embankment. Unlike the liner option, the low -permeability cut-off wall will still allow water within the pond to infiltrate and recharge the wetlands below the pond. While the interior slopes of the pond would still be prone to shallow surficial failure or slumps. The existing trees within the pond and interior side slopes, should be removed within the depth of ponded water. The current stormwater manual discourages Ponding water will eventual kill the trees, making them a maintenance issue. The trees should be cut, but the stumps left in place in order to minimize disturbance within the pond. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this addendum report for the Archdiocese of Seattle, Gethsemane Cemetery and members of the design team for use in evaluating a portion of this project. The data used in preparing this report and this report should be provided to prospective contractors. Our report analyses, conclusions and interpretations are based on data from others, our subsurface explorations and limited site reconnaissance, and should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. Variations in subsurface conditions are possible between the explorations and may also occur with time. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and schedule. Sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation should be provided by our firm during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with contract plans and specifications. The scope of our services does not include services related to environmental evaluations or construction safety precautions. Our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report. If there are changes in the loads, grades, locations, configurations or type of facilities to be constructed, the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report may not be fully applicable. If such changes are made or site conditions change, we should be given the opportunity to review our recommendations and provide written modifications or verifications, as appropriate. MM JABrennan GethsemaneCemetery ARG ,June 20, 2017 Page 6 We have appreciated working for you on this project. Please do not hesitate to call at your earliest convenience if you have questions or comments. Respectfully submitted, GeoResources, LLC 925 KEITHSl OTT SC ---- fir, Keith S. Schembs, LEG Principal KSS:DCB/kss Doc ID: JABrennan.GethsemaneCemetary.RG Attachments: Figure 1: Site and Exploration Plan Figure 2: Wetland Buffer Plan Figure 3: Hand Auger Logs Appendix "A": Slope Stability cc: J.A. Brennan & Associates ado P�H�fG' 54 4tl L p��PFGIR' Dana C. Biggerstaff, PE Senior Geotechnical Engineer '25'-SETBACK PROPERTY LINE EX. DRAIN FIELD USOLEUM ------------------- EX. FENCE GATE EX. SLOPES >40% EROSION PRONE I rtr," AREA (CITY MAPS) 7 W. HYLEBOS CREEK CREEK BUFFER WETLAND 011CU1=13 Ij Q 0 C EX -ACCESS WETLAND 0 0 -!t� BUFFER 00 EX. ADMIN TO STORM DRAIN BUILDING AND SEDIMENT POND EX. GRAVIES EX. STORM DRAIN 0 AND SEDIMENT POND 0 #5 0 2-21-4-1 77 ... ... V. E=J T'. . WET N BUFFER '32-21-4-103 GeoResources, LLC 5007 Pacific Highway East, Suite 16 Fife, Washington 98424 Ph: (253) 896-1011 Fax: (253) 896-2633 GRAPHIC SCALE I 1wh 11119 & Wetland Areas and Buffers Gethsemane Master Plan Federal Way, Washington Doc ID: JABrennan.Gethesmane.F I June 2017 1 Figure 2 Hand Auger HA-1 Location: Bottom 'of Stormwater Pond Approximate Elevation: _ Depth (feet) Soil Type Soil Description 0.0 - 0.8 - Forest Duff, dark brown silty SAND (loose, moist) 0.8 - 2.0 SM Tan/light brown silty SAND (loose, moist)(fill) 2.0 - 3.8 SM Tan/lightbrown mottled silty SAND (loose, wet to saturated) Terminated at 3.8 feet below ground surface. No caving was observed. Groundwater seepage observed at 3 feet below ground surface. Hand Auger HA-2 Location: Top of berm to east of stormwater pond Approximate Elevation: Depth (feet) Soil Type Soil Description 0.0 - 0.8 - Forest Duff, dark brown silty SAND (loose, moist) 0.8 - 4.5 ML Tan/gray disturbed fine sandy SILT (soft, moist) 4.5 - 5.5 SM/ML Tan/Grey silty SAND with silt clast inclusions and gravel ( loose, moist) Terminated at 6.5 feet below ground surface. No caving observed. No groundwater seepage observed. Hand Auger HA-3 Location: Lower eastside of berm east of stormwater pond Approximate Elevation: Depth (feet) Soil Type Soil Description 0.0 - 0.5 - Forest Duff, dark brown sandy SILT with gravel (loose, moist) 0.6 - 3.5 SM-ML Brown silty SAND (loose, moist) 3.5 - 7.5 SM Grey/tan oxidized SAND with some silt (loose, wet to saturated) Terminated at 7.5 feet below ground surface. Minor caving observed at 5.5 feet below ground surface. Groundwater seepage observed at 5.5 feet below ground surface. DRT/CC GEORESOURCES earth science & geotechnical engineering 5007 Pacific Hwy E., Suite 16 1 Fife, WA 93424 1 253.896.1011 I www.georesources.rocks Excavated on: May 16, 2017 Hand Logs Gethesmane Cemetery Master Plan 37600 Pacific Hwy S, Federal Way, WA DocID: JAB rennan.Gethesmane.F June 2017 3 %D � g r-i o � v L 4 Ln C [2 Q W 0 i i Ln A 3 1a o 0 0 0 0 CC) 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 o 0 o o +' o Lo o Lo o uo o uo o n o un o Ln o Ln o Ln o uo o o o Lo o � o N Ln I- o N Lo[- o N Ln l- O N Lo r o N Lo[- O N Ln M1 o o 0 0 N N N N 4 N w ro %0 M1 ,n k L 0 a E y fV a C O a Q Nd N d M 3� th CV Z CD ra C y r _ O d E Oo _ i f�6 O a N m +� o n Q W 0 AP N a rl O n rl � N N t0 O co r o o 3■�i R 000000000ooQoo0oQoo0oo0000 +' o Ln Q Ln o Ln o uo o Ln o Ln o Ln o 4 o uo o un o uo o u) o 0 r j, (0 O N N r- O N N C- O N Ln [- O N ul I- O N Ln 1- O N ul r O O O O O ,--I '-I ri '4 N N N N Rl r• f+l Rl 4 C 4 4 LP Lf LI7 L( to, r 10 cV 006 ��. OiS 9Z 4- Ui 4 3 N O o o o 00 0 0 0 0 cc, o 0 0 0 o o 0 4 o Ca cko 0 +' o u] o Ln o zo o Nn o u] o cn 0 n o Ln o to o V] d Ln O it7 6 roo N ell r` allo C'-o[V u7(^ oN Lo C^ ocvLn r- oN tl7 i-Q O oOo.--i r-1N rlN N NN mr'f P'7 rh,' a 11, 0 E f0 p� O a m 0 id 2 C C Q W V) �I O 0 0 0 0 0 CDC): -P O In 0 Ln O Lo O 0 CD N Ln [- CD N LO I (N N N ul U) 19 U) V' v' c' V' u ) U) u ) U) w J N m SLIDE - An Interactive Slope Stability Program: Page 1 of 6 Slide Analysis Information SLIDE - An Interactive Slope Stability Program Project Summary File Name: PondStab112slmd - Group 1- Saturated -seismic Slide Modeler Version: 7.024 ProjectTitle: SLIDE - An Interactive Slope Stability Program Date Created: 6/12/2017, 4:01:46 PM General Settings Units of Measurement: Imperial Units Time Units: days Permeability Units: feet/second Failure Direction: Left to Right Data Output: Standard Maximum Material Properties: 20 Maximum Support Properties: 20 Analysis Options Slices Type: Vertical Analysis Methods Used GLE/Morgenstem-Price with interslice force function: Half Sine Number of slices: 50 Tolerance: 0.005 Maximum number of iterations: 75 Check malpha < 0.2: Yes Create Interslice boundaries at Intersections with water tables and plezos: Yes Initial trial value of FS: 1 Steffensen Iteration: Yes Groundwater Analysis Groundwater Method: Water Surfaces Pore Fluid Unit Weight [Ibs/ft3]: 9.81 Use negative pore pressure cutoff: Yes Maximum negative pore pressure [psf]: 0 Advanced Groundwater Method: None Random Numbers Pseudo -random Seed: 10116 Random Number Generation Method: Park and Miller v.3 Surface Options PondStabil2.slmd 6/12/2017, 4:01:46 PM ell SLIDE - An ., .ceractive Slope Stability Program: Page 2 of 6 Surface Type: Circular Search Method: Slope Search Number of Surfaces: 5000 Upper Angle: Not Defined Lower Angle: Not Defined Composite Surfaces: Disabled Reverse Curvature: Invalid Surfaces Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth [ft]: 4 Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined Seismic Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Loading Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.1 Material Properties Property Upper Embankment FIII Native silty sand Grey sand some silt Pond Bottom Fill Upper Weathered Color ❑ F1 Strength Type Mohr -Coulomb Mohr -Coulomb Mohr -Coulomb Mohr -Coulomb Mohr -Coulomb Unit Weight [lbs/ft3] 116 118 127 120 120 Cohesion [psf] 0 0 25 0 0 Friction Angle [deg] 26 26 34 32 30 Water Surface Water Table Water Table None Water Table None Hu Value 1 1 1 Ru Value 0 0 Global Minimums Method: gle/morgenstern-price FS 1.108810 Center: 158.012, 94.071 Radius: 43.363 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 125.837, 65.000 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 164.215, 51.154 Resisting Moment: 321896lb-ft Driving Moment: 290307lb-ft Resisting Horizontal Force: 6913.78lb Driving Horizontal Force: 6235.32lb Total Slice Area: 141.442 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 38.3776 ft Surface Average Height: 3.68554 ft Valid/Invalid Surfaces Method: gle/morgenstern-price Number of valid Surfaces: 4927 Number of Invalid Surfaces: 73 PondStabil2.slmd 6/12/2017, 4:01:46 PM SLIDE - An interactive Slope Stability Program: Page 3 of 6 Error Codes: Error Code -103 reported for 67 surfaces Error Code -108 reported for 3 surfaces Error Code -111 reported for 3 surfaces Error Codes The following errors were encountered during the computation: -103 =Two surface / slope intersections, but one or more surface / nonslope external polygon intersections lie between them. This usually occurs when the slip surface extends past the bottom of the soil region, but may also occur on a benched slope model with two sets of Slope Limits. -108 =Total driving moment or total driving force < 0.1. This Is to limit the calculation of extremely high safety factors if the driving force is very small (0.1 is an arbitrary number). -111 = safety factor equation did not converge Slice Data Global Minimum Query [gle/morgensterrn Angle - Safety Factor: 1.10881 Slice Width Weight of Slice Base Number [ft] [lbs] Base Material [degrees] Upper 1 0.78448 30.3374 -47.1394 Embankment FIII Upper 2 0.78448 79.9874 -45.6362 Embankment FIII Upper 3 0.78448 125.295 -44.1723 Embankment FIII Upper 4 0.78448 167.095 -42.744 Embankment FIII Upper 5 0.78448 205.628 -41.3479 Embankment FIII Upper 6 0.78448 241.105 -39.9811 Embankment FIII Upper 7 0.78448 273.706 -38.6412 Embankment FIII Upper 8 0.78448 303.594 -37.3258 Embankment FIII Upper 9 0.78448 330.91 -36.0332 Embankment FIII 10 0.859677 391.551 -34.7014 Native silty sand 11 0.859677 419.312 -33.3308 Native silty sand 12 0.859677 444.105 -31.9814 Native silty sand 13 0.859677 466.063 -30.6516 Native silty sand 14 0.753474 424.441 -29.4199 Native silty sand 15 0.753474 437.456 -28.2831 Native silty sand 16 0.753474 448.765 -27.1584 Native silty sand 17 0.753474 458.42 -26.0448 Native silty sand 18 0.753474 466.47 -24.9418 Native silty sand 19 0.753474 472.957 -23.9485 Native silty sand 20 0.753474 477.922 -22.7644 Native silty sand 21 0.753474 481.403 -21.6888 Native silty sand 22 0.753474 483.431 -20.6212 Native silty sand 23 0.753474 484.04 -19,5611 Native silty sand 24 0.753474 483.232 -18.5078 Native silty sand Base Base Effective Base Effective Base Shear Shear Pore Friction Normal Normal Vertical Vertical Cohesion Stress Strength Pressure [pstil Angle [Psfl [Psf) Stress [Psi Stress Stress Stress [degrees] [psf] [psf] IPA [psf[ 0 26 11.3229 12.555 25.7415 0 25.7415 37.9432 37.9432 0 26 29.6729 32.9016 67.4583 0 67.4583 97.7975 97.7975 0 26 46.1901 51.2161 105.009 0 105.009 149.883 149.883 0 26 61.3143 67.9859 139.391 0 139.391 196.058 196.058 0 26 75.2417 83.4288 171.054 0 171.054 237.267 237.267 0 26 88.1412 97.7318 200.38 0 200.38 274.289 274.289 0 26 100.158 111.056 227.699 0 227.699 307.771 307.771 0 26 111A17 12354 253.295 0 253.295 338.251 338.251 0 26 122.027 135.305 277.416 0 277.416 366.182 366.182 0 26 132.704 147.143 301.688 0 301.688 393.581 393.581 0 26 143.502 159.116 326.236 0 326.236 420.61 420.61 0 26 153.813 170.549 349.678 0 349.678 445.721 445.721 0 26 163.712 181.526 372.183 0 372.183 469.201 469.201 0 26 172.125 190.854 392.698 1.39012 391.308 489.765 488.375 0 26 179.103 198.591 411.246 4.07477 407.172 507.615 503.541 0 26 185.907 206.135 429.21 6.57125 422.639 524.582 518.011 0 26 192.551 213.502 446.631 8.88529 437.745 540.73 531.845 0 26 199.04 220.698 463.52 11.0221 452.498 556.088 545.066 0 26 205.368 227.714 479.871 12.9866 466.884 570.657 557.67 0 26 211.515 234.53 495.64 14.7832 480.857 584.398 569.615 0 26 217A48 241.109 510.762 16.4159 494.346 597.246 580.83 0 26 223.126 247.404 525.142 17.8884 507.254 609.104 591.215 0 26 228.492 253.354 539.657 19.2042 519AS3 619.844 600.64 0 26 233A67 258.871 551.13 20.3665 530.764 629.283 608.916 PondStabil2.slmd 6/12/2017, 4:01:46 PM suorvrreavrter�axa SLIDE - An ,. ,ceracdve Slope Stability Program: Page 4 of 6 25 0.753474 480.786 -17.4611 Native silty sand 0 26 237.845 263.725 562.093 21.3781 540.715 636.908 61553 26 0.753474 476.921 -16.4203 Native silty sand 0 26 241.634 267.926 571.57 22.2417 549.328 642.78 620.538 27 0.753474 471.737 -15.385 Native silty sand 0 26 244.779 271.413 579.438 22.9597 556.478 646.792 623.832 28 0.753474 465.253 -14.3549 Native silty sand 0 26 247.18 274.076 585.474 23.5344 561.939 648.731 625.197 29 0.753474 457.49 -13.3294 Native silty sand 0 26 248.737 275.802 589.446 23.9677 565.478 648.38 624.412 30 0.753474 448.462 -12.3084 Native silty sand 0 26 249.346 276.477 591.124 24.2617 566.862 645.528 621.266 31 0.753474 438.186 -11.2912 Native silty sand 0 26 248.907 275.991 590,282 24.4179 565.865 639.979 615.562 32 0.753474 426.675 -10.2777 Native silty sand 0 26 247.327 274.239 586.712 24.4379 562.274 631.559 607.121 33 0.753474 413.942 -9.26741 Native silty sand 0 26 244.522 271.128 580.218 24.323 555.895 620.117 595.794 34 0.753474 399.998 -8.26002 Native silty sand 0 26 240.415 266.575 570.635 24.0745 546561 605.537 581.462 35 0.753474 384.853 -7.2552 Native silty sand 0 26 234.951 260.516 557.832 23.6934 534.138 587.743 564.049 36 0.753474 368.515 -6.25261 Native silty sand 0 26 228.086 252.904 541.711 23.1808 518531 566.701 543.521 37 0.753474 350.991 -5.25194 Native silty sand 0 26 219.798 243.714 522.225 22.5373 499.688 542.429 519.892 38 0.753474 332.289 -4.25288 Native silty sand 0 26 210.085 232.944 499.371 21.7638 477.607 514.994 493.23 39 0.753474 312.413 -3.25511 Native silty sand 0 26 198.968 220.618 473.195 20.8607 452.334 484.511 463.65 40 0.753474 291.366 -2.25833 Native silty sand 0 26 186.49 206.782 443.794 19.8286 423.965 451.148 431.32 41 0.753474 269.153 -1.26224 Native silty sand 0 26 172.715 191.508 411.318 18.6677 392,651 415.124 396.456 42 0.753474 245.775 Native silty sand 0 26 157.731 174.894 375.964 17.3782 358586 376.697 359.319 0.266521 43 0.753474 221.232 0.729114 Native silty sand 0 26 141.643 157.055 337.971 15.9603 322.011 336.168 320.208 44 0.753474 195.525 1.72497 Native silty sand 0 26 124.573 138.128 297.618 14.4139 283.204 293.866 279.452 45 0.753474 168.652 2.72135 Native silty sand 0 26 106.657 118.262 255.212 12.7388 242.474 250.143 237.404 46 0.753474 140.61 3.71855 Native silty sand 0 26 88.0402 97.6198 211.085 10.9349 200.151 205.364 194.429 47 0.753474 111.398 4.71688 Native silty sand 0 26 68.871 76.3649 165.573 9.00164 156.571 159.89 150.889 48 0.753474 81.0084 5.71665 Native silty sand 0 26 49.2976 54.6617 119.012 6.93863 112.073 114.077 107.138 49 0.753474 49.4374 6.71817 Native silty sand 0 26 29.4608 32.6664 71.7212 4.74523 66.976 68.2509 635057 50 0.753474 16.6779 7.72175 Native silty sand 0 26 9.75929 10.8212 24.027 1.84017 22.1869 22.7037 20.8636 Interstice Data PondStabil2.slmd 6/12/2017, 4:01:46 PM SIIOEIM91%iET JA29 SLIDE - An interactive Slope Stability Program: Page 5 of 6 X Y Intersllce Interslice Interslice Slice coordinate coordinate - Bottom Normal Force Shear Force Force Angle Number [ft] [ft] [Ibs] [Ibs] [degrees] 1 125.837 65 0 0 0 2 126.622 64.1546 15.8B82 0.545417 1.9661 3 127.406 63.3525 54.6547 3.74468 3.91951 4 128.191 62.5904 110.882 11.3565 5.84783 5 128.975 61.8654 180.424 24.5199 7.73917 6 129.76 61.175 259.889 43.8754 9.58252 7 130.544 60,5172 346.482 69.66 11.3677 8 131.329 59.8901 437.874 101.782 13.0858 9 132.113 59.2919 532.108 139.884 14.729 10 132.898 58.7212 627.522 183.388 16.2906 11 133.757 58.1259 731.883 236.414 17.9016 12 134.617 57.5606 834.56 293,935 19.4024 13 135.477 57.0238 934.092 354.621 20.7889 14 136.336 56.5143 1029.19 417.031 22.0579 15 137.09 56.0894 1108A6 472.156 23.0719 16 137.843 55.684 1183.62 526.821 23.9935 17 138.597 55.2974 1253.95 579.998 24.8223 18 139.35 54.9292 1318.78 630.669 25.5581 19 140.104 54.5788 1377.48 677.839 26.2012 20 140.857 54.2457 1429.45 720.562 26.7519 21 141.611 53.9295 1474.16 757.952 27.2104 22 142.364 53.6299 1511.08 789.207 27.5772 23 143.118 53.3463 1539.75 813.626 27.8526 24 143.871 53.0786 1559.74 830.623 28.0371 25 144.625 52.8264 1570.68 839.752 28.1308 26 145.378 52.5894 1572.29 840.717 28.1338 27 146.132 52.3673 1564.34 833.392 28.0462 28 146.885 52.16 1546.72 817.829 27.8677 29 147.639 51.9672 1519A 794.259 27.5981 30 148.392 51.7887 1482.46 763.1 27.2373 31 149.145 51.6243 1436.1 724.951 26.7849 32 149.899 51.4738 1380.67 680.583 26.2404 33 150.652 51.3372 1316.65 630.925 25.6033 34 151.406 51.2142 1244.64 577.046 24.8736 35 152.159 51.1049 1165.42 520.123 24.051 36 152.913 51.0089 1079.91 461.413 23.1356 37 153.666 50.9264 989.165 402.211 22.1275 38 154.42 50.8571 894.377 343.815 21.0277 39 155.173 50.8011 796.867 287.476 19.8373 40 155.927 50.7582 698.066 234.359 18.5582 41 156.68 50.7285 599.497 185A94 17.1929 42 157.434 50.7119 502.754 141.742 15.7448 43 158.187 50,7084 409.484 103.752 14.218 44 158.941 50.718 321.356 71.9356 12.6177 45 159.694 50.7407 240.04 46.4424 10.9502 46 160.448 50.7765 167.186 27.1457 9.22253 47 161.201 50.8255 104.396 13.6385 7.44308 48 161.955 50.9877 53.2098 5.23684 5.62088 49 162.708 50.9631 15.0895 0.993208 3.76584 50 163.461 51.0518 -8.58997 -0.28324 1.88855 51 164.215 51.154 0 0 0 List Of Coordinates Water Table PondStabil2.slmd 6/12/2017, 4:01:46 PM A10�i16MT7,024 x Y 0 63 101.8 63 163.499 51.4134 168.807 49.4904 176.84 46.5796 189.8 41.8841 195 40 227 35 External Boundary x Y 0 55 0 53 0 52.1003 0 49.9662 0 0 227 0 227 33 227 35 195 40 168.807 49A904 1"355 58.3495 139.8 60 126 65 111 65 88.7115 60.1547 88 60 75 55 Material Boundary x Y 88.7115 60.1547 144.355 58.3495 Material Boundary x Y 0 52.1003 40.6687 51.6218 67.1709 51.31 73.1014 51.2402 76.181 51.204 166508 49.5329 168.807 49.4904 Material Boundary x Y 67.1709 51.31 75 55 Material Boundary x Y 166.508 49.5329 194.377 38.026 227 33 SLIDE - An interactive Slope Stability Program: Page 6 of 6 PondStabil2.slmd 6/12/2017, 4:01:46 PM 4�kCITY OF Federal April 20, 2017 Mr. Richard Peterson Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle 710 9t" Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 riclip .jnveatholiceemeterv.org FcILE Federal Way, , Avenue South WayFederal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor Re: File No's 16-101141-00-SE & 16-101140-UP; PLANNING DIVISION 2"' TECHNICAL REVIEW Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long Range Master Plan 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way Dear Mr. Peterson: Planning Division staff has completed the review of your SEPA and Process IV Master Land Use (MLU) re -submittal for the Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan proposal. The proposal is for a 50-year Phased Expansion and Master Plan with associated site improvements. TECHNICAL COMMENTS The following comments must be addressed prior to setting a hearing date and preparing a staff recommendation to the Hearing Examiner for the Process IV application. Prior to issuance of the Process IV staff report and recommendation, city staff will issue the administrative SEPA determination, with a comment and appeal period. Please address each of the following comments and revise plans and documents as necessary. 1. On April 4, 2017, City staff provided you a copy of the City's wetland review prepared by Perteet dated March 24, 2017. The comments in the Perteet review must be addressed by your wetland consultant and resubmitted to the City for review. 2. Item numbers 1 I and 12 in the Perteet March 24, 2017, review discuss wetland buffer exemptions requested for the sediment pond. In summary, it appears that proposed repurposing of the sediment pond may require much more land surface modification and construction work than what is described in the application materials and as shown on the preliminary KPFF plans. In addition, the exemption you are requesting for the pond repurposing (Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.110(3)) and have identified on page 32 of the Otak Report, is not applicable to the proposed action of repurposing the pond. The exemption request cites subsection (3) of 19.145.1 10 which applies to artificially created wetlands. The existing sediment pond from around 1972 may have or may in the future take on wetland characteristics, as is the case with many constructed stormwater facilities. However, that the constructed sediment pond has or may in the future have wetland characteristics is not relevant. Because the sediment pond is located within the buffer of wetland number 6, the exemption cited in the Otak report (FWRC 19.145.1 10(3)) is not applicable. Work to expand, enlarge, revise, or repurpose the existing sediment pond within a wetland buffer is not exempt under FWRC 19.145. Mr. Peterson April 20. 2017 Page 2 The stormwater facilities must be located outside of wetlands and wetland buffers. Any stormwater facilities proposed within wetland buffers would need to meet applicable FWRC Chapter 19.145 decision criteria and be approved by the Hearing Examiner as a part of the Process IV review. 3. As identified in the enclosed Public Works Department review memo from Kevin Peterson, dated April 18, 2017, it is expected that a significant amount of earthwork, improvements and construction activity will be required to implement stormwater improvements, beyond what is currently described as the sediment pond repurposing and as depicted on the preliminary plans sheets 3.1 and 3.3 by KPFF. All land surface modifications including but not limited to: land clearing, tree removal, stormwater pond and water quality improvements, and outfall improvements, must comply with applicable FWRC Critical Area regulations. Any modification of the existing sediment pond that would occur within the wetland buffers must comply with FWRC Chapter 19.145. Given the preliminary and likely underestimated scale of improvements and modifications to the sediment pond shown on the preliminary plans, we are unable to determine the extent of potential wetland buffer impacts. The plans must be revised to avoid critical areas and critical area btuffers, and/or the wetland report must address all applicable critical area and buffer intrusions including any repurposing, expansion, modification, etc. of the existing 1972 sediment pond and associated stormwater facilities. Avoidance of all wetland and wetland buffer intrusions should be the highest priority. Any wetland buffer intrusions must meet the mitigation sequencing provisions of FWRC 19.145.140, and regulations for development in wetland buffets tinder FWRC 19.145.440. 4. As city staff has previously indicated, we do not Support 50-year project vesting as proposed in the project narrative. We will consider and recommend vesting consistent with applicable state and local regulations and city policy. The city is supportive of the master plan concept as allowed under applicable rules and regulations, as this should provide some overall predictability for future growth. Please resubmit six copies of any revised plans and four copies of any revised special studies, along with a completed resubmittal sheet. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your development project, please contact me at 253-835-2652, or iiiii.harrisacitvoffedera3lwa y.col.n. Sincerely, Harris Senior Planner enc: Memo from Kevin Peterson_ dated April 18. 2017 Resubmittal sheet c: Kevin Peterson_ Engineering Plans Reviewer Carol Ohlfs. I.A. Brennan Associates PLLC. carol uiahrennan.com 16-IOt14J Doc I1)75720 A CITY OF Federal Way DATE: April 18, 2017 TO: Jim Harris FROM: Kevin Peterson SUBJECT: GETHSEMANE CEMETERY - (16-101140-00-UP) 37500 PACIFIC HWY S Jim, MEMORANDUM Public Works Department Public Works has reviewed the applicant's proposal to utilize the existing 'silting basin' (reference taken from 1972 cemetery development plans) as their combined detention and water quality pond, as part of the current and future expansion proposal (Master Plan) of the Gethsemane Cemetery. However, based on observations made during our Spring 2016 site visit and aerial satellite images, it's apparent that the silting basin has not been maintained (as any sort of 'formal' storm drainage pond) for several years. The applicants' wetland report (Section 4.2.3, of the Otak, Inc., Wetland and Stream Delineation Report... dated Jan 17, 2017) also confirms that not only is this basin heavily vegetated, indicating a lack of formal maintenance, but it also indicates that the basin appears to receive very limited amounts of storm water runoff from the upper, currently developed areas of the cemetery site. To approve the proposal to use the silting basin as a combined detention and water quality pond, the owner will have to bring this basin into conformance with the design criteria for a combined detention/wet pond under the requirements of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) - the manual to which this project is currently vested. The proposed re -purposing of this basin for use as a detention/wet pond will require clearing of all vegetation and trees, possibly some grading of the basin floor and interior and exterior side slopes, and other construction activities within and around the basin. This work is well beyond that which are currently anticipated, noted, or shown on the plans and/or in the reports provided to date. Because the additional work will be required in and around that basin, it follows that there will be greater impact within the buffer of Wetland #6 than is currently anticipated, and those impacts, and any proposal to minimize or mitigate those impacts, will have to be identified during the land use review. In accordance with the KCSWDM, analysis and/or design by a geotechnical engineer will be required as part of the master plan review. While many of the geotechnical analysis are intended for construction of new ponds, the City will require, as part of the master plan review, that a geotechnical engineer provide analysis, opinions, and recommendations of the existing basin regarding those design elements found in the KCSWDM. If approved, and after construction is complete, the storm water pond will be subject to annual City inspections, as required under the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, and will need to be regularly maintained, and therefore, less likely to take on all of the characteristics of a 'typical' wetland in the future, as suggested in the wetland report. Alternatively, the applicant may elect to construct a new storm water pond outside of the wetland buffer/critical areas, which would allow them to avoid any disturbance within the critical areas and associated mitigation. 11 Cu CAI RNCROSS&HEMPELMANN 1 & ATTORNEYS AT LAW 524 2nd Ave., Suite 500 office 206.587.0700 Seattle, WA 98104 fax 206,587.2308 www.cairncross.com MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Harris, City of Federal Way FROM: John W. Hempelmann & Nicole De Leon DATE: April 18, 2017 RE: Legal, Factual and Practical Justifications for Long -Term Phased Development and Vesting of Gethsemane Cemetery The City of Federal Way has the authority under both State and municipal law to permit the 50- year phased development articulated in the Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan. Gethsemane Cemetery is charged with a sacred mission to maintain and develop the Cemetery in a responsible and sustainable manner such that future generations are ensured a spiritual resting place. The Cemetery Master Plan enables Gethsemane to meet these ethical, legal, and financial long-term obligations by allowing the Cemetery to develop under unique funding and demand constraints. When Gethsemane Cemetery met with senior City Staff to first review a Master Plan Application, the Cemetery believed long-term phased development and vesting for the Cemetery could best be achieved through the Development Agreement processes authorized by State law and the City Code. However, City Staff assured the Gethsemane representatives, including the undersigned, that the same result could be achieved by relying upon the phased development provisions in Federal Way Revised Code Section 19.15.100(2). It is for this reason that the present Application is before the City. The Applicant would be extremely disappointed if, after all the work on this Application, the Applicant was now required to pursue its original approach and seek City Council approval of a Development Agreement. This reversal of approach is unnecessary. State law allows, and the City Code expressly authorizes, long-term vesting for the Master Plan Application. Proper analysis of the proposal for long term vesting must be considered in the following contexts. First, we are dealing with completely unique circumstances. Gethsemane Cemetery is the only cemetery in the City. Large, undeveloped tracts of land in the City are rare and it does not appear that another cemetery will ever be proposed in the City. Certainly, it does not appear that another large, master planned cemetery to serve regional needs for another 100 years would ever be proposed in the City. Moreover, it does not appear that the City will ever consider another long-term phased development plan that would extend over the next 100 years. These are two reasons why the proposed Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan presents unique circumstances. Second, unlike other types of development, the Cemetery often enters into specific commitments and contracts to provide burials up to 30-50 years before the need for those burials arises. Individuals purchasing a burial site need the assurance that a particular burial site can be delivered when needed and {03292304.DOCX;2 } that the Cemetery will continue to be maintained and developed in a sustainable manner for a long, long time. Unlike other property development, a cemetery is truly perpetual in that once title to a burial site is conveyed to a patron of the Cemetery, that site is owned by the patron and may not be sold or used for any purpose other than the patron's burial. See RCW 68.32.010. Once the land is committed to use as a Cemetery, the City is assured that the large expanse of green space will be held as such in perpetuity. Therefore, Gethsemane Cemetery, one of the largest cemeteries in the Puget Sound area, is truly a unique use of land for which long-term vesting is not only appropriate, but also critical to the satisfaction of Gethsemane's legal and ethical commitments to the community. Third, in light of the long-term legal and ethical obligations Gethsemane Cemetery has to the Catholic Church, its families, those buried, and to be buried, at the Cemetery, and to the community, the Cemetery's finances are subject to a long-term care fund which is largely funded by the individual sales of burial plots. Again, the sale of a plot today is often intended for a plot to be used several decades in the future. Gethsemane must therefore engage in measured financial and development planning such that its current patrons and grounds are thoughtfully cared for while also enabling Gethsemane to accommodate future burial needs. Given the limited provisions of this long-term care fund and the need to provide services for decades to come, the Cemetery depends on the thoughtful use of the care fund over time and only as needed. Requiring the Cemetery to build out its grounds in a more restricted timeframe would truly be crippling to the care fund and long-term viability of Gethsemane Cemetery. In contrast, limiting the Cemetery to smaller scale, short-term development and vesting will significantly hinder its ability to plan for future obligations and continue providing its various amenities and benefits to the community. Indeed the Cemetery is truly a unique use in that it carries the heavy burden of expected continued use for generations to come. In light of these surrounding facts, the City should use its authority under State and municipal law to permit and vest the 50-year phased development of the Cemetery Master Plan. The Federal Way Revised Code ("FWRC") grants the City the authority to allow phased development and to extend such phasing "to allow for completion of subsequent phases." FWRC 19.15.100(2); see also FWRC 19.15.045(4) (describing the general right to vest upon completion of a land use application). The language describing this authority is unqualified and open-ended, thereby granting the City a great degree of discretion in allowing long-term phased development. Notably, the City's Critical Areas Ordinance similarly contemplates operation under "a phased schedule that assures completion [and] has been approved by the director." FWRC 19.145.140(6). This discretionary authority is a reflection of the fact that State law does not preclude the City from permitting long-term phased development, which means such a decision is entirely within the jurisdiction of the City. Article XI, section 11 of the State Constitution "allows local governments to adopt regulations that are not in conflict with general law. A local regulation conflicts with general law if it permits what state law forbids or forbids what state law permits." Fed v. Eastern Washington GMHB, 153 Wn. App. 394, 415 (2009) (internal citation omitted). Furthermore, municipalities possess constitutional authority to enact zoning ordinances as an exercise of their police power. A city's land use action or ordinance is only unconstitutional if "(1) the ordinance conflicts with some general law; (2) the ordinance is not a reasonable exercise of the city's police power; or (3) the subject matter of the ordinance is not local." Edmonds Shopping Ctr. Assocs. v. City of Edmonds, 117 Wn. App. 344, 351 (2003). Here, the decision to allow long-term phased development of the Cemetery is entirely within the City's lawful exercise of its police power and discretion with respect to this local land use decision. The f03292304.DOCX;2 } unique nature of Cemetery management and development justifies the City's reasonable decision to allow such long-term phased development. Additionally, we have not found any State law in conflict with the requested long-term phased development. Further, and in an effort to assuage any concerns regarding the need to protect public health and safety in years to come, Gethsemane Cemetery will agree to apply future regulations to the proposed Master Plan to address issues of public health and safety. Such action demonstrates Gethsemane Cemetery's continued commitment to the community and confirms that its request for long-term phased planning stems from a practical need to continue to manage and develop the Cemetery for the benefit of the community at large. With this analysis of the law, we encourage the City to allow Gethsemane Cemetery to develop pursuant to the 50-year Cemetery Master Plan and to vest the Master Plan to current City regulations, except in circumstances where new regulations are required to protect public health or safety. 50-year phased development is essential to ensure that Gethsemane may appropriately plan today for its future development. Absent long-term phased development approval, there will be great uncertainty with respect to property constraints and applicable regulations, such as boundaries and buffers of critical areas and engineering requirements. Gethsemane would therefore be unable to build the appropriate infrastructure today to accommodate development in the future. This will result in costly development inefficiencies that will not only negatively impact the operation of the Cemetery, but also negatively impact the community at large. In contrast, allowing Gethsemane to develop early phases based on informed decisions and with certainty of applicable regulations, except for those required to protect public health and safety, will enable Gethsemane to best allocate its fixed resources and efficiently plan for future development. For all of these additional reasons, it is both imperative and legally proper that Gethsemane develop pursuant to at least a 50-year phased master plan that is vested to current regulations. {03292304.DOCX;2 ) 1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600 Seattle, WA 98101 206.622.5822 kpff.com April 6th, 2017 Mr. Kevin Peterson City of Federal Way Public Works Department 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 Subject: Gethsemane Cemetery — (16-101140-00-UP) Applicant Responses Public Works Comments Dear Kevin: RESUBMITTED APR a 7 2017 CITY OF FE-DERA-1 WAy COMM NIY DEVELOPMENT We received your comments dated April 19", 2016, for the Gethsemane Cemetery project and have prepared the following responses in bold: 1) According to information provided in the Storm water Technical Information Report prepared by KPFF Engineers, the proposed detention pond has been modeled under the assumption that the `pre -developed' land use condition is pasture land with some existing impervious surfaces. According to the requirements of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), the pre -developed condition shall be modeled under the assumption of `historic' site conditions (definition found in KCSWDM page 1-3), which assumes a fully forested site for the Puget Sound region, unless it can be shown differently through exemptions or exceptions provided in the manual. The pond sizing calculations will need to be revised to reflect this requirement, or cite the appropriate exemption/exception to this assumption. Response: Per the KCSWDM Section 1.2.3.1.13, target surfaces in Conservation Flow Control Areas that are applicable to this project include new impervious surfaces and existing impervious surfaces added since January 8, 2001 that are not fully dispersed. The pond sizing calculations are revised to model the pre -developed condition for these surfaces as fully -forested within the area draining to the detention pond. The remaining surfaces draining to the detention pond include existing impervious surfaces added before January 8, 2001, existing pervious surfaces to remain, and existing pervious surfaces that will be disturbed but not converted from a native vegetated surface. These surfaces are used in both the existing and proposed condition in the pond sizing calculations. Refer to Section 4 Part A, Section 4 Part D, and Appendix G of TIR for added narrative and revised pond sizing calculations. Mr. Kevin Peterson April 6", 2017 Page 2 2) The project is required to meet the Water Quality Treatment criteria of the KCSWDM, however, the TIR indicates what appear to be exemptions or exceptions have been applied to reduce this standard to Basic water quality. For clarity, specific exemptions or exceptions shall be stated, cited, or referenced in the TIR. Response: The project is proposing Basic Water Quality treatment as a deviation from the Enhanced treatment requirement because the anticipated traffic generation for the site is substantially lower than the level of traffic that triggers Enhanced treatment in the KCSWDM. Our understanding is that the City of Federal Way classifies the Gethsemane Cemetery site as a Commercial site and requires Enhanced treatment for target surfaces per Section 1.2.8.1.A of the KCSWDM. However, a cemetery is a unique land use unlike other commercial sites with higher vehicle use for which the code is intended. A transportation analysis addressing the anticipated traffic generation of the Gethsemane Cemetery was prepared by Heffron Transportation, Inc. Their memorandum summarizing the analysis is now included in Appendix L of the TIR. The memorandum explains that the ADT for the fully expanded 29 acre site can be estimated at 660 trips per day. This is substantially lower than the Enhanced treatment threshold in the KCSWDM for roads with an expected ADT of 2,000 or more vehicles. In addition, the traffic generation expected from the fully expanded site would be similar to a residential subdivision development with housing densities between 0.6 and 2.3 units per acre, which is significantly less than the Enhanced treatment threshold of 8 units per acre. Because level of traffic at the Gethsemane Cemetery is substantially lower than levels of traffic use that trigger Enhanced treatment, the project proposes to use the Basic treatment requirement. Refer to Section 4 Part C and Section 4 Part E of the TIR for added narrative clarifying the proposed deviation. 3) The pond access road shall connect/extend to an existing access or maintenance road. This should be the case for both current and future phase roadways. Response: The pond access road is now shown on the site plan, connecting to a proposed roadway. Refer to revised sheets 2.3 and 3.1. Mr. Kevin Peterson April 6t', 2017 Page 3 A copy of the correction notice is attached to this letter. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (206) 622-5822. Sincerely, Alex Sundell Civil Design Engineer AJS: Enclosure 10040115243.20 MEMORANDUM Public Works Department DATE: April 19, 2016 TO: Jim Harris FROM: Kevin Peterson SUBJECT: GETHSEMANE CEMETERY - (16-101140-00-UP) 37500 PACIFIC HWY S Public Works Development Services has reviewed the material submitted for the referenced project. Prior to Land Use approval, the applicant will need to address the following Technical comments: 1) According to information provided in the Storm water Technical Information Report prepared by KPFF Engineers, the proposed detention pond has been modeled under the assumption that the 'pre -developed' land use condition is pasture land with some existing impervious surfaces. According to the requirements of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), the pre -developed condition shall be modeled under the assumption of 'historic' site conditions (definition found in KCSWDM page 1-3), which assumes a fully forested site for the Puget Sound region, unless it can be shown differently through exemptions or exceptions provided in the manual. The pond sizing calculations will need to be revised to reflect this requirement, or cite the appropriate exemption/exception to this assumption. 2) The project is required to meet the Water Quality Treatment criteria of the KCSWDM, however, the TIR indicates what appear to be exemptions or exceptions have been applied to reduce this standard to Basic water quality. For clarity, specific exemptions or exceptions shall be stated, cited, or referenced in the TIR. 3) The pond access road shall connect/extend to an existing access or maintenance road. This should be the case for both current and future phase roadways. RECEIVED CH&CAIRNCROSS&HEMPELMANN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 524 2nd Ave., Suite 500 office 206.587.0700 Seattle, VGA 98104 fax 206.587.2308 www.cairncross.com March 27, 2017 VIA HAND DELIVERY Jim Harris City of Federal Way 33325 8th Ave. S Federal Way WA 98003 Re: Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan Dear Mr. Harris: MAR 18 2017 CITY OF FEDEHAL WAY COM UNf1Y DEVELOPMENT Following up on our email to you of February 24 when we transmitted to the City the electronic copies of the January 31, 2017 SWCA Cultural Resources Assessment for the Gethsemane Master Plan Application, we are now delivering with this letter printed copies of both the full SWCA Report and the Redacted SWCA Report. We are delivering one copy of the full Report and four copies of the Redacted Report. Consistent with our telephone and email communications and your review with the City Attorney, the Redacted SWCA Report can be made available to the public. Since the full SWCA Report includes information about burial sites and other cultural resources protected from disclosure pursuant to state law, you have advised us that the full SWCA Report will not be made available to the public and that you will contact us if any member of the public requests access to the full SWCA Report. In such a case, we will respond. City Staff and the Hearing Examiner can have access to the full SWCA Report. A copy of the full SWCA Report was provided to the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Tribes that requested the SWCA Report have also been given access to both the full Report and the Redacted Report. ihempc1ma aroacairarcross.coar direct. (206) 254-4400 103287079.DOCX;1 } r • A` Jim Harris March 27, 2017 Page 2 above. Please let me know if you have any concern about this letter or the protocol I have detailed Ver t , lyAyor Jo W. Hempelmann JWH:msd Enclosures cc: Richard Peterson, Director of Cemeteries, Associated Catholic Cemeteries Carol Ohlfs {03287079.DOCX;1 } ryl AR( I11110( LSt OF SL \ I I l i I ASSOCIATED CATHOLIC CEMETERIES OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR CALVARY CEMETERY Irlrlr. nlyaltllolicce lnctely. org February 1, 2017 RESUBMITTED Mr. Jim Harris, Planner FEB U 1 2017 City of Federal Way 33325 8th Ave South CITY OF FEDERAL WAY Federal Way, WA 98003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Jim_harris cit offederalwa .com 7io 9111 Avi: SL I, I I I L. AV.A 98 104- 2017 l l'lIll l'.iiu llIca !'i11r IOi i>l_01`t RE: File No's 16-101141-00-SE & 16-101140-UP; Planning Division Technical Review Comments Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Long Range Master Plan 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way Dear Mr. Harris: In response to your letter dated June 21, 2016, our team has gathered further information and modified the design to respond to the Technical Comments. This package addresses the following comments and questions: Technical Comment #1: The proposal includes several activities and improvements within regulated wetland buffers. These improvements include natural burial sites in three different geographic locations, pervious pavement access paths, grading/ground contouring, and stormwater improvements as shown on page 3.3; including stormwater structure, grading, and maintenance access, etc.... Response: Activities have been removed from the regulated wetland buffers. We are requesting a wetland buffer modification per FWRC 19.145.440(6) and requesting confirmation of an exemption per FWRC 19.145.110(3) for repurposing an existing sediment and stormwater detention pond into an updated code compliant stormwater detention pond. Please see the updated site plans and the "Wetland and Stream Delineation Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan" by Otak Inc. (1/27/2017). Please let us know how much we need to pay for the third party review. Technical Comment #3: Please show on the submitted site plan any wetlands off -site on adjacent properties.... 1 lolprood Cenietc'ly 2o5 NL 205TH SYREFT SHORELINE, N A 98iSs 206 - 363-8404 Ax: 206-365-658o Calrarp Cenlc'te y 5041 35TH Avr, NE SEATTLL, AVA 981os 2o6-522-o996 Ax: 2o6-525-9628 Gethsonane Ceincto), 37600 PACAFIC H\VY S FFDrRAL 1,VAY1 NVA 98003 S EATTLL: 253 -S 38 -2240 TAcoi\iA: 253- 927-3350 FAX: 53-874-5910 St. 1'arrick CenR'tel-1, S 204-1'11 AND ORILLIA IZOAD l;r_NT. AUA 99032 ADMINISTERFD BY GETHSEMANE 11101i2rFRY" SEATI'l L: 253-838-2240 •r Response: Please see the updated site plans with the surveyed off -site wetlands. Technical Comment #5: Pursuant to FWRC 14.10.020(6) ... A final determination shall be made within 90 days from the receipt of the applicant's response for additional information, unless the applicant requests an additional 30 days as provided in this section. Response: We requested an extension for SEPA determination on 06/24/2016 to prepare the additional reports in response to your technical questions. Responses to Technical Questions #2 & #4 are forthcoming and will be addressed in a separate letter. If you have any questions regarding this letter or our package of submittal items, please contact Rich Peterson at 206-522-0996, Carol Ohlfs at 206-583-0620, or John Hempelmann at 206-254-4400. Sincerely, 4-41 A;;V-� Mr. Richard Peterson, Director of Cemeteries Archdiocese of Seattle, richp@mycatholiccemetery.org Enc: C: • "Wetland and Stream Delineation Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan" by Otak, Inc. (1/27/2017) (6 copies) • Plan Sheets (0 — Cover; 2.1- Site Plan Phasing, 2.2 - Site Plan 1, 2.3 - Site Plan 2, 2.4 - Site Plan 3, 3.1- Drainage, Grading, & R.O.W. Plan 1, 3.1- Drainage, Grading, & R.O.W. Plan 2, 4.5 Buffer Modification & Enhancement Plan) by J. A. Brennan Associates (1/27/2017) (7 copies) d John Hempelmann, Cairncross & Hempelmann, 524 Second Avenue, Suite 500, Seattle, WA 98104, JHempelmann@Cairncross.com • Carol Ohlfs, J.A. Brennan Associates PLLC, 2701 First Avenue, Suite 510, Seattle WA 98121, carol@jabrennan.com 2of2 CITY OF Federal February 7, 2017 Mr. Jason Walker Perteet Inc. 2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 900 Everett, WA 98201 jwalker@perteet.com 1 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue -South Federal Way'-6325 {253� 81�-7000 V,,Wff a&@A4 "YCom Jim Ferrell, Mayor Re: File #16-101141-000-00-SE; PEER REVIEW OF WETLAND AND STREAM DELINEATION REPORT AND WETLAND BUFFER MITIGATION PLAN Gethsemane Church, 37500 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way Dear Mr. Walker: Enclosed is a Wetland Consultant Task Authorization for peer review of the Gethsemane Cemetery Wetland and Stream Report. Please provide me a cost estimate for your peer review of the January 27, 2017 report. The report was prepared by Otak Inc, one of the City's P party consultants, so a delineation and classification check should be brief and condensed. If you see any issues with the delineation and classification, you will need to identify these in your findings. We are looking for your review and input on addressing the proposed intrusions into wetland/buffers and compliance with the FWRC decision criteria for same. We will need your input on the preliminary mitigation plan. We will need you to attend and possibly testify at the public hearing on behalf of the City. I am working on getting you an electronic copy of the report and plans. Please contact me ataim.harris@ :ityoffederalway.com, or 253-835-2652, if you have any questions. Sincerely, arris Planner enc: Wetland Consultant Task Authorization Wetland and Stream Delineation Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan, Gethsemane Cemetery, By Otak Inc, January 27, Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Master, Preliminary Plan Sheets by JA Brennan, sheets 0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 4.5, CITY OF Community Development Department Federal Way WETLANDS CONSULTANT AUTHORIZATION FORM Date: February 7, 2017 Consultant: Jason Walker Perteet Inc. 2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 900 Everett, WA 98201 425.252.7700 / walker ter. C ect-coon Project: Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan Location: 37500 Pacific Highway South City File No.: 16-101141-SE Applicant Contact: JA Brennan Associates Carol Ohlfs Caro l (c,j ab renn an.com 206 583-0620 City Staff Contact: Jim Harris, Planner— 253.835.2652,jim,harris@cityoffederalway.com Documents Provided: Wetland and Stream Delineation Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan, Gethsemane Cemetery, By Otak lnc, .lanuary 27, 2017 • Gethsemane Cemetery Phased Master, Preliminary Plan Sheets by JA Brennan, sheets 0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 4.5 • 1 will provide a link to the documents shortly; hard copies of plans and report are enclosed with this task scope. Task Scope: Verify wetland delineations and categorization only: Review and respond to proposed critical areas buffer impacts and mitigation actions. Review and respond to proposed stormwater pond repurposing. + Brief review of wetland delineation and wetland classification for conformance with the requirements of FWRC. Conduct site visit as necessary. A single site visit is proposed to observe conditions. Review proposed intrusions for compliance with FWRC requirements. ■ Provide written response to findings, recommendations, and request additional information from applicant if needed. A single review memo is proposed. io Possible meeting with applicant's wetland biologist.Two meeting items to be combined • Meet with City staff. with site visit if necessary. • Attend public hearing and testify on behalf of City. PM to attend one public hearing. • Review of resubmitted/corrected documents as needed. A single response memo will be prepared if necessary. Task Schedule: Provide task cost estimate ASAP. Review work is not to begin until authorized in writing by city. Task Cost: Not to exceed $ 5497.00 without a prior written amendment to this Task Authorization. Acceptance: 2- 16-L (Consultant - Pertee nc.) Date (City (Applicant) Consultant Fee Determination Summary 'q pE RTE ET 2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 900, Everett, WA 982011 P 425.252.7700 Project: Federal Way On -Call Wetlands/Stream Consultants - Gethsemane Cemetary Client: City of Federal Way Project No.: 2013009.008 r _ Hourly Costs Classification Sr. Associate Planner II Lead Ecol/Mgr Accountant Total Hourly Costs E_ _ `-- In -House Costs Mileage - $.535 Total In -House Costs Contract Total Prepared Jason T Walker By: Hours Rate Amount 11 $180.00 $1,980 1 $100.00 $100 23 $140.00 $3,220 1 $85.00 $85 36 $5,386.00 Reimbursables Obt Rate Amount 210 $0.535 $112 $112.00 $5,497.00 Date: February 15, 2017 ARCHDIOCESE OF SEATTLE ASSOCIATED CATHOLIC CEMETERIES OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR/CALVARY CEMETERY www.mycatholiccemetery.org February 27, 2017 Mr. Jim Harris Planner, City of Federal Way 33325 8tn Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 710 9TH AVE SEATTLE, WA 98104-2017 www.seattlearchdiocese.org Re. Wetlands Consultant Authorization — Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan; City File No.: 16-1-1141-SE Dear Mr. Harris: Enclosed please find a signed copy of the City of Federal Way's "Wetland Consultant Authorization Form" for the Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan, City File No.: 16-1-1141-SE. Also enclosed is payment in full of $5,497.00 (five thousand four hundred ninety-seven dollars) for the Peteet contract for wetlands review. Please contact me if there are any questions. Sincerely yours, ply 4!� 1.) Richard Peterson Director of Cemeteries Archdiocese of Seattle CC. Mr. John Hempelmann, Cairncross & Hempelmann Ms. Carol Ohlfs, J.A. Brennan and Associates Holyrood Cemetery 205 NE 205TH STREET SHORELINE, WA 98155 2o6-363-8404 FAx:2o6-365-658o Calvary Cemetery 504135TH AVE NE SEATTLE, WA 98105 2o6-522-0996 FAx:2o6-525-9628 Gethsemane Cemetery 37600 PACIFIC Hwy S FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 SEATTLE:2S3-838-2240 TACOMA: 253-927-3350 FAx:253-874-5910 St. Patrick Cemetery S. 204TH AND ORILLIA ROAD KENT, WA 98032 ADMINISTERED BY GETHSEMANE CEMETERY SEATTLE:2S3-838-2240 INVOICE City of Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue S. INVOICE TO: RICHARDPETERSON CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE OF SEATTLE 710 9TH AVE SEATTLE WA 98104 PROJECT LOCATION: 37500 PACIFIC HWY S FOLDER NAME: GETHSEMANE CEMETERY PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Cemetery Master Plan with Phasing FEE DESCRIPTION CD - DEP ENV PASS-THRU (8045) TOTAL: PAYMENT RECEIVED: BALANCE: BILL NO: 215965 BILL DATE: March 01, 2017 PERMIT NO: 16 101141 00 SE AMOUNT $5,497.00 $5,497.00************************************* $0.00 CItY OF 09ERAL WAY $5,497.00 CITY HALL 33325 8TH AVE S FEDERAL WAY WA. 98003 Reg# #/Rcpt#: 005-00010549 [ CJD ] Accounting Date: Wed, Mar 1, 2017 Date/Time: Wed, Mar 1, 2017 11:49 AM A80\CD - DEP ENV PASS-THRU (8045) FOLDER:16-101141-00-SE FEE AMOUNT: $ 5,497.00 --------------------- RECEIPT TOTAL $ 5,497.00 Payment Data: Pmt# :1 Payer: ASSOCIATED CATHOLIC CEMETERIES Method: CK Ref# : 67355 AMOUNT = $ 5,497.00 RECEIPT SUMMARY TOTAL TENDERED = $ 5,497.00 RECEIPT TOTAL = $ 5,497.00 ------------------ CHANGE DUE _ $ 0.00 HAVE A NICE DAY! u:1.0.3980 MEMORANDUM CITY OF jj pp }} DATE: January 31, 2017 TO: Mark Orthmann Community Development Department FROM: Jim Harri .� SUBJECT: Gethsema Cemetery Archeological Survey - (16-101141-00-SE) 37500 PACIFIC HWY S Mark: I anticipate receiving a Cultural Resources Report in the near future as part of the application re - submittal packet for the Gethsemane Cemetery expansion. The applicant's Legal Counsel, John Hempelmann has asked some specific questions about public disclosure of the report. I have attached an email from Mr. Hempelmann and a follow up email from his Associate, which cites some state regulations on the subject. Can you review and advise. Brian and I would be glad to discuss with you. RECEIVED APB 0 3 2017 pERTEET To: Jim Harris, Planner, City of Federal Way _ PERTEET.COM 00 �MMUNI i l E,� OP%'� I7�pLBY AVENUE, SUITE 201 l I l � EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 From: Bill Kidder, Lead Ecologist, Perteet Jason Walker, PLA, PWS, Environmental Manager and Wetland Ecologist, Perteet Date: March 24, 2017 Re: Gethsemane Cemetery —Critical Areas and Impacts Mitigation Plan Review Perteet Inc. conducted a critical areas review of the Gethsemane Cemetery Master Plan expansion located at 37600 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, Washington. The cemetery is situated across tax parcels: #322104- 9025, #322104-9020, #218820-4560, #218820-4281, and #218820-4365. The Cemetery is situated about mile west of Interstate 5 next to the Pierce County boundary at the south end of the City of Federal Way in Section 32, Township 21 North, Range 4 East. West Fork Hylebos Creek flows through center of the subject property. The applicant is proposing to create a Cemetery Master Plan that would guide phased build out over several decades. The Master Plan requires City land use approvals that include a critical areas assessment. The critical areas review is being completed using the Federal Way Municipal Code (FWMC) current on March 17, 2017. Perteet ecologists completed a site visit and critical areas review of the subject property and the proposed project plan on March 13, 2017. Weather was overcast and raining. Much of the site contained puddles of standing water throughout. The cemetery's stormwater system was actively flowing and draining untreated to an outfall upslope of Wetland 6. Wetlands had standing and flowing water at least 6 inches deep in many places. Perteet met the applicant's representatives at the end of the site visit to discuss observations, provide project background, and answer questions. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED The following documents and resource information websites were reviewed by Perteet prior to the site visit: • Wetland and Stream Delineation Report for and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan, Gethsemane Cemetery, Federal Way, WA. Prepared for Corporation of the Catholic Archbishop of Seattle, prepared by Otak, Inc., dated January 27, 2017. • Gethesamane Cemetery No. 2 Site Plan, Drainage, and Topograhic Survey Permit Drawings, August 31, 1972. Prepared for Archdiocese of Seattle. • King County Online Parcel Viewer t .//www.kin count ov/ rations/G]SiMa siiMAP.as� ?;), accessed March 21, 2017. • City of Federal Way Critical Areas maps ht :/Iwww.cit ❑flederalvra .cam! p mu s), accessed March 21, 2017. • Google Earth Pro with historic imagery from 1990 to present. • Current (2015) EPA Approved Water Quality Assessment for Washington state (htt ._i 'www.:ecy..wg o»;;',proarams, yr Q, d/currentassessmt, h.rml), accessed March 21, 2017. ■ King County Public Health sewage plans search system hit -1/www.kin county. avlde tslhealihlenvir nmental-health) i ina/ nsite-sewaae- syste /records/as-built-drawin s.as x), accessed March 21, 2017. I—) pERTEET FINDINGS PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 1) On -site wetland delineation mapped boundaries and data forms west of Hylebos Creek are consistent with FWMC 19.145.4100) Wet/and/Dandde/ineation, the 1988 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual and the 2010 Corps Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Regional Supplement. Perteet did not inspect the subject property east of Hylebos Creek as no land use development is currently proposed for that portion of the property. Wetland 2 developed in an artificially created roadside ditch constructed through uplands and is determined to be exempt from FWMC 19.145 pursuant to FWMC 19.145.110(3). 2) One off -site ponded area with emergent vegetation was observed on the adjacent parcel (Parcel 3221049065) to the south that corresponds to a "1998 City Survey" wetland depicted on the City of Federal Way's Critical Areas Map dated May 2016 (Figures 1 through 3; www.cilyaff tderolw ..comtsite defoultlfiieslmo s,'sersiiive 2016. df). The Critical Areas Map and the ponding present during the site visit extended up to the subject property fence. This feature is not present on other publicly available data sources. A copy of this feature as recorded in the city's 1998 survey report is attached to this memo. Per FWMC 19.145.410(2)e Evaluation, "identify and characterize all wetlands and buffers within 225 feet of the subject property. For off -site areas with limited or no access, estimate conditions using best available information." Update the Delineation Report to evaluate and document the off -site ponded area with best available data and observations. Contact the land owner so see if permission can be granted to perform an onsite evaluation of soils, vegetation, and hydrology. If permission to enter the property is not granted, provide an off -site characterization of the observed field conditions from the project site boundary and provide a summary determination of the feature based upon observable components of Corps delineation methodology to evaluate the potential for wetland characteristics. Figure 1.Off-site 1998 City Survey wetland adjacent to project on neighboring parcel. s srrr s. rr , h, 1: X {ib�lta5dlf. ��+NCCnI''.C4 ,tE 1'iU[�FRm u JJPERTEET Figure 3. Off -site ponded area adjacent to the s ;t property south fenceline. PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 3) Three streams were mapped and characterized by Otak. The first, West Fork Hylebos Creek, receives a 100 foot buffer as reported. The second is a roadside ditch draining Wetland 2 to Wetland 1 flows into a natural stream channel within Wetland 1 Unit 1 that is clogged with vegetation. The natural channel within Unit 1 has not been mapped. A third stream discharges from a stormwater culvert onto the slopes above Wetland 6 (Figure 4). If the stormwater system and outfall were removed no natural stream would likely be present in 3 10 pERTEET PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 similar form at this location. Perteet observed that the roadside ditch between Wetland 2 and Wetland 1 andthe stream upslope of Wetland 6 next to the stormwater pond meet the definition in FWMC 19.05.190 Stream subpart (3) ditchesand are exempt from FWMC 19.145 pursuant to FWMC 19.145.110(3). "ietland 6 downslope. Fioure 5. Seaiic system and critical areas features near Wetlands 1 and 2. 4 J)PERTEET PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 4) Three watercourses or streams were observed that were not mapped and characterized in the Delineation Report that may meet the definition of stream in FWMC 19.05.190 SDefinitions. One small watercourse was observed to follow the natural slope contours in the south central corner of the parcel east of Wetland 14 along a shallow drainage (Figure 2). Multiple watercourses were identified draining from culverts and roadside ditches into Wetland 1 Unit 1 that flowed through Unit 2 before draining into Unit 3 (Figure 5). The culverts are documented in the Delineation Report figure 7A. The two watercourses flowing through Wetland 1 Units 1 and 2 were obscured by overgrown emergent vegetation clogging the channels and would be difficult to locate when not flowing full of water as they were during Perteet's site visit on March 13, 2017. All Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, including streams and other waters, shall be mapped and characterized pursuant to FWMC 19.145.260 through .340 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. Please identify and characterize these watercourses. 5) The Delineation Report rating forms direct viewers to Ecology's WRIA 10: Puyallip —White website for question D3.3 / R3.3 / S3.3 pertaining to watershed water quality. Commencement Bay, with its constituent streams and rivers, is listed on this web page as a waterbody within WRIA 10 that contains a TMDL and Cleanup Action Plan. Hylebos Creek is listed on the Commencement Bay web page as an input water body. http•i/www.ecv.wo.gov/programslwq/tmdl/CommenceBayTMDL.html Hylebos Creek downstream of the subject property has been an active element of the EPA and Ecology Commencement Bay cleanup efforts. All wetland ratings should be adjusted for question D3.3 / R3.3 / S3.3 to include points for the Commencement Bay TMDL. Update buffers as necessary. 6) Wetland 1 (Units 1 and 2) rating should be Category II based on points. Question DIJ, D4.1, and H1.2 should be two points each to include intermittently flowing streams and occasionally flooded areas as observed by Perteet in Unit 1 during the site visit. Question D4.2 should be 3 points to ponding greater than 6 inches as observed in several places in Unit 1 by Perteet during the site visit. Question H1.5 should include large downed woody debris within the wetland for 2 points. Question D2.3 should be one point (similar to Otak's selection for Wetland 1 Unit 3) as the two parcels immediately to the north are listed by the tax assessor to use private septic systems. Records from King County Public Health Onsite Sewage Systems are not available for Parcel: 3221049019, but records pulled for Parcel: 3221049087 show the septic to be within 250 of all three wetland units (Figure 5). Additionally, question D2.4 should be one point for the presence of many abandoned cars, trucks, and boats parked immediately adjacent to the wetland units. Abandoned vehicles are a common source of pollutants. Please update the Wetland 1 ratings and buffers accordingly. 7) Wetland 1 Unit 3 question H2.3 gives "-2" points but the hand calculation on the data form totaling 48% illustrates the question should get "0" points for <50% high intensity land use. Please update the Wetland 1 Unit 3 rating and buffers accordingly. 8) Wetland and stream buffers characterized in the current reviewed version of Delineation Report are determined to meet the appropriate FWMC 19.145.270 Stream Buffers and 19.145.420 Wetland Rating and Buffers. The proposed wetland buffers may change after updates to the wetland rating forms and buffers recommended by this review. 9) The proposed Master Cemetery Plan is avoiding impacts to wetlands pursuant to FWMC 19.145.130(1) Mitigation Sequencing, Avoidance and FWMC 19.145.430 Development within wetlands. r� JO pERTEET PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425;252.7700 10) The proposed Master Cemetery Plan is proposing intrusion into wetland buffers at Wetland 1 on the north side of the subject property and is requesting buffer reduction with enhancement pursuant to FWMC 19.145.440(6) Bufferreduction with enhancement. Perteet has determined the proposed buffer reduction at Wetland 1 currently meets 19.145.440(6). Please revise the buffers and buffer enhancement plan as necessary to reflect any new rating and buffer updates proposed by this memo for Wetland 1. 11) (Connected to item 12 below) The proposed Master Cemetery Plan is requesting buffer exemption under FWMC 19,145.110 for a previously constructed stormwater pond that is not operating correctly (not providing flow control and water treatment functions) and has become vegetated with native and volunteer species presently in a forested condition (Figure 6). The existing stormwater system presently bypasses the stormwater pond directly to an outfall and drains untreated into a stream that flows into Wetland 6 downslope of the stormwater pond. The existing stormwater system piping with the bypass is illustrated on the applicant's construction plan drawings and on a set of cemetery construction plan permit drawings dated 1972. FWMC 19.145 Critical Areas and FWMC Title 16 Surface Water Management do not provide clear guidance regarding any critical areas exceptions or exemptions for existing but apparently abandoned facilities for site redevelopment. Perteet requests the City Planner and Surface Water Engineer review the stormwater pond proposal element and provide a determination whether the previously constructed stormwater pond shall be exempted from current wetland buffers or perhaps for the proposed action to be considered as a maintenance measure to restore the stormwater function to this feature as it was originally designed. A re-resubmittal related to the City's above -mentioned determination is needed, and any necessary restoration of buffer habitats associated with the stormwater pond decision and updated design will be required for subsequent evaluation. Figure 6. Previously constructed but non-functional stormwater pond that has naturalized with native forest rnvPr. 12) (Connected to item 11 above) The proposed Cemetery Master Plan proposes to request exemption of a repurposed stormwater pond that would "become an artificial wetland over time" within the stormwater pond. Perteet requests the City Planner and Surface Water Engineer review the stormwater pond C.1 10 pERTEET PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.2547700 proposal element in item 11 above. Perteet recommends the City determine future exemptions related to this question during subsequent project review. 13) The Delineation Report and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan proposes to revegetate with a native tree and shrub community the outer portion of the Wetland 1 buffer on the subject property at a 1:1 ratio. The proposed mitigation to address permanent buffer reduction to the Wetlondlbuffer width has been determined to meet the FWMC 19.145.130 Mitigation sequencing and FWMC 19.145.140 Mitigation Plan Requirements. 14) The proposed buffer mitigation performance standards, monitoring, maintenance and contingency standards to address permanent buffer reduction to the Wetland 1 buffer width adequately meet the FWMC 19.145.140. However, the applicant must update these elements to incorporate other items presented in this review memo. 15) Signage and fencing pursuant to FWMC 19.145.180 is provided along the reduced wetland buffer edge along the Wetland 1 buffer enhancement area. No signage or fencing is proposed for other critical areas buffers associated with Wetlands 2 through 14. Perteet recommends the proposed project update the proposed project Buffer Mitigation Plan and the construction plan drawings to incorporate suitable signage and fencing pursuant to 19.145.180 for all on -site critical areas buffers and to halt mowing/clearing to allow buffer areas to return to a native vegetative state that provides adequate fish and wildlife conservation habitat. Perteet suggests using an easy installation and maintenance fence similar to an open rail fence that allows for rapid replacement of rails without disturbing the fence posts. The City Planner shall determine if critical areas signage or fencing is necessary along the west and north edges of Wetland 1 and at Wetland 14 along the property lines of the subject property to discourage buffer intrusions. 16) Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.190 Physical Barriers, please update pertinent construction plan drawings and specifications to include a "physical barrier during or after construction to prevent direct runoff and erosion from any disturbed area onto or into a critical area." Perteet recommends construction silt fencing along the Wetland buffers where construction is expected. All cemetery storm drains shall receive silt clothe socks during construction pursuant to the current stormwater manual. 7 I- PE tTEET ^ City of Federal Way Wetland Inventory Field Form Wetland Number J -7 LW( 1/4 SecVTWn/Rn Location (addrassrcross-btreets) Team Members, ,�/i9 Date Field Check: Base Map #: 6 Windshield Acces 1te Aec#ss Site Not Accessed FIELD DATA r.....-"4;.. rl.,.-c S"lnminan} Cnn Notable Wildlife Features rid Snags:#'s z6" 2:12" 2!24" Heights: o tntal W L 1 AL inlet present: Y N; width' flow: Y N / 0utfetpresent:(2N; width a �"� Aow: Y serve none Observed star ounces (YIN) stream culvert: (diarn) ``sheet floy, floodplain seeps Human Disturbances: PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 Buffer Conditions: OFFICE DATA NRCS Soil Unit: -"Q WL Rating Approximate Size: /oU X 3 sDJ 500 tos 2,500 sq.ft z1 acre,s 2 acre a 500 sf, s 1/2 acre z2 acre,s 5 acre �%� -�; 1 acte-� 25 acre COMMENTS/OBSERVATIONS fJF� t Or�jtD{ 5 V1Uf rn �)rtfI �)�ce jrGlvJ END OF MEMO