07-100304L. OF Y '
Federal Wav
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT TO THE
FEDERAL WAY HEARING EXAMINER
PROCESS IV HEARING EXAMINER REVIEW OF PROPOSED
WETLAND ELIMINATION AND WETLAND MITIGATION
MIRROR ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT
Federal Way File No. 07-100304-00-UP
PUBLIC HEARING
January 30, 2007
Federal Way City Hall City Council Chambers
33325 8t" Avenue South
Table of Contents
I.
Project Information............................................................................................................................
I
II.
Summary of the Requests..................................................................................................................2
III.
Analysis of Process IV Decisional Criteria........................................................................................4
IV.
Analysis of Hearing Examiner Decisional Criteria........................................................................ 9
V.
Findings of Fact and Conclusion.....................................................................................................10
XI.
Recommendation.............................................................................................................................11
XIII.
List of Exhibits ...................... —.—............. .......................................................................................
12
Report Prepared by:
Deb Barker, Senior Planner
January 23, 2007
>—)
Wetland Elimination and Wetland Mitigation
Mirror Estates Preliminary Plat
File No: 07-100304-00-UP
Engineer: J3 Civil, PLLC
Jerrit Jolma, P.E.
1375 NW Mall Street, Suite 3
Issaquah, WA 98027
425-313-1078
Owner: New Concept Homes
Christine Balyeat
PO Box 1229
Issaquah, WA 98027
425-427-1714
Action
Requested: The applicant is seeking approval pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC)
Article XIV, "Critical Areas" (FWCC Section 22-1356, Division 7, "Regulated
Wetlands").
Relevant Dates: Preliminary Plat Application Filed: February 9, 2005
Application Determined Complete: June 23, 2005
Notice of Application Published: June 29, 2005
SEPA Issued: October 7, 2006
Staff
Representative: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642
Staff
Recommendation: Process IV Approval with Conditions
I. PROJECT INFORMATION
A. Decision Requested
Process IV Approval — The Process IV application for wetland elimination and wetland
mitigation is subject to approval by the Hearing Examiner following a public hearing. An
analysis of the applicable Process IV decisional criteria, findings, and recommendations, is
provided under sections X, XI, and XII of this report.
B. Background Information
The applicant, New Concept Homes, and agent Jeritt Jolma have made an application for a 27-
lot preliminary plat on a 9.37 acre vacant parcel located west of 8`" Avenue SW at SW 315,'
Street, as extended. The Wetland Determination and Mitigation Plan for the Mirror Estates
property prepared by C. Gary Schulz, March 1, 2006 (Exhibit AI), indicates that five wetlands
exist on the subject site. The applicant has proposed the following impacts to wetlands
associated with site development:
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation File 07-100304-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 39484
Process IV Staff Report January 23, 2007 / Page 1
(1) Request to fill Wetlands A, CID, and Efor road and lot development;
(2) Request to temporarily intrude into the southern 50foot setback area of Wetland
B for construction of storm drainage easement; and
(3) Request to permanently intrude into the 50 foot setback area of Wetland B in
conjunction with wetland creation, wetland buffer creation and enhancement,
and a pedestrian trail over the drainage easement corridor.
Approximately 7,316 square feet (SF) of wetland will be eliminated; 11,254 SF of wetland
created, 23,475 SF of wetland buffer will be impacted; and 3 8,3 72 SF of buffer will be
enhanced. Pursuant to the Federal Way City Code (FWCC), these requests require a Hearing
Examiner review and approval under the provisions of Use Process IV.
II. SUMMARY OF THE REQUESTS
The applicant's wetland biologist working in conjunction with the City.'s wetland biologist identified
five Category III wetlands on the subject site. Pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1357(b)(3), the standard
buffer for Category III wetlands in excess of 10,000 SF is 50 feet, while the buffer for Category III
wetlands that are 2,500 to 10,000 SF is 25 feet. Category III wetlands less than 2,500 SF are not
regulated under the FWCC.
#1) Request to fill Wetlands A, C/D, and E for road construction and lot development.
Located in the northern part of the site, Wetland A (3,748 SF) is proposed to be filled in
conjunction with the extension of 8ffi Place SW and SW 315t" Place, as well as the construction
of lots 2 and 3. Wetland C/D (3,568 SF), located in the western portion of the site, is proposed
to be filled in conjunction with the installation of 11a' Place SW and the construction of lots 25
and 26. Wetland E (1,886 SF), located in the southern portion of the site, is proposed to be
filled in conjunction with the extension of 8"' Place SW and the construction of lot 15. In order
to mitigate the filling of regulated wetlands, 11,254 square feet of created wetland is proposed
at Wetland B (38,501 SF). This proposed wetland elimination and mitigation requires review
under the provisions of FWCC Section 22-1358(d). A discussion of each request follows.
Wetland A — The Wetland Determination and Mitigation Plan notes that Wetland A is a small
and isolated depression, approximately 3,748 square feet in size, with vegetative cover
dominated by willow shrubs and sapling, limited shrubs, and sparse groundcover. The wetland
is classified as palustrine, scrub/shrub, and seasonally saturated, and meets the Category III
rating as it is less than one acre in size and contains only one wetland class. The 25-foot buffer
area on the north side of Wetland A is impacted by residential development. Hydrology.that
supports the wetland is influenced by surface water runoff and shallow groundwater; the
surface water hydrology will be affected by roadway development. Potential Wetland A
functions were identified as flood flow alteration, nutrient and toxicant removal, and habitat for
aquatic invertebrates. Three of 14 specific functions are likely to occur.
Wetland CID is described in the Wetland Determination and Mitigation Plan as a complex of
two wetlands separated by a six to ten foot upland berm -like area with no evidence of a hydric
connection between the two. However, due to their close proximity, the wetland areas are
combined into a regulated wetland area, 3,568 square feet in size, meeting the definition of a
Category III wetland. The wetland complex is characterized as shallow and isolated depressions
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation File 07-100304-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 39484
Process IV Staff Report January 23, 2007 / Page 2
with seasonal saturation. The wetland has dominant cover of shrub vegetation with a small area
dominated by a clump of trees. The wetland is classified as palustrine, scrub/shrub, and
seasonally saturated, and meets Category III rating as it is less than one acre in size and contains
only one wetland class. The 25-foot buffer area on the west side of Wetland C/D is impacted by
residential development. Hydrology that supports the linear, shallow wetland is influenced by
surface water runoff and possible shallow groundwater. Potential Wetland C/D functions were
identified as habitat for aquatic invertebrates and habitat for amphibians. Two of 14 specific
functions are likely to occur.
Wetland E is a small, 1,886 square foot isolated depression, with seasonal hydrology, and
contains vegetative cover dominated by shrubs and sparse groundcover. As the wetland is less
than 2,500 square feet in size, it is not regulated as a wetland under the FWCC.
Wetland B is a large wetland, extending north to south in the center of the subject site. It is a
distinct lineal depression supported mostly by surface water runoff. The wetland has a total area
of 38,501 square feet, and has a fairly diverse cover of native plant species, dominated by red
alder trees. The wetland is classified as palustrine, forested, seasonally flooded,' and meets the
FWCC definition of a Category III wetland, regulated with 50-foot buffers. The Wetland
Determination and Mitigation Plan notes that Wetland B hydrology is likely a combination of
both surface water runoff and shallow groundwater table, and finds that Wetland B functions as
a drainage swale that crosses the site from north to south. A stormwater detention pond or
facility in the Mirror Woods plat to the north discharges water onto the subject site; four
concrete culverts discharge directly into Wetland B. As surface water fills Wetland B, it drains
to the south and enters the City's storm drainage system.
In order to mitigate the filling of Wetlands A and C/D, wetland creation is proposed along the
western side of Wetland B. As depicted on sheets W2.1 and W3.2, prepared by Altman Oliver
Associates, LLC (Exhibit B), wetland creation consists of the re -grading of the wetland buffer
consistent with Wetland B; retention of trees where possible; locating woody debris, snags, and
other habitat features; and re -vegetation with supportive trees and shrubs. The new Wetland B
buffer west of the wetland creation area would be planted with native trees, shrubs, and
groundcovers. Significant trees will be avoided to the extent possible to foster wetland continuity.
No disruption of hydrology would occur with the wetland creation. The Wetland Determination
and Mitigation Plan proposes monitoring the improvements for a period of five years. The
conceptual wetland mitigation would result in a net gain of wetland function and value.
#2) Request to temporarily intrude into the southern 50-foot setback area of Wetland B for
construction of storm drainage easement.
As a Category III wetland, Wetland B contains a 50-foot buffer. Currently, the northern and
southern buffers of Wetland B are impacted by residential development. The southern buffer of
Wetland B is proposed to be temporarily impacted by the construction of a 12-inch storm
drainage pipe within a 15-foot easement that would convey storm drainage from the western
side of the subdivision site to the storm pond established on the east portion of the site. The 15-
1 The report states that the wetland has only one class, as based on USFWS classification. "Classes" are distinguished on the basis
Of the life form of plants that constitute the uppermost layer of vegetation and that possess an area coverage of 30 percent or
greater excluding pioneer species. In this site, red alder trees comprise the uppermost layer within the wetland and exceed 30
percent area cover; therefore, the wetland meets the designation of forested wetland class.
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation File 07-100304-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 39484
Process IV Staff Report January 23, 2007 / Page 3
foot wide disturbance area would extend approximately 110 feet through the buffer in an area
currently dominated by Himalayan blackberry shrubs. Following construction of the storm
pipe, the disturbed area would be covered with an eight -foot wide pedestrian trail consisting of
pervious material, and wetland buffer vegetation planted along the trail edges.
#3) Request to permanently intrude into the 50-foot setback area of Wetland B in conjunction
with wetland creation, wetland buffer creation and enhancement, and a pedestrian trail
over the drainage easement corridor.
The area proposed for wetland creation is currently the buffer of Wetland B, and consists of
dead and dying red alder trees with dense salmonberry and blackberry shrub cover according to
the wetland report. The applicant proposes to create a wetland buffer west of and adjacent to
the 11,254 square foot Wetland B creation area, and to enhance the entire Wetland B buffer,
including removal of invasive plant species and installation of native vegetation. The applicant
further proposes to permanently intrude into southern portion of the Wetland B buffer with an
eight -foot wide soft surface pedestrian trail located over the storm drainage easement and also
east of lot #17.
The net Wetland B buffer will be increased by 38,372 square feet, and includes replacement of
23,475 square feet of wetland buffer eliminated from Wetlands A and C/D. Buffer creation will
include retention of healthy trees and enhancement through the planting of native trees and
shrubs, and the installation of woody debris, as generally depicted on page W 1.1 of the wetland
mitigation plan.
The proposed temporary and permanent intrusion into the Wetland B setback area is reviewed
under the provisions of FWCC Section 22-1359(d), "Modification," and is subject to six
decisional criteria.
III. PROCESS IV DECISIONAL CRITERIA
Separate decisional criteria are required to consider displacement of regulated wetland area and
intrusions or displacement of regulated wetland setback areas. Impacts to regulated wetland areas are
considered under FWCC Section 22-1358, and intrusions to setback areas from regulated wetlands
are considered under FWCC Section 22-1359. Each required decisional criteria is evaluated below.
A) Analysis of decisional criteria for FWCC Section 22-1358, "Structures, Improvements and
Land Surface Modifications within Regulated Wetlands."
The following is an analysis of required decisional criteria outlined in FWCC Section 22-1358.
This criterion applies to the portions of the project that propose to displace wetland areas as
discussed above. The request to locate an improvement or engage in a land surface
modification in a regulated wetland can only be approved if the following criteria are met.
The nine criteria to be met in order to allow the filling of Wetlands A and C/D are listed below,
with each criterion being followed by staff discussion as to how the criterion has been or will
be met. The City's wetland consultant, OTAK, Inc., has reviewed the wetland reports, maps,
and delineations submitted prior to January 22, 2007. OTAK's technical comments are
identified in a January 19, 2007, Technical Memorandum (Exhibit Q, and which serves as the
basis for recommendations to the Hearing Examiner.
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation File 07-100304-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 39484
Process IV Staff Report January 23, 2007 / Page 4
Criterion No. 1— It will not adversely affect water quality.
Staff Response: The filling of Wetlands A and C/D eliminates 7,316 square feet of wetland.
According to the report, these two wetlands have limited water quality value. The creation of
11,254 square feet of wetland adjacent to the large Wetland B serves to expand and thereby
increase the water quality capabilities of the overall site.
Criterion No. 2 — It will not destroy nor damage a significant habitat area.
Staff Response: The proposed project will increase the acreage of habitat of Wetland B and
augment the habitat capacity of Wetland B through the addition of native vegetation and habitat
features such as stumps, snags, downed logs, and bat nests, in conjunction with the removal of
non-native and invasive plant species. Enhancement to habitat provided by creation of a new
wetland area and through the re -vegetation of disturbed areas will significantly improve the
overall ecological and habitat quality of the site. The wetland report noted that Wetlands A and
C/D did not contain significant habitat areas. The elimination of Wetlands A and C/D is offset
by the benefits of the wetland creation area.
In addition, the environmental determination required the applicant to enhance habitat capacity
at the subject site.
Criterion No. 3 — It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities.
Staff Response: The expansion of Wetland B will improve the quality of the wetland area that
presently functions as stormwater drainage. The enhanced wetland and associated buffer will
increase retention of stormwater that will have important biological benefits for the wetland and
downstream systems. While the elimination of Wetlands A and C/D removes approximately
8,473 cubic feet of stormwater storage/retention volume from the subject site, the applicant
proposes that compensatory storage volume be established in the Wetland B creation area.
Further, the applicant will direct predetermined roof runoff from several lots to discharge into
Wetland B in order to replace historic flow volumes. Based on these measures, the efficiency of
drainage and stormwater retention through the project site will be maintained.
Criterion No. 4 — It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards.
Staff Response: According to the wetland plan (Exhibit B), wetland areas are relatively flat. No
unstable earth conditions are anticipated with the proposed work. The potential for erosion
hazards will be mitigated by the implementation of a Temporary Erosion Control Plan (TESC),
which will be submitted and reviewed by the City in conjunction with engineering approval
prior to the start of any clearing or grading of the site.
Criterion No. 5 — It will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the area of
the subject property nor to the City as a whole, including the loss of significant open space
or scenic vista.
Staff Response: No property other than that which is owned by the applicant is proposed to be
modified by the proposal. According to the wetland report, Wetlands A and C/D are isolated,
and no scenic vista opportunities are provided. The elimination of these wetlands will not be
materially detrimental to any other property. Flooding problems that occur to properties
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation File 07-100304-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 39484
Process IV Staff Report January 23, 2007 / Page 5
`l
adjacent to Wetland A will be alleviated by storm drainage connections that control flows to
on -site systems. Upgrades to those disturbed areas of Wetland B, as well as the replacement of
the removed wetland in excess of one to one ratio, will benefit the subject property and the City
as well by improving the ecological and habitat quality of the wetland.
Criterion No. 6 — It will result in no net loss of wetland area, function, or value.
Staff Response: The applicant will create 11,254 square feet of wetland within Wetland B,
resulting in a replacement factor of 1.5 to 1 as required pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1358(3),
for Category III scrub/shrub wetland. As noted above, a total of 7,316 square feet of wetlands are
proposed to be filled, while 11,254 square feet of wetlands will be created, resulting in no net loss
of wetland area. According to the wetland report, Wetlands A and C/D have limited value for
most wetland functions due their size and isolated condition. The expansion of Wetland B serves
to increase the function and value of the existing wetland. Further, compensatory retention
volume will be added in order to maintain the hydrology of the site. No net loss of wetland area,
function, or value is anticipated if mitigation measures are successfully incorporated.
Criterion No. 7 — The project is in the best interest of the public health, safety, or welfare.
Staff Response: Reviewed cumulatively, the various components of the proposal are found to
be in the best interest of the public health, safety, or welfare. Wetland creation proposed to
mitigate the eliminated wetlands establishes a higher value wetland. The wetland enhancement
of Wetland B is in the best interest of public health, safety, or welfare because it increases the
value of the functions performed by wetland.
Criterion No. 8 -- The applicant has demonstrated sufficient scientific expertise and
supervisory capability to carry out the project.
Staff Response: The Wetland Delineation and Mitigation Plan prepared by C. Gary Schulz,
Wetland/Forest Ecologist, lists projects that demonstrate extensive experience with successful
wetland and wetland buffer projects (Exhibit A1).
Criterion No. 9 — The applicant is committed to monitoring the project and to make
corrections if the project fails to meet projected goals.
Staff Response: A monitoring program and contingency plan, as required under FWCC Section
22-1358, is proposed in the wetland report. The five-year monitoring would commence
following successful installation of the proposed mitigation. A qualified firm retained by the
applicant would conduct monitoring of the wetland and wetland buffer areas based on guidelines
and goals identified in the wetland report. Monitoring would be reviewed by the City's wetland
consultant at the expense of the applicant. The report also includes a contingency plan, which
shall be implemented if any portion of the project fails to meet projected goals. The City's
wetland consultant, OTAK, has reviewed the monitoring and contingency plans and has
provided comments regarding preparation of those documents in Exhibit C.
B) Analysis of Minimum Acreage Replacement Ratio
FWCC Section 22-1358(e)(3) requires a minimum acreage replacement or enhancement ratio of
1.5 to 1 for scrub/shrub wetlands. This replacement ratio pertains to the proposal. In order to
compensate for the loss of 7,316 square feet of Wetlands A and C/D acreage, wetland
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation File 07-100304-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 39484
Process 1V Staff Report January 23, 2007 / Page 6
1 mitigation in the amount of 11,254 square feet in area of replacement has been incorporated
into the project exceeding the 1.5 to 1 ratio for scrub/shrub wetlands (7,316 x 1.5 = 10,974).
Mitigation consists of the creation of 11,254 square feet of wetland created from the Wetland B
buffer through removal of invasive plant species; excavation of a level topographic bench and
shallow ponds in the creation area; incorporation of snags, downed logs, stumps, and bat nests
for wildlife habitat; and planting of a variety of evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs and
herbaceous species. Native plant species that adapt to specific water regimes will be planted. A
temporary irrigation system is to be installed for the mitigation area. The irrigation system
should be installed in all wetland and wetland buffer areas for a period of not less than two
years.
C) Analysis of decisional criteria for FWCC Section 22-1359, "Structures, Improvements and
Land Surface Modifications within the Setback Areas from Regulated Wetlands."
The following is an analysis of required decisional criteria outlined in FWCC Section 22-
1359(c) and (d). These criteria apply to the portions of the project that: (1) intrude into the 50-
foot setback area from regulated Wetland B for wetland creation; (2) intrude into the 50-foot
setback area for wetland setback creation and restoration; (3) intrude into the wetland setback
areas of Wetlands B for installation of a storm drainage pipe; and (4) installation of a pedestrian
trail, as discussed above. The Hearing Examiner can only approve a request to located an
improvements or engage in a land surface modification in the setback area of the regulated
wetland if the following criteria are met.
The six criteria to be met in order to allow structures, improvements, and land surface
modifications within the setback of regulated wetlands are listed below, with each criterion
being followed by staff discussion as to how the criterion has been or will be met. The City's
wetland consultant, OTAK, has reviewed all submitted materials. Their comments are
incorporated in Exhibit C.
Criterion No. 1— It will not adversely water quality.
Staff Response: During construction, compliance with a City -approved TESC plan will
adequately address any temporary erosion impacts. Initial clearing for the storm drainage
construction in the buffer of Wetland B and the pedestrian trail, as well as access to the wetland
buffer creation and enhancement areas, will be limited to narrow corridors, avoiding significant
trees wherever possible. After construction, any disturbed areas (except those established as
pedestrian trail) will be re -vegetated and/or mitigated in compliance with the recommendations
in the Wetland Mitigation plan sheet W3 (Exhibit B-3). The undisturbed buffer portion of
Wetland B, coupled with the re -vegetation of the disturbed portions of Wetland B setback area,
will serve to protect Wetland B from any adverse water quality impacts from plat construction.
Criterion No. 2 — It will not destroy nor damage a significant habitat area.
StaffResponse.- The proposed encroachments into the wetland buffer will not destroy nor
damage significant habitat areas. The proposed expansion of Wetland B associated with the
buffer encroachments is intended to increase the diversity of Wetland B, which has overall high
_ value for many wetland functions. As discussed, water quality, buffering, and habitat values of
the wetland will be improved. The new wetland buffer, coupled with the buffer enhancement,
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation File 07-100304-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 39484
Process IV Staff Report January 23, 2007 / Page 7
expands the Wetland B buffer, and will subsequently increase significant habitat area for the
large wetland. Those portions of wetland setback area disturbed with the storm drainage pipe
installation and not established as a pedestrian trail will be re -vegetated with appropriate trees
and shrubs:
Development of the pedestrian trail and residential lots brings human activity into the proximity
of wetland habitat areas with few safeguards. However, pedestrian related activity on those areas
adjacent to the wetland setback area must be controlled. To minimize the potential or inadvertent
wetland setback area intrusions by human activity and subsequently protect the habitat areas,
and as discussed in the OTAK Technical Memorandum, open rail fencing around the wetland
buffer subject to residential and pedestrian activity and education signage must be provided.
Criterion No. 3 — It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities.
Staff Response: The extension of the storm drainage pipe within the wetland buffer from the west
to the east serves to transfer storm drainage for treatment to a system designed in conformance
with the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), and to subsequently improve
the quality of stormwater that drains from the wetland. The buffer creation and enhancement will
facilitate retention of stormwater and will have an important biological benefit for the wetland.
Construction impacts to the wetland setback area are short-term temporary construction related
impacts, and the efficiency of drainage through the project site will not be affected. The trail
created with pervious materials is located in the outer edge of the wetland setback area and will
not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities.
Criterion No. 4 — It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards.
StaffResponse: Proposed encroachments into the wetland setback areas will not create
unstable earth conditions or erosion hazards. Areas proposed for wetland buffer creation and
enhancement are relatively flat. As part of engineering approval, a TESC plan will be submitted
and approved by the City prior to the start of any clearing or grading of the site. Furthermore,
any disturbed area will be re -vegetated.
Criterion No. 5 — It will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the area of
the subject property nor to the City as a whole, including the loss of significant open space
or scenic vista.
Staff Response: The proposed intrusions into the wetland setback areas will not be materially
detrimental to any other property in the area of the subject property, nor to the City as a whole.
No scenic areas are visible from the Wetland B setback area due to existing residential
development, and the wetland setback area is unsuitable for open space opportunities because of
adjacent development. However, installation of a pedestrian trail within the wetland setback area
will establish usable open space, meeting standards of the subdivision chapter of the FWCC,
while the enhancement of the entire Wetland B setback area increases its functions and values.
Criterion No. 6 — It is necessary for reasonable development of the subject property
Staff Response: Wetland B extends north/south through the subject site, cutting the site in half,
the only non -wetland area is along the south property line. The applicant proposes to establish
only one storm drainage system for the 27-lot subdivision. As a result, an east/west storm
drainage connection is proposed outside of the wetland within the wetland buffer. Conversely,
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation File 07-100304-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 39484
Process IV Staff Report January 23, 2007 / Page 8
J
the pedestrian trail also follows this storm drainage connection, reducing the amount of
disturbances within the wetland buffer area while also maintaining an east/west pedestrian
connection to future residents. Temporary construction work within the setback area of Wetland
B is necessary to provide access into an area proposed for wetland creation, wetland setback area
creation, and wetland setback area enhancement. The proposed work and proposed mitigation
within the setback area is necessary for the reasonable development of the subject property
because the storm line connection and pedestrian corridor are required under the FWCC.
IV. HEARING EXAMINER DECISIONAL CRITERIA
In addition to the above decisional criteria, pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1312(c)(1)-(3), the Hearing
Examiner may approve the requested intrusions only if the following Process IV decisional criteria
are met. Decisional criteria and staff comments are provided below.
(1) It is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Staff Comment: The comprehensive plan is used, among other documents, as a basis for
implementing regulations such as zoning and the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). The
larger proposal, of which these intrusions are a component, has undergone SEPA review and
must be found to be in compliance with pertinent subdivision zoning regulations in order to be
approved by the City Council. The 9.37acre site is designated single family -high density under
the comprehensive plan. These designations are intended to provide areas to be used for
residential and other compatible uses. The requested encroachments into critical areas will
enable development of the subject site consistent with the comprehensive plan.
(2) It is consistent with all applicable provisions of this chapter and all other applicable laws.
Staff Comment: The development of the preliminary plat will be consistent with all applicable
provisions of FWCC Chapter 22, "Zoning," and Chapter 20, "Subdivisions," RCW 58.17.030,
and all other applicable codes and development standards through implementation of SEPA and
conditions of preliminary plat approval, and if the Process IV wetland elimination mitigation
and wetland setback intrusion requests are conditionally approved by the Hearing Examiner
pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1356, Division 7, "Regulated Wetlands." The Process IV
requests meet all the decisional criteria of FWCC Section 22-445(c)(1)-(5).
(3) It is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare.
Staff Comment: Proposed intrusions are in the best interest of the public health, safety, and
welfare. The wetland elimination is mitigated by the compensatory mitigation provided by the
wetland creation, and there is no net loss of wetland or wetland buffer associated with project
development. Wetland buffer enhancement increases the value of functions performed by both
the wetland and its buffer. The pedestrian trail provides an opportunity for public health, while
promoting. unique conservation and scenic resources.
(4) The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to serve the anticipated
demand from the proposal.
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation
Process IV Staff Report
File 07-100304-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 39484
January 23, 2007 / Page 9
Staff Comment: The streets and utilities in the area have been evaluated in accordance with all
applicable codes, policies, and regulations, and determined to be adequate to serve the
anticipated demand from the proposal, provided all recommended conditions of preliminary
plat approval are met. The utility extension is a component of the overall infrastructure as
required for the plat.
(5) The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and configuration for
access.
Staff Comment: The access to the subject property is provided at optimal locations and
configurations, as determined through the City's SEPA and preliminary plat review of the
proposed subdivision. The proposed pedestrian trail is at the optimal location connecting both
ends of the plat within a utility corridor.
V. FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on an analysis of the proposed actions, the environmental record, and related decisional
criteria, the Department of Community Development Services finds the following.
There are four regulated Category III wetlands and one non -regulated Category III wetland at
the subject site. Wetlands A and C/D have 25-foot buffers, while Wetland B has a 50-foot
buffer as defined under the FWCC.
2. Development of required public roadway improvements, construction of a storm drainage
utility line, construction of building lots, and installation of a pedestrian trail, as proposed,
would result in permanent intrusions into Wetlands A, C/D, and E, and the Wetland B setback
areas. In accordance with code requirements, a March 1, 2006, "Wetland Determination and
Mitigation Report"; project addendums dated August 21, 2006, prepared by C. Gary Schulz•,
and March 16,2 006, plans titled Wetland Mitigation Plan (Sheet W 1.1 revised January 22,
2007), as prepared by Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC, were submitted for the proposed
development.
3. In order to construct required public roadway improvements and building lots 2, 3, 15, 25, and
26, Wetlands A, C/D, and E (totaling 7,316 square feet) would be filled, and 11,254 square feet
of wetland would be created adjacent to Wetland B. In order to connect the east and west side of
the subject site, a 12-inch storm drainage pipe within.a 15-foot wide easement would intrude
into the southern buffer of Wetland B. An eight -foot wide pedestrian trail would subsequently be
installed over this easement, and within the wetland buffer adjacent to Lot #17. Permanent
intrusions into the Wetland B buffer also include the wetland buffer creation and restoration, and
the enhancement of the entire buffer. A total of 23,475 square feet of buffer will be impacted,
and 38,372 square feet of buffer enhanced. Open rail fencing along the wetland buffer adjacent
to residential lots 7, 8, and 17 through 22, and the pedestrian trail, will discourage human
intrusion into the wetland buffer.
4. Approximately 11,254 square feet of new wetland will be established along the western edge of
Wetland B. This replacement meets the required ratio amount of wetland replacement, and
there is no net loss of wetland. New wetland buffer will be established along the new Wetland
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation File 07-100304-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 39484
Process IV Staff Report January 23, 2007 / Page 10
B area, and the entire buffer will be enhanced with removal of invasive species and planting of
native vegetation. There is no net loss of wetland buffer.
5. A Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDSN) was issued on October, 7 2006. One
comment letter was received and responded to during the comment period. There were no
appeals received on the City's determination and the Final Staff Evaluation for Environmental
Checklist, Federal Way Application No. 05-100591-00-SE, is hereby incorporated by reference
as though set forth in full.
6. Improvements proposed to intrude into regulated wetlands require Process IV approval
pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1358, and also require review in a public hearing conducted by
the Federal Way Hearing" Examiner. As required by the FWCC, the Process IV wetland
intrusion analysis prepared by City staff incorporates extensive discussion and analysis of
decisional criteria and mitigation as proposed in the March 1, 2006, Wetland Delineation and
Mitigation Report prepared by C. Gary Schulz; April 12, 2006, response letter; August 21,
2006, addendum to the report; and the March 16, 2006, Wetland Mitigation Plan prepared by
Altmann Oliver Associates (sheet W1.1, revised on January 22, 2007).
7. Improvements proposed to intrude into the 50-foot buffer of the regulated wetland require
Process IV approval pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1359, and also require review in a public
hearing conducted by the Federal Way Hearing Examiner. As required by the FWCC, a Process
IV wetland buffer intrusion analysis prepared by City staff incorporates extensive discussion
and analysis of decisional criteria and mitigation proposed in the March 1, 2006, Wetland
Delineation and Mitigation Report prepared by C. Gary Schulz and the January 22, 2007,
Wetland Mitigation Plan prepared by Altmann Oliver, Associates, and amendments, letters, and
e-mails. The proposal meets the six decisional criteria of FWCC Section 22-1359(c) for
structures, improvements, and land surface modifications within regulated wetlands setback
areas, if the recommended conditions are met.
8. The January 19, 2007, OTAK Technical Memorandum provides the basis for recommended
conditions of approval for intrusion into regulated wetland and wetland buffer intrusions
associated with the Process IV request. The proposal meets the nine decisional criteria of
FWCC Section 22-1358(d) for structures, improvements, and land surface modifications within
regulated wetlands, if identified in the January 19, 2007, OTAK Technical Memorandum are
met. Further, the project also meets the six decisional criteria of FWCC Section 22-1359(d) for
modifications within wetland buffers if recommended conditions identified in the January 19,
2007, OTAK Technical Memorandum are met.
9. The proposal is found to meet the Process IV decisional criteria of the FWCC Section 22-445(c).
VI. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above analysis, the Department of Community Development Services recommends
approval of the requested work subject to the condition listed below:
1. Prior to issuance of construction permits related to any work associated with this
application, the applicant shall incorporate all recommendations from the January 19,
2007, OTAK Technical Memorandum into applicable construction related documents
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation File 07-100304-00-UP / Doe. I.D. 39484
Process IV Staff Report January 23, 2007 / Page 11
for review and approval by City staff, and include verification by the City's wetland
consultant, which is fully funded by the applicant.
VII. EXHIBITS
Al Wetland Determination and Mitigation Report, Mirror Estates Property prepared by C. Gary
Schulz, Wetland/Forest Ecologist, revised March 1, 2006
A2 Schulz Addendum Letter, August 21, 2006
A3 Schulz Response to Peer Review, April 12, 2006
B-1 Sheet W1.1: Overview Plan Wetland Mitigation Plan Mirror Estates, prepared by Altmann
Oliver Associates, LLC, March 13, 2006, and revised January 22, 2007
B-2 Sheet W2.1: Grading Plan and Grading Details, Wetland Mitigation Plan Mirror Estates,
prepared by Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC, March 13, 2006
B-3 Sheet W3.1: Planting Plan, Planting Details, and Plant Schedule, Wetland Mitigation Plan
Mirror Estates, prepared by Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC, March 13, 2006
B-4 Sheet W4.1: Specifications and Monitoring Plan, Wetland Mitigation Plan Mirror Estates,
prepared by Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC, March 13, 2006
C. Technical Memorandum, prepared by OTAK, Inc., January 19, 2007
TRANSMITTED TO THE PARTIES LISTED HEREAFTER
Federal Way Hearing Examiner
Applicant — New Concept Homes
Project Engineer — Jerrit Johna, J3 Civil Engineers, PLLC
Federal Way Staff— Deb Barker, Sean Wells
City's Critical Areas Consultant — Suzanne Bagshaw, OTAK, Inc.
Mirror Estates Wetland Elimination and Mitigation
Process IV Staff Report
File 07-100304-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 39484
January 23, 2007 / Page 12
CITY OFF
Federal Way
The following full size exhibits are provided to the
Federal Way Hearing Examiner
for
PROCESS IV HEARING EXAMINER REVIEW OF PROPOSED
WETLAND ELIMINATION AND WETLAND MITIGATION
MIRROR ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT
Federal Way File No. 07-100304-00-UP
B-1 Sheet W1.1: Overview Plan Wetland Mitigation Plan Mirror Estates, prepared by Altmann
Oliver Associates, LLC., dated March 13, 2006, and revised January 22, 2007
B-2 Sheet W2.1: Grading Plan and Grading Details, Wetland Mitigation Plan Mirror Estates,
prepared by Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC, dated March 13, 2006
B-3 Sheet W3.1: Planting Plan, Planting Details and Plant Schedule, Wetland Mitigation Plan
Mirror Estates, prepared by Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC, dated March 13, 2006
B-4 Sheet W4.1: Specifications and Monitoring Plan, Wetland Mitigation Plan Mirror Estates,
prepared by Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC, dated March 13, 2006
Doc. I.D. 39509
I
-1 . . .......
WETLAND DETERMINATION
MITIGATION PLAN
MIRROR ESTATES PROPERTY
Preliminary Plat
City of Federal Way, Washington
�l
Prepared for:
New Concept Homes, Inc.
P.O. Box 1229
Issaquah, Washington 98027
425-766-5547
Prepared by:
C. Gary Schulz
Wetland / Forest Ecologist
7700 S. Lakeridge Drive
Seattle, Washington 98178
206-772-6514
EXHIBIT
PAGE-L---OF
March 1, 2006
RESUBMITTED
APR 14 2006
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
BUILDING DEPT.
J
Pie
Introduction................................................................................................. 2
Site Description
Project Description
i Purpose
Methodology
WetlandDetermination.................................................................................. 6
-� Soils
Hydrology
Wetland Description
Wetland Impact Assessment......................................................................... 10
~ Potential Impacts
Functions & Values
WetlandMitigation.......................................................................................13
On -site Wetland Mitigation
References..................................................................................................19
AppendixA.................................................................................................20
IWetland Functions Forms
AppendixB................................................................................................. 21
Wetland Data Plot Forms
JAppendix C.............
JCity of Federal Way - Wetland Modification Criteria EXHIB,TAt
List of Figures/Drawings PAGE-Z.OF
VicinityMap (Figure 1).......................................................................................
JOverview Plan (Wetland Mitigation Plan)......................................................... Attached
J1
l
i�wll'` 0.
A wetland investigation was conducted for the Mirror Estates Property Preliminary Plat.
Numerous site visits occurred from September, 2004 through January, 2005. Four isolated
wetlands have been delineated on the subject property. In accordance with Federal Way's
Environmentally Sensitive Areas Code (FWCC Section 22.1357), three of the identified wetlands
are rated as Category III. The minimum buffer setback distances for Category III wetlands are 25
or 50 feet depending on total size. One of the on -site wetlands is less than 2,500 square feet in size
and does not meet the definition of "Regulated wetlands" as found in FWCC Section 22-1
Definitions.
A peer review of wetland information has been conducted by the City's wetland consultant (July 7,
2005 Memorandum, Sheldon & Associates, Inc.). Several meetings have been conducted with
City staff to coordinate revisions. As a result, this report replaces and updates the 1/22/05 Wetland
Determination & Conceptual Mitigation Plan, Mirror Estates Property (Schulz). Information and
responses directly related to the wetland peer review comments and requested revisions are noted
throughout the report
Site Description
} The Mirror Estates Property is 9.37 acres in size and is located directly south of the Mirrorwood
residential development (Figure 1). The site is situated between S.W. 314th Place and S.W. 316th
Place just east of Sth Avenue S.W. in the City of Federal Way, Washington (Section 7, Township
21N., Range 4E. WM). The subject property is undeveloped land with tree cover throughout and
{ is zoned for single-family residential use. Single-family, residential development borders the site
on all sides.
The subject property has mostly flat topography with some rise in topographic relief on the east
side. Overall, the site slopes from east to west with an elevation change of about 26 feet. There is
a distinct, wetland basin area that exists in the center of the site at a north -south orientation.
The upland portion of the property is primarily forest land dominated by deciduous native tree
species. Prior to settlement and logging activities, the area was likely dominated by a coniferous
forest habitat and remnant conifers are present as scattered individuals. The upper eastern portion
of the site has some mature Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) trees. Tree cover includes
second- and third -growth Douglas fir and western red cedar(Thujaplicata). The central to western
portions of the property include mostly bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), bitter cherry (Prunus
emarginata), black cottonwood, (Populus balsamifera), and red alder (Alnus rubra).
EXH1,Q1T A
PAGE
MIRROR ESTATES PROPERTY
ea
A
�P
SW 312TH ST � S M27H ST
SW
SITE
WA
nNk SW y o P
a
Sw 3 TH x S 320TH S
VICINITY MAP
(NOT TO SCALE)
Figure 1 (Peterson Consulting)
EXHIBIT
PAGE��OF ;
Salmonberry (Rubes spectabilis) and Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis) are dominant shrubs
throughout most of the site. Western hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), vine maple (Ater circinatum),
red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) are shrub
l species present in different areas of the site. Dominant groundcover species observed include
sword fern (Polystichum munitum), Pacific blackberry (Rubus ursinus), and salal (Gautheria
j shallon ).
I
Project Description
The Mirror Estates Property is a proposed residential subdivision for single-family, residential
housing that includes developing 27 lots and retaining an extensive open space corridor with a trail
connection. Attached is a map, included in the plat application submittal, that depicts site features
and site plan design (Overview Plan - Wetland Mitigation Plan, Sheet W 1.1 Altmann Oliver
Associates, 3/16/06). Open space Tract A is greater than 2 acres of land and nearly 25 percent of
the total site area. The proposed roadway layout is designed to allow public access to the entire
development and provide through -street traffic circulation. Surface water runoff will be collected
in a stormwater detention tract (Tract B) proposed for the south central area.
J
J
J
In order to provide a high quality, single-family project, include significant open space forest
habitat, and achieve the proposed housing density, a small wetlands would be filled. The
proposed on -site mitigation combined with on -site best management practices should provide an
increase in various wetland functions. The mitigation planning strategy includes wetland creation
and enhancements as allowed by the City's Sensitive Areas code (FWCC Chapter 22.1358).
Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide the applicant a wetland delineation and wetland mitigation
plan that can be approved by the City. The preliminary residential site desitn
gn proposes wetland
impacts that can be mitigated on the site. A wetland impact and functions assessment is provided
with required mitigation measures to meet Federal Way's code standards.
0
EXHIBIT�
PAGE-OF:�W_
"-1
l
,l Methodology
The methodology used for wetland determination was based on the presence of dominant
hydrophytic vegetation (i.e. plant species adapted to, or tolerant of, growing in saturated soil
conditions), hydric soils, and observed wetland hydrology as described in the Washington State
Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Dept. of Ecology Pub. #96-94, 1997). This
manual was developed to address regional conditions and is consistent with the 1987 Corps of
Engineers Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The three technical criteria for vegetation,
soils, and hydrology are mandatory under normal conditions and must all be met for an area to be
identified as wetland.
Per the State Manual (Ecology, 1997), the Routine On -site Determination Method was used in this
investigation. The entire project site was investigated and cursory soil pits were dug in addition to
the installed wetland data plots. A total of 14 wetland data plots, approximately 0.01 acres in size,
were installed on the project site as a relative sampling of the property's existing conditions. The
wetland investigation identified four, separate wetlands on the subject property. Three of these
areas are closed depressions exhibiting seasonal ponding or soil saturation. The largest wetland
extends across the property in a natural lowland area.
Wetland boundaries and wetland data plots were marked with pink plastic flagging. Peterson
Consulting Engineers conducted the professional survey of wetlands, trees, topographic relief and
1 other features on the Mirror Estates site (Overview Plan - Wetland Miti gation Plan, Sheet W 1.1
Altmann Oliver Associates, 3J16/06). A copy of Sheet W1.1 is attached to this report. Please refer
j to the complete set of de€ai Ied wetland mitigation drawings (Sheets W 1.1 to W4.1) included in the
_ 1 application submittal. The site plan design and engineering is provided by J3 Civil Professional
Engineering Services.
The City's wetland inventory includes the largest wetland (Wetland B) on the site. This wetland is
referred to by the City as #07-21-04-25 . The wetland inventory includes data collected in the field
that includes plant composition, drainage features, soil type and approximate wetland size. Based
on the data collected and field observations, the City has rated the on -site wetland (Wetland B) as
Category III. The Category III rating has been re -confirmed by the City's wetland consultant (* )
and is discussed under the Wetland Description sub -section on page 8-
Because direct wetland impacts are proposed, a wetlands functional assessment method
(Washington State Dept- of Transportation - Wetland Functions Characterization Tool For Linear
Projects (WSDOT - hull et. al. June, 2000) was used and results provided in Appendix A. This
wetland functions assessment method is listed by the State as one of many possible sources of
science (Citations of Recommended Sources of Best Available Science for Designating and
Protecting Critical Areas, CTED March 2002). The Citations list can be found at
�j http://www.ocd.wa.govlinfollgdlgrowthlbasIBAS_Citations_Final.pdf.
J
J
EXHIBITAI -,
PAGE *_0060i-
5
.N
� .!.'.
_ I
This wetland investigation includes field -delineating four wetland areas on the project property.
Site investigations were conducted during the dry season and included visits during the winter
j months. The wetland boundaries are shown on Sheet W 1.1 of the plan submittal package
(Overview Plan - Wetland Mitigation Plan, Attached). Wetland boundaries were professionally
j land surveyed and have been verified by the City's wetland consultant.
The majority of the land surrounding the Mirror Estates Property is developed with single-family
homes. Wetland habitat was observed to be contained on the project Property. The primary
sources of surface water hydrology originate from the upstream watershed basin as wetland
drainage and runoff from residential development. A relatively large wetland area was observed to
the north between the project Property and S.W. 312 Street.
Soils
The SCS (USDA 1973) Soil Survey - King County Area has mapped the Alderwood soil series on
the property. The soil map unit shown is Alderwood gravelly sandy loam - 0 to 6 percent slopes
(AgB). The Alderwood series is comprised of moderately well -drained soils associated with a
glacial till layer at depths of 24 to 40 inches. These soils are on uplands but have inclusions of
other soils that are not large enough to map. Some included soils are the poorly drained Norma,
Bellingham, Seattle, Tukwila, and Shalcar series. Investigation of portions of the site's upland
area confirmed soil that closely resembles the Alderwood series.
The soil inclusions mentioned above are poorly drained and found in depression areas and drainage
ways on till and outwash plains. These soil map units are listed in the Hydric Soils of Washington
(1985). Hydric soils are generally associated with wetland habitats and were observed in soil pits
excavated within wetland areas.
J Hydrology
Seasonally inundated or saturated wetland areas were observed on the site. The most significant
- area (Wetland B) is a drainage swale that crosses the site from north to south. An old stormwater
detention pond for the Mirrorwood residential development discharges water onto the Mirror
1 Estates Property from the north side. There are four concrete culverts at the points of discharge
into the wetland. Site visits in January 2005 and 2006 observed the on -site wetland is flooded by
the stormwater discharge. As surface waters fill the wetland area it drains to the south. At the
south edge of the wetland a short ditch was constructed to direct the overflow into a catch basin at
the south boundary. The catch basin structure appears to be part of a public stormwater system
EXH
..J
TAI
PAGEILG�
6
associated with S.W. 316th Place. The hydrology that is present on the site is likely a combination
of both surface water runoff and a shallow groundwater table.
According to the King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio (1990) the Property is situated within the
Lower Puget Sound watershed basin. Puget Sound is located about 2 miles west of the site.
Streams that support an anadromous fishery are mapped as being greater than one mile from the
Property.
Wetland Description
There are four wetlands (Wetlands A, B, C/D, E) identified and delineated on the Mirror Estates
Property. The wetlands are located in areas that receive seasonal, surface water runoff from the
surrounding upland areas.
Wetland A
Wetland A is a small and isolated depression that has a total area of 0.09 acres (3,748 sq. ft.). The
vegetative cover is dominated by willow shrubs and saplings. Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra) and
Scouler willow (Salix scoulerana) are growing throughout the wetland. Douglas' spirea (Spiraea
douglasii) shrubs and Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) are also providing some cover.
Groundcover was observed to be sparse to no cover and includes some patches of reed
canarygrass (Phalarisarnacea).
A site visit on 1/18/05 observed the wetland to be nearly dry after a day of significant rainfall.
Shallow groundwater was evident in soil pits. Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland is classified as palustrine,
scrub/shrub, and seasonally saturated.
In accordance with Federal Way's wetland regulation standards (FWCC Chapter 22.1357),
Wetland A is rated as Category III because it is less than one acre in size and has only one wetland
J class. The standard buffer width for Category III wetlands that are 2,500 square feet to 10,000
square feet in area is 25 feet.
Wetland B
Wetland B is a distinct linear depression supported mostly by surface water runoff. The wetland
has a total area of 0.88 acres (38.501 sq. ft). The wetland has a fairly diverse cover of native plant
species but is dominated throughout by young and mature red alder trees. In addition to red alder,
j Pacific willow trees are growing in the central portion of the wetland. Shrub cover is comprised of
J salmonberry, Scouler willow, and Douglas' spirea.
M
_J
EXHIBIT-4 1,
PAGE-X_OF SD
1 The emergent plant species observed include slough sedge (Carex obnupta), speedwell(Veronica
sp.), smartweed(Pol_vgonum sp.), fowl mannagrass(Glyceria striata), and lady fern (Athyrium
1 felix femina). This wetland is seasonally flooded.
Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979),
this wetland is classified as palustrine, forested, and seasonally flooded. This wetland has only
one class because when using the USFWS classification, "classes" are distinguished on the basis
l of the life form of the plants that constitute the uppermost layer of vegetation and that possess an
areal coverage of 30 percent or greater excluding pioneer species. Red alder trees comprise the
uppermost layer and exceed 30 percent areal cover so a forested wetland class is desiZn
gnated.
In accordance with Federal Way's wetland regulation standards (FWCC Chapter 22.1357),
Wetland A is rated as Category III because it is less than one acre in size and has only one wetland
class. The standard buffer width for Category III wetlands that are greater than 10,000 square feet
in area is 50 feet.
Wetland CID
The wetland area is described as a complex of two wetlands located in close proximity to each
other but have a 6 to 10-foot upland berm -like area of separation. Non-hydric, sandy loam soil
was observed in the area separating these wetlands. Wetland hydrology is assumed to be very
seasonal and there is no evidence of a surface hydrologic connection. Initially, the areas were
delineated as two, distinct wetlands. The City's wetland consultant determined the areas should be
considered as one wetland area due to their close proximity (* ). These areas have been combined
and include two boundary adjustments per the City's wetland peer review (* ).
This wetland complex is characterized as shallow and isolated depressions with seasonal
saturation. Hydric mineral soils are present with indicators seasonal inundation and potential
shallow groundwater. Wetland CID has a total area of 0.08 acres (3,568 sq. ft.). This wetland
area has dominant cover of shrub vegetation. Shrub cover is comprised of salmonberry and
Douglas' spirea. A small portion of wetland area is dominated by a clump of young western
crabapple (Malus fusca). The only wetland emergent species observed are small patches of reed
canarygrass.
J Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979),
these wetlands are classified as palustrine, scrub/shrub, and seasonally saturated. In accordance
with Federal Way's wetland regulation standards (FWCC Chapter 22.1357), Wetland C / D is
rated as Category III because it is less than one acre in size and has only one wetland class. The
standard buffer width for Category III wetlands that are 2,500 square feet to 10,000 square feet in
area is 25 feet.
EXHIBIT
PAGE�OF
I
Wetland E
1 Wetland E is a small and isolated depression that has a total area of 0.04 acres (1,886 sq. ft.). The
vegetative cover is dominated by shrub cover of Douglas' spires with some salmonberry around its
I perimeter. Groundcover was observed to be sparse to no cover and but includes some small
patches of slough sedge. Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) classification
-� system (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland is classified as palustrine, scrub/shrub, and seasonally
saturated.
f Federal Way's wetland regulation standards (FWCC Section 22-1 Definitions) includes the
9 definition of "Regulated wetlands" as Category III wetlands that are greater than 2,500 square feet
and less than one acre with only one wetland classes. Wetland E is an area of seasonal hydrology
less than 2,500 square feet with only one wetland class. Based on the wetland determination and
City definition, Wetland E is a non -regulated wetland. Wetland E was delineated, surveyed, and
added to the project mapping per the wetland consultant peer review
EX!-IIBI'T Al
PAGE-b_OF �
.' .... ��yy
The Mirror Estates Property project has small areas of wetland that are very limited in providing
many of the functions recognized as being important. Wetlands A and C/D are proposed to be
filled and replaced on the Property. The total area of wetland fill will be 7,316 square feet.
Wetland replacement is planned and the proposed site design will provide significant open space
(Tract A) to preserve wetland functions and values related to flood control, water quality
improvement, wildlife habitat, and human aesthetics. The wetland modification criteria for
approval are addressed in Appendix C. The wetland review indicates that all nine criterion in
FWCC Section 22-1358 can be satisfied.
A temporary impact to the buffer of Wetland B is necessary and unavoidable for constructing a
new stormwater pipe to connect to the existing stormwater system. This is the location of Wetland
B's outlet channel and receiving stormwater pipe conveyance. A new pipe and debris cage will be
installed but Wetland B's outlet elevation will remain unchanged (* ).
This area of work in the buffer will also provide a trail to connect the project's east and west
residential areas. There are six wetland buffer modification criteria in FWCC Section 22-1359 that
can be satisfied by planting native species and restoration of disturbance (Appendix Q.
Potential Impacts
Wetland A
The on -site wetland area is a small and isolated depression (3,748 sq. ft.) to be filled primarily for
lot development. The proposed development of new roadway (future 8th Place S.W.) would
eliminate the wetland buffer along its west side. The buffer area on the north side has been
previously developed. The hydrology that supports the area appears to be influenced by a
combination of surface water runoff and shallow groundwater. The surface water hydrology that
supports this wetland will be affected by roadway development that is necessary to access the
Property. Considering the proposed development, preserving this small wetland and its buffer
would not be easy to achieve or specifically beneficial.
Wetland C /D
This wetland complex is also small and isolated (3,568 sq. ft.) and is proposed to be filled for
roadway development and lot development. The planned extension of 1 lth Place S.W. would
l cross this wetland area eliminate most its area. This roadway will provide a new traffic connection
for residential developments bordering on the north and south (Mirrorwood & Mirror Glen).
i
EXHIBIT
AI
10 PAGEA-OF
The hydrology that supports the area appears to be influenced by a combination of surface water
runoff and possibly shallow groundwater. The wetland is described as a mostly linear and shallow
topographic feature. Due to proposed roadway development, preserving this small wetland and its
buffer will not be feasible.
Wetland B Buffer
A limited portion of Wetland B's buffer would be temporarily disturbed in order to convey
stormwater drainage from the west side of the site to the detention and water quality facility on the
easterly portion in Tract B. The stormwater pipe will be constructed in the alignment of a proposed
public trail. A 15-foot wide area of disturbance is planned for approximately 110 feet. This
portion of the buffer is currently dominated by Himalayan blackberry shrubs.
Functions & Values
As described above, small areas of regulated wetland area will be filled as part of the proposed
} residential project. As such a discussion of wetland functions and values is warranted and
required. It is known that wetland functions contribute significant benefits to an ecosystem and
have uses that are valued by society. Wetland features and characteristics are complex, often
connected, and difficult to assess and quantify. Evaluations of the functions are necessarily
qualitative and depend on professional judgment.
Wetland functions and values are identified by many sources (Mitsch & Gosselink 1986, Sather &
Smith 1984, Reppert et al. 1979, & Cooke 1996) and include the following:
0 Erosion/Shoreline Protection
• Water Quality Improvement
• Natural Biological Support
• Hydrologic Support - Baseflow & Groundwater
• Flood/Stormwater Control & Storage
Based on published methods to assess wetland functions listed above, total size of the wetland or
wetland system is heavily weighted in the evaluation. Cumulative effects of wetland loss are
important to the entire watershed; however, wetlands of 1 acre to 5 acres in size are generally rated
as having lower functions if isolated from other water resources.
The Wetland Functions Characterization Tool For Linear Projects (WSDOT - Null et.al. June,
2000) was used and incorporates WSDOT's wetland functional assessment methodology for linear
projects and field data collection forms to provide "best available science" information. The
i WSDOT functional assessment / characterization tool can be used to evaluate all wetlands. It is a
qualitative tool designed for rapid documentation on linear projects associated with the Department
EXHIIMT&L-
PAGE ...OF
j of Transportation. Being qualitative rather than quantitative, it is intended for use where general
characterization of wetland functions is needed but extensive field investigation is not practical or
necessary. Therefore, best professional judgment with guidance from the characterization tool are
used to identify the functions provided by any given wetland.
The WSDOT assessment methodology evaluates Hydrologic Functions (water quantity & quality),
Biologic Functions, Social Values, and Other Wetland Attributes And Values. The specific
functions including the related qualifiers/indicators are included on data forms found in Appendix
A. Using WSDOT's Functions Characterization Tool, all individual functions were evaluated for
their potential (likely or not likely) to occur in the subject wetlands. The majority of these
functions are "not likely" to occur because the wetlands are small, isolated, and lack habitat
diversity or significant hydrology. Therefore, filling these wetlands would not be a measurable
loss of function in the watershed basin that cannot be replaced. Compensatory mitigation to
replace area and function will be provided to meet code standards.
At the request of the City's wetland consultant, a re -assessment of wetland functions was
conducted (* ). Using WSDOT's Functions Characterization Tool, there are fourteen specific
functions that are considered. The assessments for wetlands to be filled are summarized below.
Wetland A Assessment
Wetland A's functions that likely occur are Flood Flog Alteration because it is a fairly deep
depression, Nutrient & Toxicant Removal because of its close proximity to residential lawns and
streets, and Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates because of ponding and leaf litter. Three of fourteen
specific functions are likely to occur.
Wetland CID Assessment
Wetland C/D`s functions that likely occur are Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates because of it's
proximity to Wetland B and ponding with leaf litter, and Habitat for Amphibians because it has
woody debris, provides cover and food, and is surrounded by mostly forested habitat. Two of
fourteen specific functions are likely to occur.
EXHIBIT A 1
PAGE-&-OF-dW
12
Per the current site plan proposed for the Mirror Estates Property, small regulated wetlands will be
directly affected and filled. Direct wetland impacts are associated with roadway alignments and lot
development. Mitigation is required for permanent alteration of Category I, II, and III wetlands
and buffer areas as regulated under Federal Way's code. The requirements include no net loss of
area, function, and value.
It has been recognized, regionally, that preservation or creation of small wetland areas are subject
to failure. King County (DDES 1998) conducted its own monitoring study to document
failure/success rates in wetland mitigation projects. The results of his study found that 93 percent
of the created wetlands reviewed had design flaws. A significant criteria in designing wetland
creation projects is appropriate or adequate hydrology.
This proposal is based on providing an increase in wetland function that can be achieved on the site
by creating new wetland area adjacent to Wetland B and enhancing the entire buffer. Wetland B
offers significant area and opportunity for habitat improvement. On -site observations indicate
Wetland B is seasonally flooded every year and has water depths that exceed 1 foot. Because this
wetland receives significant runoff and becomes flooded, expanding its area will provide more
flood storage capacity and water quality improvement functions that will benefit downstream areas.
The mitigation area is predominantly dead and dying red alder trees with dense salmonberry and
blackberry shrub cover. This condition prevents natural reproduction of conifer trees that are
present on the site. Also, the salmonberry competition will prevent other native shrubs to grow in
this area. The existing condition of Wetland B includes hummocks or raised areas and very wet
pockets. The mitigation grading will resemble this type of terrain in order to save the healthy trees
and some of the salronberry cover within the proposed wetland creation area. This will be
accomplished by careful excavation and the planting of new tree, shrub, and emergent plants.
The area will also be improved by removing invasive blackberry shrubs that are present within the
salmonberry cover (See Wetland Mitigation Plan Sheets W1.1 - W4.1).
In order to meet code requirements and provide appropriate wetland compensation, the mitigation
concept would replace wetland functions and values at a minimum area ratio of at least 1.5 to 1.0.
j The table below lists the areas and mitigation ratios.
Wetland Mitigation Table
TotalIm act Area Total Mitigation Area Mitigation Ratio
Wetland = 7,316 s.f. Wetland = 10,974 s.f. 1.5 to 1.0
Buffer = 20,216 s.f. Buffer = 52,169 s.f. 2.6 to 1.0
13
exHiBrT A 1
PAGEII—OF
At the request of the City's wetland consultant, a qualitative assessment of Wetland B's functions
I is described below (* ). Using WSDOT's Functions Characterization Tool, there are fourteen
specific functions that are considered. Of the fourteen specific functions, the criteria in the
Characterization Tool determines that four of the functions are not likely to occur in this wetland -
Erosion Control & Shoreline Stabilization, Habitat for Wetland -Associated Mammals, General
Fish Habitat, and Uniqueness & Heritage. The assessments for Wetland B are generally described
and summarized below.
Wetland B: Pre -development Functions
Due to the wetland's size, complexity, position in the watershed, intact buffer areas, hydrologic
support, and opportunity to improve water quality in an urban setting, ten of fourteen specific
functions are likely to occur. These functions are Flood Flow Alteration, Sediment Removal,
Nutrient & Toxicant Removal, Production of Organic Matter and its Export, General Habitat
Suitability, Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates, Habitat for Amphibians, Habitat for Wetland -
Associated Birds, Native Plant Richness, and Educational or Scientific Value.
Wetland B: Post -Development Functions
After the mitigation area is constructed some specific functions will immediately increase and
others will increase over time. As most of the specific functions are already likely to occur there
are no anticipated new functions that will be added to the wetland. Rather, there should be an
overall increase in functionality or performance.
Flood Flow Alteration will increase with additional area created to store stormwater and
floodwater. The added storage volume is important because there appears to be a lack of
stormwater detention facilities in the upstream area. Sediment Removal will be increased by
adding depression areas to trap and allow settling of sediments. New areas of wetland vegetation
will also improve sedimentation by slowing the movement of water. Nutrient & Toxicant Removal
is similar to sediment removal and will also increase by adding depression areas. Upstream
development is probably contributing pollutants to this drainage corridor. Production of Organic
Matter and its Export will increase over time as new vegetation becomes established and matures.
1 General Habitat Suitability will increase over time as vegetation matures. Added area of wetland
1 emergent habitat increases diversity. Wetland buffer enhancement will also provide more diversity
and add native conifer trees to the wetland corridor. Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates and Habitat
for Amphibians increases quickly with new area of ponding and inundation. Breeding and feeding
opportunities increase as emergent vegetation matures. Observations from the last two winter
seasons indicate this wetland receives significant surface water runoff. Habitat for Wetland -
Associated Birds is likely to increase with additional areas of long-term inundation and food
production. Native Plant Richness increases when the mitigation plantings become established,
j mature, and reproduce. EXHIBITA V
PAGE J5__GF
J 14
Educational or Scientific Value will probably remain the same unless the wetland is used as a
demonstration project. Students or neighborhood residents may benefit from observing the
wetland before and after the mitigation is constructed.
In addition to the functions discussed above, wetland hydrology is described using site
observations and best professional judgment (*). The observed hydrologic regime throughout
most of the wetland is seasonally flooded or inundated. Its hydrogeomorphic (HGM)
classification is depressional. The wetland has the potential to store flood water and improve water
quality because its lowest internal elevation is 286 feet and the outlet channel is approximately 288
feet. A new pipe and debris cage will be installed but Wetland B's outlet elevation will remain
unchanged
The hydrologic input to Wetland B is influenced by impervious surfaces in the upstream basin.
According to the project engineer (J3 Civil), the upstream tributary area to Wetland B is 31.1 acres.
Significant flows were observed entering the wetland during the 2005 and 2006 winter seasons.
The wetland is a flow -through system that receives surface water via a wetland riparian corridor
and upstream development. After development that includes a new retention pond the contributing
area to Wetland B will be reduced by approximately 16% (4.96 acres).
The project site is currently pervious and only provides a small percentage of the total area of
hydrology contribution. Therefore, it is not anticipated that there will be significant loss in surface
water runoff entering the wetland. Six lots (4-8, 22) will have their roof drains installed to the
outer edge of buffer to compensate for some hydrology loss associated with the development. In
addition, because 26 acres of contributing basin area should remain it does not appear that there
will be adverse affects of post -development changes in water quality and quantity
Wetland B's buffer will also be improved by removing a non-conforminzn
g structure and
encroachment along the north property boundary. The southern portion affected by the stormwater
pipe and new trail is currently disturbed. This crossing will be restored with native shrubs. The
overall buffer habitaf functions will increase with the removal of non-native invasive plants and the
planting of conifer trees and other native species that are not present on the site.
This detailed Wetland Mitigation Plan includes the typical components of a final mitiZD
gation plan
including maintenance and monitoring programs. The intent of the Plan is to facilitate reasonable
development of the Mirror Estates Property and also improve on -site wetland and wetland buffer
habitat. The mitigation will meet the City's requirement for no net loss of wetland area and
wetland functions. Listed as follows are the mitigation components of this Plan. Please refer to
the Plan's details and related specifications provided on Sheet W4.1 - Specifications & Monitoring
Plan, Wetland Mitigation Plan (Altmann Oliver Associates).
CHI IT�
P�GEOF__5&
15
MITIGATION GOALS
• Improve existing wetland habitat & function by adding species diversity and structure with
native trees and shrubs.
• Create new wetland habitat with emphasis on attracting aquatic invertebrates and
amphibians.
• Remove invasive & non-native species in enhanced wetland buffers.
Increase wetland functions of flood water storage and water quality improvement by
creating new wetland area.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
• Provide wetland creation having a total area of at least 10,974 square feet
(1.5 to 1.0 mitigation ratio).
• Provide enhancement in wetland buffers having a total area of 52,169 square feet.
• Establish at least 7 native tree species and 8 native shrub species.
• Provide 80 percent survival of all installed trees and shrubs by the end of the 5 years of
monitoring.
• Maintain less than 10 percent non-native, invasive plant cover in planted areas by the end of
the 5 years of monitoring.
PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Per the City's sensitive areas code (FWCC 22-1358 4.), a performance security or other
instrument is required to guarantee mitigation success. Generally, costs associated with
installation, maintenance, and monitoring are used for performance security. Actual costs may
vary depending on several factors, including; 1) source of plant material, 2) site preparation work,
3) contract landscaper, and 4) consultant hired for monitoring. An estimated cost or contract bids
for mitigation enhancement work may be used to determine a performance security. Alternatively,
the City may provide a bond worksheet calculation method to determine security.
-� EXHIBITAI -
PAGE-M_OF-51
_J 16
SCHEDULE
The preferable time to implement the planting portion of this Plan is during the fall/winter season
and the proponent anticipates implementing this plan during the fall/winter of 2006. Surface
grading activities within the wetland corridor will occur prior to wet season conditions. A qualified
professional (project ecologist) will provide necessary construction oversight related to removing
structures and invasive plants, tree protection, installing enhancement plantings, restoration, and
maintenance and monitoring.
LONG-TERM MONITORING PROGRAM
An ecologist (qualified professional) will monitor the mitigation area following installation, for a
minimum of 5 years. Observations of wetland creation and wetland buffer enhancement plantings
will be made twice yearly in the spring (511 to 6/30) and fall (9/1 to 9/30) of the first, second, and
third years and then annually for the fourth and fifth years (6/ 1 to 9/30).
At the of the growing season during the month of September, monitoring will be as follows:
• Count all installed trees and shrubs in the mitigation areas for mortality/survival.
• Assess the health of all installed trees and shrubs in the mitigation areas for any potential
disease or infestation.
■ Estimate percent cover of weeds, by species, and specify maintenance / removal techniques
in order to promote the growth and survival of all installed plants.
• Photograph the created wetland and enhanced buffer areas from at least 5 locations. The
location and direction of each photograph shall be consistent among monitoring periods, be
representative of created and enhanced areas, and be represented on a map (i.e., properly
located and labeled).
Submit the results of annual monitoring to the City of Federal Way within 30 days following field
monitoring.
EXHIBIT
PAGE�OF
17
i
CONTINGENCY PLAN
At the direction of the project ecologist, the proponent (owner) will replace all trees and shrubs that
are dead or dying each year during the remaining portion of the 5-year monitoring period.
Should the desired mitigation goals and performance standards not be achieved, a determination
will be made by a City representative, the project ecologist, and the project proponent to implement
a contingency plan. The ecologist will access reasons for repeated failure and make
recommendations to the City.
Potential contingency is two -fold, including (1) to replace plants that have not survived at
acceptable performance standards during the 5-year monitoring period, and (2) to determine and
rectify the cause of significant mortality (50 percent or greater) of any enhancement area or plant
species. Plan design and implementation will proceed with City approval, and if needed,
additional maintenance and monitoring.
MAINTENANCE
Maintenance will be conducted on a routine, yearly basis for 5 years followintn
g installation. The
project's need for maintenance will be evaluated by a qualified professional. The Monitoring
Program's schedule will assure maintenance and success criteria are accomplished prior to or at the
end of the mitigation period. Contingency or remedial measures will be implemented on an as -
needed basis at the direction of the project ecologist or City representative.
18
EXIM3, A I
RAGE_J5,_OF
�l
i
v.
'i .`S:
Cowardin, L., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife
Service, United states Department of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79-31.
Cooke, S. 1996. Wetland and Buffer Functions, A Semi -Quantitative Assessment Methodology,
Draft Users Manual. Cooke Scientific Services. May, 1996.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical
Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Federal Way, City of. 1999. Federal Way City Code - FWCC Section 22, Environmentally
Sensitive Areas.
Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist, M. Ownbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1977. Vascular Plants of the
Pacific Northwest. University Press, Seattle, Washington.
J3 Civil Professional Engineering Services. 2006. Mirror Estates Preliminary Plat Submittal.
King County. 1990. Sensitive Areas Map Folio.
King County. 1998. Results of Monitoring King County Wetland and Stream Mitigations,
Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) August, 1998.
Null, W.S.; G. Skinner, W. Leonard. 2000. Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear
Projects. Washington State Department of Transportation, Environmental Affairs Office.
Olympia.
Soil Conservation Service. 1985. Hydric Soils of the State of Washington. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil Survey of
King County Area, Washington. Prepared in cooperation with Washington Agricultural
Experiment Station.
I United States Department of Interior, Fish, and Wildlife Service. 1988. National Wetland
Inventory. Prepared for the Office of Biological Services.
Washington State, Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and
r Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication #96-94.
EXHIBITAI
19 PAGE _OF55
��_
r
1
ft
,
WETLAND FUNCTIONS FIELD DATA FORMS
WETLAND FUNCTIONS & VALUES FORM
(Summary)
I
I
exHieR��
PAGE24_OF5$_
�' 20
Uf
Wetland Functions Field Data Form — WSDOT's BPJ Characterization
s
Project: Date: 1115k5
Wetland Name: Biologist:�-
I.� �-
A. Flood Flow Alteration
(Storage and Desynchronization)
10. .. Wetland occurs in the upper portion of its watershed.
1 2.
Wetland is in a relatively flat area and is capable of
i
retaining higher volumes of water during storm events,
than under normal rainfall conditions.
GWetland
is a closed (depressional) system.
4.
If flowthrough, wetland has constricted outlet with signs of
fluctuating water levels, algal mats, and/or lodged debris.
Wetland has dense woody vegetation.
6.
Wetland receives floodwater from an adjacent water course.
�0.
Floodwaters come as sheet flow rather than channel flow.
I
Y/1
B. Sediment Removal
WJ
l
_J
J
Sources of excess sediment (from tillage or construction)
are present upgradient of the wetland.
2: ,S low -moving water and/or a deepwater habitat are present
in the wetland.
3. Dense herbaceous vegetation is present.
4. Interspersion of vegetation and water is high in wetland.
0 Ponding of water occurs in the wetland.
6. Sediment deposits are present in wetland.
not likely to provide.
your rationale.)
Likely oinot likely)to provide.
%f c{g2S ha!
- XHi T
Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for Wetlapmi V F
Values (COE, 1995).
_J
21
C. Nutrient and Toxicant Removal
Likely r not likely to provide.
I� Sources of excess nutrients (fertilizers) and toxicants tate your rationale.)
(pesticides and heavy metals) are present upgradient of
VM
the wetland.
Wetland is inundated or has indicators that flooding is a'o
kCu Umt
seasonal event during the growing season.
3. Wetland provides long duration for water detention.
4. Wetland has at least 30% areal cover of live dense
herbaceous vegetation.
Fine-grained mineral or organic soils are present in Cam' �
the wetland.^
A Erosion Control and hnreliue Stabilization Likely or not likely o provide.
(State your rationale.)
If associated with water course or shoreline.���,��«�!
1. Wetland has dense, energy absorbing vegetation bordering
the water course and no evidence of erosion. �F
2. A herbaceous layer is part of this dense vegetation.
3. Trees and shrubs able to withstand erosive flood events
are also part of this dense vegetation.
E. Production of Organic Matter and its Export Likely or of likely o provide.
(State tonale.)
1. Wetland has at least 30% areal cover of dense herbaceous o c�C". `
vegetation. p�
0 Woody plants in wetland are mostly deciduous. 1
3. High degree of plant community structure, vegetation G
density, and species richness present.
4. Interspersion of vegetation and water is high in wetland.
5. Wetland is inundated or has indicators that flooding is a
seasonal event during the growing season.
6. Wetland has outlet from which organic matter is flushed.
EXHIBIME F
* Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for Wetland Functions and
Values (COE, 1995).
22
F. General Habitat Suitability
1. Wetland is not fragmented by development.
Upland surrounding wetland is undeveloped.
Wetland has connectivity with other habitat types.
4. Diversity of plant species is high.
5. Wetland has more than one Cowardin Class, i.e.,
(PFO, PSS, PEM, PAB, POW, etc.)
6. Has high degree of Cowardin Class interspersion.
7. Evidence of wildlife use, e.g., tracks, scat, gnawed
stumps, etc., is present
-17
G. Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates
l Wetland must have permanent or evidence of seasonal
inundation for this function to be provided.
2. Various water depths present in wetland
3. Aquatic bed vegetation present.
4. Emergent vegetation present within ponded area.
Cover (i.e., woody debris, rocks, and leaf litter)
present within in the standing water area.
Likely or=ional
likely)to provide.
(StateIT 4K9 4%
e
vo,
Likely or not likely to provide.
ate your rationale.)
iIW / �
cl'n �42_4 ho
V d1_4
6 A stream or another wetland within 2 km (1.2 mi)
f of wetland. :3 /s,
H. Habitat for Amphibians Likely o �Iik?elto provide.
(State your rationale.)
1: Wetland contains areas of seasonal and/or permanent���
standing water in most years. (Must be present
i for this function to be provided)
" 2. Thin -stemmed emergent and/or floating aquatic
vegetation present within areas of seasonal and/or `
1 perennial standing water.
3. Wetland buffer < 40 /o developed, i.e., by pavement
j
and/or buildings.��
i
it
} EXHIBI
* Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for Wetl��r- Vd OF
Values (COE, 1995). -10:-
,_i
23
0 Woody debris present within wetland.
5. Lands within 1 km (0.6 mi) of wetland are greater
than or equal to 40% undeveloped (e.g., green belts,
forest, grassland, agricultural).
6 Other wetlands and/or an intermittent or perennial
stream within I� .6 mi) of wetland.
I. Habitat for Wetiand-Associated Mammals
1. Permanent water present within the wetland. (Must
be present for this function to be provided.)
2. Presence of emergent vegetation in areas of
permanent water.
Areas containing dense shrubs and/or trees are
present within wetland or its buffer.
4. Interspersion between different strata of vegetation.
5. Interspersion between permanent open water
(without vegetation) and permanent water with
vegetation.
6. Presence,of banks suitable for denning.
7. Evidence of wildlife use, e.g., dens, tracks, scat,
gnawed stumps, etc., is present. 11-7
J. Habitat for Wetland -Associated Birds
1. Wetland has 30 to 50% shallow open water and/or
aquatic bed classes present within the wetland.
2. Emergent vegetation class present within the wetland.
Forested and scrub -shrub classes present within
the wetland or its buffer.
I). Snags present in wetland or its buffer.
5. Sand bars and/or mud flats present within the
wetland.
Likely or of likel to provide.
(State y rationale.)
Likely or of likely o provide.
(State your rationale.)
W
A UA aCT i �
f
Iy
0
* Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for
Values (COE, 1995).
Likely or of likely o provide.
(State y o . ale.)
otr�c�,i� c�
r V
/ �4v dA4u
e
=6
_Q`<
24
( 6.) Wetland contains invertebrates, amphibians,
and/or fish.
7, Buffer contains relatively undisturbed grassland
shrub and/or forest habitats.
8. Lands within 1 km (0.6 mi) of the wetland are greater
than or equal to 40% undeveloped (e.g., green belts,
forest, grassland, agricultural'�
K. GeneraI Fish Habitat
(Must be associated with a fish -bearing water.)
1. Wetland has a perennial or intermittent surface -water
connection to a fish -bearing water body
2. Wetland has sufficient size and depth of open water
so as not to freeze completely during winter.
3. Observation of fish.
4. Herbaceous and/or woody vegetation is present in
wetland and/or buffer to provide cover, shade, and/or
detrital matter.
}
5. Spawning areas are present (aquatic vegetation
and/or gravel beds).
L. Native Plant Richness
` 1. J Dominant and codominant plants are native.
2. Wetland contains two or more Cowardin Classes.
3. Wetland has three or more strata of vegetation.
4. Wetland has mature trees. /A
M. Educational or Scientific Value
1. Site has documented scientific or educational use.
2. Wetland is in public ownership.
Likely orCotkel provide.
(State your rationale.)
Likely or not like] a provide.
(State your rationale.)
�Q � �S � �1 Cl��� �✓1 ,.
Likely or of likel o provide.
(State your rationale.)
Likely or atlikel to provide.
(State your rationale.) .
6) Parking at site is suitable for a school bus.
//3 1
EX T
GE OF
* Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for Wetland Functions and
Values (COE, 1995).
25
N. Uniqueness and Heritage
1. Wetland contains documented occurrence of a state —
or federally listed threatened or endangered species.
2. Wetland contains documented critical habitat, high
quality ecosystems, or priority species respectively
designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
-1 the WDNR's Natural Heritage Program, or
JI WDFW's Priority Habitats and Species Program.
i 3. Wetland is part of a National Natural Landmark
designated by the National Park Service or a
Natural Heritage Site designated by WDNR.
a
4. Wetland has biological, geological, or other features
that are determined rare by the local jurisdiction.
5. Wetland has been determined significant by the
local jurisdiction because it provides functions
scarce for the area.
6. Wetland is part of ...
➢ an estuary,
j ➢ a bog,
➢ a mature forest.
016
Likely or Cotikely o provide.
(State your rationale.)
J
J
VVVVV
EXHIBIT
e •E OF
* Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for Wetland Functions and
JValues (COE, 1995).
i
Q
a
1
� t
•
i
■
�
�
� �
w
rr
t l!
■
i
i
r
Z4
Cd
O
cl
U
U
b0
+C� Cd~
N
O
W
M
Cl)
U
x
O
3
>C
p C4
O N W
U x
U
✓ Cd
�'
~
v�
rT
b
Q .-i
� �
O
�" Nam'.
v1 C/� -�y cd
�°
4°
ti
�°
U
0
w
Z
ii
w a, c7
x
x
x
x
0 Z
w
20
Wetland Functions Field Data Form — WSDOT's BPJ Characterizatio
Project: � r t I"
,��f Date:
-�
Wetland Name: Biologist:�-
5�= S_65
A. Flood Flow Alteration
(Storage and Desynchronization)
6 Wetland occurs in the upper portion of its watershed.
2. Wetland is in a relatively flat area and is capable of
retaining higher volumes of water during storm events,
than under normal rainfall conditions.
0 Wetland is a closed (depressional) system.
4. If flowthrough, wetland has constricted outlet with signs of
fluctuating water levels, algal mats, and/or lodged debris.
S Wetland has dense woody vegetation.
6. Wetland receives floodwater from an adjacent water course.
` 1-7 7. Floodwaters come as sheet flow rather than channel flow.
B. Sediment Removal
1. Sources of excess sediment (from tillage or construction)
are present upgradient of the wetland.
2.- Slow -moving water and/or a deepwater habitat are present
in the wetland.
3. Dense herbaceous vegetation is present.
4. Interspersion of vegetation and water is high in wetland.
os.Ponding of water occurs in the wetland.
6. Sediment deposits are present in wetland.
Likely o not likely o provide.
(State your rationale.)
C �OA'; , 71�11 11, 0 r 7ts'
gkAdl U1141
Likely o not likey to provide.
(State rationale:)
lklod rSl)F� 5O
r
�4o
f" . .
EXHIBIT
* Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for Wetland Functions and
Values (COE, 1995).
21
C. Nutrient and Toxicant Removal
Likely or of likely o provide.
Sources of excess nutrients (fertilizers) and toxicants (State rationale.)
(pesticides and heavy metals) are present upgradient of ► �
the wetland. -5 0 i $ (2�7
r
Wetland is inundated or has indicators that flooding is a ] P
seasonal event during the growing season. �Z�
r 1 — ,
3. Wetland provides long duration for water detention.
4. Wetland has at least 30% areal cover of live dense A +
herbaceous vegetation.��'r
Fine-grained mineral or organic soils are present in�
the wetland. /09 p�
D. Erosion Control and Shoreline Stabilization Likely orEL likel o provide.
(State your rationale.}
If associated with water course or shoreline. � ���
1. Wetland has dense, energy absorbing vegetation bordering `I ��I� ° f
10
the water course and no evidence of erosion. lair l
2. A herbaceous layer is part of this dense vegetation.'���
0
3. Trees and shrubs able to withstand erosive flood events
/3 are also part of this dense vegetation.
E. Production of Organic Matter and its Export Likely or not likely o provide.
(State y aonale.)
1. Wetland has at least 30% areal cover of dense herbaceous
vegetation. cc�lk ak) 1" /4
CJ2 Woody plants in wetland are mostly deciduous.
3. High degree of plant community structure, vegetationyl
density, and species richness present.
4. Interspersion of vegetation and water is high in wetland.
Wetland is inundated or has indicators that flooding is a
seasonal event during the growing season.
6. Wetland has outlet from which organic matter is flushed.
EXHIBIT A I
AGE-V
* Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for Wetland Functions and
Values (COE, 1995).
22
F. General Habitat Suitability
1. Wetland is not fragmented by development.
2 Upland surrounding wetland is undeveloped.
3 Wetland has connectivity with other habitat types.
4. Diversity of plant species is high.
5. Wetland has more than one Cowardin Class, i.e.,
(PFO, PSS, PEM, PAB, POW, etc.)
6. Has high degree of Cowardm Class interspersion.
7 7. Evidence of wildlife use, e.g., tracks, scat, gnawed
stumps, etc., is present
G. Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates
10 Wetland must have permanent or evidence of seasonal
inundation for this function to be provided.
2. Various water depths present in wetland
3. Aquatic bed vegetation present.
4. Emergent vegetation present within ponded area.
Cover (i.e., woody debris, rocks, and leaf litter)
present within in the standing water area.
�6.A stream or another wetland within 2 km (1.2 mi)
of wetland.
H. Habitat for Amphibians
10 Wetland contains areas of seasonal and/or permanent
standing water in most years. (Must be present
for this function to be provided)
2. Thin -stemmed emergent and/or floating aquatic
vegetation present within areas of seasonal and/or
perennial standing water.
Wetland buffer < 40% developed, i.e., by pavement
and/or buildings.
Likely or of likel to provide.
(State your rationale.)
/" -f
1A
dts K0ix//e
# t
.'
Likely or not likely to provide.
(Si to your rationale.)
s
kid
d
O_ A( tL
r �f
w
V{'ter s
ikely r not likely to provide.
to your rationale.)
h cot
J i
�-o�
HIBIT ^CC v
Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for Wedr��ar
Values (COE, 1995).
23
G) Woody debris present within wetland.
5. Lands within 1 km (0.6 mi) of wetland are greater
than or equal to 40% undeveloped (e.g., green belts,
forest, grassland, agricultural).
Other wetlands and/or an intermittent or perennial
stream within 1 km (0.6 mi) of wetland.
I. Habitat for Wetland -Associated Mammals
1. Permanent water present within the wetland. (Must
be present for this function to be provided.)
2. Presence of emergent vegetation in areas of
permanent water.
DAreas containing dense shrubs and/or trees are
present within wetland or its buffer.
4. Interspersion between different strata of vegetation.
5. Interspersion between permanent open water
(without vegetation) and permanent water with
vegetation.
6. Presence of banks suitable for denning.
7_ Evidence of wildlife use, e.g., dens, tracks, scat,
/1 gnawed stumps, etc., is present.
J. Habitat for Wetland -Associated Birds
1. Wetland has 30 to 50% shallow open water and/or
aquatic bed classes present within the wetland.
2. Emergent vegetation class present within the wetland
Forested and scrub -shrub classes present within
the wetland or its buffer.
Snags present in wetland or its buffer.
5. Sand bars and/or mud flats present within the
wetland.
not likely to provide.
your rationale.)
Likely o not likely to provide.
(State r ra ionale.)
/1 d Q.vvd�w'
Likely or tot likely o provide.
(State y a ionale.)
4
EXHIBIT
E�OF
* Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for Wetland Functions and
Values (COE, 1995).
24
DWetland contains invertebrates, amphibians,
and/or fish.
7, Buffer contains relatively undisturbed grassland
shrub and/or forest habitats.
8. Lands within 1 km (0.6 mi) of the wetland are greater
4/9 than or equal to 40% undeveloped (e.g., green belts,
forest, grassland, agricultural).
K. General Fish Habitat
(Must be associated with a fish -bearing water.)
1. Wetland has a perennial or intermittent surface -water
connection to a fish -bearing water body
2. Wetland has sufficient size and depth of open water
so as not to freeze completely during winter.
3. Observation of fish.
4. Herbaceous and/or woody vegetation is present in
wetland and/or buffer to provide cover, shade, and/or
detrital matter.
5. Spawning areas are present (aquatic vegetation
o l C and/or gravel beds).
I L. Native Plant Richness
0 Dominant and codominant plants are native.
2. Wetland contains two or more Cowardin Classes.
3. Wetland has three or more strata of vegetation.
4. Wetland //72 has mature trees.
M. Educational or Scientific Value .
1. Site has documented scientific or educational use.
2. Wetland is in public ownership.
Likely o not likely to provide.
(State your rationale.)
Likely or of likel to provide.
(State you rationale.)
s
Likely orttkel ❑provide.
Stater,ionale.)
Likely or otiikel to provide.
j� (State you }` ionale.}
or
Parking at site is suitable for a school bus.
113 8
extiltil�
PARGEWOF
* Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for Wetland Functions and
Values (COE, 1995).
25
N. Uniqueness and Heritage
1. Wetland contains documented occurrence of a state —
or federally listed threatened or endangered species.
2. Wetland contains documented critical habitat, high
quality ecosystems, or priority species respectively
designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
the WDNR's Natural Heritage Program, or
WDFW's Priority Habitats and Species Program.
3. Wetland is part of a National Natural Landmark
designated by the National Park Service or a
Natural Heritage Site designated by WDNR.
4. Wetland has biological, geological, or other features
that are determined rare by the local jurisdiction.
5. Wetland has been determined significant by the
local jurisdiction because it provides functions
scarce for the area.
6. Wetland is part of ...
➢ an estuary,
➢ a bog,
➢ a mature forest.
Likely or not likely to provide.
(State your rationale.)
J 0% I'LL
ot
EXHIBIT
DAP.
GE�OF
* Adapted from the Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement for Wetland Functions and
Values (COE, 1995).
JJ
Cd
U
O
r-1
�I
a
74
V
v
Cam,
O
U
U
O
Cd
>
U
cn
. 4
Q
9
,,
mCd
cd
3
O
'"
O
" '
O
O
N
N
Q.
►'
++
t,
rA
w
.�
u�o�x
o
F" y
�b
Cd
�
>
w
w
z
w
a
x
x
x
x
z
w
WETLAND DATA PLOT FORMS
1
1
I
1
j
i
I
I
EXHIBIT
J PAGE.�OF
1 21
DATA FORM
RO NE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
�] r
Field Investigators a 4 Dater I
J Project/Site: State: County:
Applicant*wner: k} Plant Community #/Name:
Note_ If a more detailed site description is necoWsary, use the back of data form or a field notebook, _ _ _ _ ^ -
Do nnvironmental conditions exist at the plant community? J/ C 14
Yes No (If no, explain on back) /+"��� `'J
or e
Has the vegetation, s is; and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? -z,'l„�y
Yes No (If yes, explain on back)-
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant SeEles Status S Fatu Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
2, ►� 12.
3. 13.
4, 14.
5. Iw�r��[� Uul_f'Irl. ► �7► LEI_ � 15.
6. rl + ► 16.
7.r' CiJ2 s �Mf vn f �JM .°') f' 17.
8. 18.
i 9. 19.
10. 20. 6..
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, a & PAC l�� v
its the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes (/ No
Rationale:
SOILS
Serles/phase: Subgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No Istic epipedon present? ' Yes No
Is the soil: Molt ? No �leyed? Yes No _4z:
Matrix Color: Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil indi tors:
Is the hydric sqA criterion met? o r /�';�
Ratloriale: — o r
r-w _ w n i.� r /In4+u
HYDRO OGY !
Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes No •` Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No a` ►
Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes . zNo
'Nationale for jurisdictional decision:
This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the nun*
Assessment Procedure, B
2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy."
GC
B-2
N
DATA FORM
ROUTI O SiTE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Investigator(s): ate. a0 4
Project/She: t State: County:
Applicant/Owner: ° " Plant Community #/Name:
Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do normal esavironmental conditions exist at the plant community?�- f�� T"
Yes No (ff no, explain on back) V "'
Has the vegetation, soils; and/or hydrology been sigi nifcantly disturbed?
Yes No (Ff yes, explain on back)
----------------------------------------------------
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant Species I Status St to Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
2. { 12.
3.wA�Vil
^ 13.
4. �. r 14.
''U 15.
17.
118.
19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant spades that are OSL. FACW, ancUoyFAC
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
SOBS
Series/phase: ��—Subgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes -, No Undetermined �
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No 7�f^Histic epipedon present? Yes r No
Is the soil: Mottted / o !r-'Gleyed? Yes No
Matrix Color: ! _ . _ Mottle Colors:
Other hydro soil in cators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes Nq+
Rationale: Z/7s ZOO & I �f f L A it
� HYDRO Y
Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes no- Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No _T7__"
Depth to free-standing water in ph/soil probe -hole: �4 �L
List other field evidence of surface Inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes. No
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No
• Rationale for jurisdictional decision: � _ _ _ �C' • �"�!
1 This data form can be'used for the Hydric Soil Asses§ment Procedure and the Plant CommQMy
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy.EXHIBIT. At
s_2
F
lot
DATA FORM
R UTI E ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Investigator(s): /� A Date:
Project/She: / !` V:5 State: County: -�-
Applicant/Owner: �. ` -. ? Plant Community #/Name: _
Note: M a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
r - ^ Do norr al a vironmental conditions exist at the plant community? f r �
Yes Q (If no, explain on back) �. J
Has the vegetation, s ils; and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yea Noif yes, explain on back] frj
-- --- - --- - - -- ------- ---- -w -------- --- - --
Indicator VEGETATION
-
Domin , t Isnt S peciev Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species
2. 12.
3 A13.
4. qI 1 14.
.5 � � 15.
g� I a % 16.
7. IC 'I 1 j D 17.
19.
20
10. /
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW,-and.No AC�/ �
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
i SOILS
Sedes/phase: - V/J) a. Subgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes - No .�� Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No �Hlstic epipedon present? Yes
Is the soil: Mottled? Ye f a �' Gleyed? Yes No --
'Matrix Color: � Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil Indic ors:
Is the hydric soil criteriopn met? Ye No
Indicator
Status Stratum
No V
Q kdV, HYDR,Ok�/OGY Sd�� /Q�Yj� f�
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes " No a Surface wet depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No
Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe -hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes. No
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINA ON AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No
'Rationale for Jurisdictional decision:
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classificat Ion according to "Soil Taxonomy." s g MT-
I�
B-2
DATA FORM
RO NE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field invastigator(s):, n � ��'"�"��' ' _r' Date: IWA��17 e
iLivi State: rY' County:
ApplicantADwrier: -��` .0 �n"L , t� 5 ._ Plant Community #/Name:
Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do normal nvironmen#al conditions exist at the plant community? r - T _ Z _
Yes ! No (if no, explain on bads ��'t AL ! 7
Has the vegetation, sails, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No yes, explain on bad()
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant Specie Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
13
14.
15.
6 a 16.
S 7. s 1 f 5 �' J �� 17.
19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/ r FAC �t
Is. the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes j No
Rationale:
Cnriee/nh�ce- �'Y f Aiihmmin-2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined I -
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No (` Histic spipedon present?' Yes ' No
Is the soil: Mott ? e No Gieyed? Yes No .�
Matrix Color: 7 Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil Indica ors: -
Is the hydric soil criterion met?p Yes f No
rlrL+ 'i�?FLf�! HYDROLOGY�'-
1-a the ground surface inundated? Yes No Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No.
Depth to Iree-standing water in pitisoil probe hole: ---. ,
List other flekf evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. .
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes ,r No�'�,�y
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes 4 No
'Rationale for jurisdictional decision:
t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2Classiflcatlon according to "Soil Taxonomy."
XHIS17
B-2
%e
o
S�
DATA FORM
OUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Feld Investigator{s}: g ��� •� Date: ,
ProfectlSlte: State: — County: �';.
Applicant�wner: Plant Community #/Name:. - ,
Note: M a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do norm nvironmental conditions exist at the plant community?��°
You No [H no, explain on bads)
Has the vegetation, s ilk and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No (If yes, explain on back)
VEGETATION -
Indicator
Dominant lent S ec Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species
r 3I Ljrg415:�l3.
4. I .. , p �_ 14.
15.
6. Am.� ", ;r 16.
�7. J Lt Cf.rt r r.'t1 Tr r- —' 17.
If A
j 9.J/ 1 C1- �'3' , -� �a 19.
1t7. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC �° r
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
Indicator
Status Stratum
.�I��r�� SOILS
Seriestphase: - Subgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined r
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No lGfiistic epipedon present?- Yes r No
Is the soil: Mott/ ? Y� -� , , r o T�Gleyed? Yes No
Matrix Color: F Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil lndl tars:
Is the hydric sWJ criterion met?, }Ye Na
Raflnyimre• / ! �-'/�
f HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes .No Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No !/ ,04
�t?
Depth to free-standing water In pit/soil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes. No
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No
'Rationale for'Jurisdictional decision:
f This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure,
2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy." EXHIBIT,
B-2
I
DATA FORM
OUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION MET'HODi
Field Investigator(sj,� Date:
Proj&&Slte: State: r County:
Applicantlbwner: Plant Community #/Name:
Nate: ff a more detailed site description is necespry, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do norrna sdvironmental conditions exist at the plant community? _ -��, � -- ~ w
Yee No off no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils; andtor hydrology been significantly disturbed? C--
Yes No {tf yes, explain on back)
VEGETATION
Indicator
Domin, n lant Specled Status Stratum Dominant Plant Specips
q� 'I 2. 12 01
Ja 3. _�— 13.d
4. / 14.
6. ��,+� 16'
7• j �' 1 cl. ' a 17�Pw
.
t s '-'�
r
10. f 19.
20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW,-and/or FAC 0 is
Is. the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No.
Rationale:
Indicator
Status Stratum
5
I Y YYo t1� SOILS
2
Serlestphass: ! Subgroup:
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes ,- No Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No — istic apipedon present?- Yes f' No —
Is the' soli: Mottled? �fe No Gleyed? Yes No 1�
Matrix Coior: 0 ] VMottle Colors:
Other hydric soil Indi tors:
Is the hydric soil criteaon,me17" Yet t N�
Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes No Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No
Depth to free-standing water in pk/soil probe bole:� �
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes. No
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMIN TION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No �!
'Rationale for -jurisdictional decision:
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure. ��H��.�t
2 ClassNlcatlon according to "Soil Taxonomy.'
B-2
_-I
1
l
l
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1
Field Investigator(s): �� Date-
Project/She: State: County:
Applicant/Owner: - Plant Community #/Name:
Note: ll a more detailed site description is neces ary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do nor �al e�+r. ronmental conditions exist at the plant community? r _ `Wiii�id h,L C
Yes Avi (if no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, so ; and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No (if yes, explain on back) rY 1
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum DomAa Plant Species , Stattus Sgatum
2. 12.
r �Ir i f_14.
` 4: �t7
�D, 5. f f 15.
6. t 16.
7. / 17.
18.
9. A / i g.
10
Perce of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, anSVorFACL} .�
I4 the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No
Rationale: .
. T
SOILS
Series/phase: 0f #ta_ Subgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes �" No Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes a I1 Histic epipedon present?- Yes No
Is the soil: Mottled? jet /No Gleyed? Yes No 1171
Matrix Color: —^,� --t Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil indic ors:
Is the hydric soil criterion met?
['9-a'-�-1_. - ! ■" �Y � rl /�•'"f%j /� a /7 �
i
HYDROLOGY �a 1
Is the groundsurfaceinundated? Yes No Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes Not-'
Depth to free-standing water In pit/soil probe •hole:�� - -
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
JURISDIC71ONALL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes - L� No
'Rationale forjurisdictional decision:
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure. EXH t BIB,
2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy." PAGE
_.�rr
1'
B-2
DATA FORM
RO NE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Investigator o �! Date: , •
Project/Slte: State: County: A MU-
Applicant/Owner:-► r Plant Community #/Name:
Note: If a more detailed site description is'necessl , use the back of data form or a field notebook.
W Do normal nvironmentai conditions exist at the plant community? — Y
Yes No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, s ils; andlor hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No 1f yes, explain on back)
-----------------------------------------------------
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Domin nt Pla t Spoples, , Status Stratum Domi t Plant Species atus r to
f 2. 12.Ezg
5' ! � S i
6. ''I 16.
' �,,,,7, rt�' !f� �/ 17.
�'J/ 6. is.
�79 9. �? . �r 19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are ❑BL, FACW, and! FAG
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes Y No
Rationale:
Arph
Series/phase: SOILSSubgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes f No Undetermined
Is the soll a Histosoi? Yes No _� Histic epipedon present? ' Yes No
Is the soil: Mottled Ye 't 1No �G Gleyed? Yes No 47'—
'Matrix Color: ! 1 ! r, . Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil indica ors: f
Is the hydric soil criterloWet?
/ HYDROLOGY -
Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes Rio �Surla water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No Z
Depth to f roe -standing water In pit/sofl probe hole: Al'�
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
` No ti
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes ,- No
'Rationale' for jurisdictional decision:
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment'Procedure. ���� TA-12 Classification according to `Soil Taxonomy."
6A ale 2J.4r. 4
B-2
DATA FORM
F�OUTII)IE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field lnvestigator('s)- JI Date:-
ProjectlSlie.. ;� State: County:
Al-
Applicantlowner '- Y lant Community Mame:
Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do normalor vironmental conditions exist at the plant c6mmunity? --- Iv4—t rll-0
Yes Gf No (K no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils- andtor hydrology been significantly disturbed'?
on
Yaa--- No----s,expl-------------------+++------- - - -
---
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Dornhant Plant S ecigs on Status Stratum Dom! n t FlantSpecies Io Status Stratjim
2. 12.
113.
14.
'r4od i2 ��. . � 15.
16.
9Vr9 A Z < i r.- �19.
10. 20. / y
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW,-and/St FAC
14 the hydrophytic vegetation driterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
SOILS
Seriestphase: a Subgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No c-" Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No _ HisW epipedon present?' Yes No
Is the soil: Mott! ? Y . No � Ieyed? Yes No t�
Matrix Color: • ' Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil Ind! ators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes a
Rationale. I g 'j e -- r r ,y --sand,, d`. -,
HYDRO OGY
Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes o f Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No
Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole: --- -
List other field evidence of surface Inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes. No %
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant communi a wetland? Yes No •
Rationale for'jurisdid anal decision:` � 4/ �
f
1 17
This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
2 Assessment Procedure. ��'r
Classification according to "Soli Taxonomy." EXH
PAGEL0
B-2
DATA FORM
E ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Date- I A�
State: County:
plant Community #/Name: !�
Note: ff a more detailed site description is 'necesory, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Da normal nvlronmental conditlona exist at the punt community? gegl&-41- � Yes �Na {If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, so i ; and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Cd-- A ,L-t-'-44
�
! . Yes--- No---{ffyes. expl---- back)
-----------_—__-- -- ��_--_--
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plar}t S Status Stratum Domin, t Plant Species , Status Siraturry
,
1 2. /. r f / 1 12. u
14.
r i P 15.
C 6 ' , 1 s.
/0,9 7j7AdL ^ U r f ._ 17.
8Y "1 / t 18.
10. - 20.
Percent of dominant species that are ❑BL, FACW. andlo .FAC t `�
Is the hydrophydc vegetation criterion met? Yes I _ No
Rationale:
Field
ApplicantlOwner:
SOILS
Serieslphase: l � �i -` ' guhgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes - No I,=' Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No 1,--. Histic epipedon present?' Yes No
Is the soil: MottledrMo —kL Gleyed? Yes No Lf
Matrix Color: C Mottle Colors:
f HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes �r No G.•�'Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No
Depth to free-standing water In ph/soil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. ,
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No—/Z
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No
Rationale for'jurisdictional decision:
t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure. � �������
2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy."
B-2
DATA FORM
IA.OUFNE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD'
9/51
Field Investlgator(s • a� � Date: "� _
Projecl/Site: r°' State- X County: ' 'L
Applicant/Owner: Plant Community */Name:
NoN a more detailed site desc €on Is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do norms nvironmental cond€tlons exist at the plant community? - ^ � . �CL 25
Yes VNo no, explain on back}
Has the vegetation, Is, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes--- No - - - -yes,e-sin -back) ------ - - -- -- --- �' .n
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Doman nt Piqnt Spoplezr Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
12.
13.
4.
6_ i . 16.
7• r 17.
g, is.
9. 19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, an FAC
to the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes �Na
Rationale:. .
SOILS
Seriestphase: ' '� = Subgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined .�
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No Histic epipedon present? Yes No ■�
Is the soil: Mottled Y f o Gleyed? Yes No
'Matr€x Color: _ - Mottle -Colors:
Other hydro soil in cators:
Is the hYdric soil criterion met? Yes, , /'�€�,
r HYDROLOGY
`Is the ground surface inundated? Yes '440-AZSurface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No -
Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole: f r
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No
'Rationale forjurisdictional decision:
1 This data form can be used for the Flydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the -Plant
Assessment ' Procedu re. -A/
2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy.' PAGE OF .
B-2
DATA FORM
RO NE NSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Investlgatorli Date: Olh-� `
ProJeW Ite: State: County:
Applicant/Owner: Plant Community ir./Name:
Note: If a more detailed site descriptf n is necessary, use the back of data form or a field noteboolt.
Do normal nvironmentai conditions exist at the plant community? r -��I�� -�
Yes le"' No (H no, explain on hack)
Has the vegetation, s ils; and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No explain
-
- - ---- ---- ------------ - ----- �� A-: _�:J-o
Plant
Indicator
Status
VEGETATION
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW
Is. the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
Dominant Plant Species
It.
12.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
rrFAC
Na
SOILS
Series/phase: Subgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric solls list? Yes No Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No Istic spipedon present?' Y s No
Is the aoll: Mottled D f LNo �/ Gleyed? Yes N
Matrix Color: "� Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil Ind tors:
Is the hydric soil criierion mein7
Indicator
Status Stratum
Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes ` No -_Je Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No
Depth to free-standing water in ph/soil probe -hole: - - -
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
Sf11/m I
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No,++
Rationale for'Jurisdictional decisjon, _ _ i „ _/.�_ �-; ,�-TT..
t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the P1rXMMT-_—j
Assessment Procedure.
2ClasslficatIon according to "Soil Taxonomy.- PAGE .4F
B-2
DATA FORM
R 11Ti E ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Investigator( / ,a Date:
Projewske: State: I ° County:
Applicant/Owner.Plant Community */Name: �
Note. II a more detailed she descrf n is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
^ -
Do normal ironmentai conditions exist at the plant community? �
Yea No (If no, explain on bade
Has the vegetation, s Is; and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
-Yea No (H yes, explain on back)
VEGETATION
Indicator indicator
Dominant last S ec s ,Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
11.
/ 2.�_ -_ — 12.
3. 13. '
4. 14.
S. 15.
6. 16.
7. 17.
6_ is.
9. 19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant spades that are 08L, FACW, andlo FAC���'
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes o
Rationale:
SOILS
Seriestphase: Subgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes . No Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No _4ff Histic epipedon present? ' Yes No
Is the soil: Mottled? ��'�a Gleyed? Yes No
'Matrix Color: wE � _ Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil Indica rs:
Is the hydric soil cr#�eriorymg7 ,e�Io
�/�ri�LIJ�:SI�f�(.`�' 7ri�■...�r��r:�w�1��.�►7+•��r•,•.�F�
i� • ��fi�"li���F�3:�►�l1Fi�1!tl��ri.I��d�1�''i
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No 1 Surface water depth:
�
Is the soil saturated? Yes No=
Depth to free-standing water In pi lsoil probe hole: --
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. -
Is the wetland hydrolo¢y criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
No
L�firll
JURISDICTIONAL ETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes - No
'Rationale forlurisdictlonal decislon:
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Comn
Assessment Procedure. EXHIBIT
2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy." cc��
B-2
DATA FORM
E ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Investigators • r` ' : Dater
Project/She: 7L State: I-- &V County: t
Applicant/Owner: r- `I , Plant Community #/Name,
Note: If a more detailed site descrip l n Is necessary, use the back of data form or a fie n- -otebook. - - -
Do norm !•environmental conditions exist at the plant community? r _ lr 77z-'�� �f - �'� j
Yes No (If no, explain on back) r
Has the vegetation, ils; and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? 1
Yes Na L (ff yes, explain on back)
f
7.
8.
9.
10.
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Status Slra um
Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
zliOi2.
13. '
r
ff
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FAC
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
20-
W,an& FAC_ �
No
_ SOILS 2
Senes/phaSubgroup:
se.
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No fr Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No —e` Histic epipedon present? Yes r No
Is the soil: Mottled? �Y N ,..� Gleyed? Yes No
Matrix Color: _, Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil indicat6rs:
Is the hydric soil criterion W s i
Ration r _ "" 4 1122 1 Ir.L i
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes o � Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No�N
Depth to free-standing water in ph/soil prole hole: _
LIM other field evidence of surface Inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrolo¢y criterion met? Yes. No
Rationale:
4 vd4l,14,_
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No
'Rationale for'Jurisdlctional decision:
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure. EXHIBIT -Al
2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy."
PAGE k. S
B-2
i
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
WETLAND MODIFICATION CRITERIA
w
EXHIBIT A I
PAGE-W-_OF-Sf
22
J
Mirror Estates
Decisional Criteria
Separate decisional criteria are required for impacting regulated wetland areas and intrusions into or
use of regulated wetland buffer areas (Attached Sheet W1.1). Impacts to regulated wetland areas
are considered under FWCC Section 22-1358 and intrusions into their buffer areas are considered
under FWCC Section 22-1359. Each required decisional criteria is evaluated below.
"Structures, improvements and land surface modifications within regulated
wetlands." FWCC Section 22-1358
Wetland Modification
There are nine criteria to be met in order to allow the filling of Wetlands A and C/D so that an
improvement or land surface modification can approved. The basis for meeting the criteria is
provided in the contents of the Wetland Determination & Mitigation Plan report (Schulz 3/1/06) and
Wetland Mitigation Plan construction sheets (W1.I - W4.1 Altmann Oliver Associates 3/16/06). A
wetland area loss of 7,316 square feet would be replaced by 10,974 square feet. This provides an
area replacement ratio of 1.5 to 1.0.
Criterion No. 1 — It will not adversely affect water quality.
The filling of Wetland A and C/D will eliminate a total of area 7,316 square feet. Both wetlands
are about the same size and are isolated areas. Neither of these wetlands provide measurable water
quality improvement because they are depressions with limited influence on downstream aquatic
areas. These wetlands treat water through soil infiltration, plant uptake, and evaporation in a
manner that is similar to the adjacent forested upland. The loss of these wetlands will not affect
overall water quality in the watershed basin.
Grading and clearing activities within Wetlands A and C/D will occur in dry periods to help avoid
erosion impacts. Best management practices including temporary erosion control and treatment of
runoff will also be implemented as standards necessary maintain the existing quality of water that
leaves the site.
EXHIBIT At
PAGEM _U
1W
Mirror Estates
Wetland Modification Criteria
Page 2
Criterion No. 2 — It will not destroy nor damage a significant habitat area.
The area of habitat that Wetlands A and C/D provide will be replaced at 150 percent within a
wetland area (Wetland B) that does provide significant habitat. The expansion of Wetland B will
provide more area for more species to use then are likely to occur in smaller wetland pockets. The
buffer enhancement around Wetland B will improve the overall habitat quality of the site.
Criterion No. 3 — It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention
capabilities.
According to the project engineer, the areas of Wetlands A and C/D will be compensated in the
engineered detention facility. Runoff from Wetland A was assumed to be bypassed directly to
Wetland B because of a circular stormwater pipe connection located in the Mirror Wood residential
neighborhood.
The mitigation measures proposed within Wetland B will increase the amount of stormwater
retention area and will have biological and other benefits for the wetland and downstream
properties. With the engineered retention system and wetland mitigation measures, there should be
no detrimental affect related to the drainage leaving the project site.
Criterion No. 4 — It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion
hazards.
The site is relatively flat which helps minimize the potential for erosion. The grading work for the
wetland mitigation area will be conducted during dry periods preferably in late summer and the
contractor will follow the approved erosion control plan that will be developed for the site.
Unstable earth conditions or erosion hazards are not expected with this work.
Criterion No. 5 — It will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the
area of the subject property nor to the City as a whole, including the loss of
significant open space or scenic vistas.
The subject property is the only area that will be modified as part of this proposal. Currently, both
on -site wetlands are not suitable areas for usable open space because they are small areas that are
disconnected. No scenic vistas are provided by either wetland area. Increasing the size of Wetland
B and enhancing its buffer area will benefit the subject site as well as the City by improving the
water quality and habitat functions of Wetland B. The buffer enhancement included in the Wetland
Mitigation Plan has a ratio greater than 2.0 to 1.0 for buffer area loss.
EXHIBIT
_#4f
PAGE_S.3)_Or-_W
24
Mirror Estates
Wetland Modification Criteria
Page 3
Criterion No. 6 — It will result in no net loss of wetland area, function or value.
The FWCC Section 22-1358 requires a wetland replacement ratio of 1.5 to 1.0 for scrub/shrub
wetlands. As noted, 10,974 square feet of wetland will be created and approximately 52,169
square feet of buffer will be enhanced resulting in no net loss of area. Construction of new
wetland adjacent to Wetland B serves to increase the function and value of a much larger wetland
resulting in an overall gain.
Criterion No. 7 — The project is in the best interest of the public health, safety
and welfare.
The various components of the applicant's proposal will be in the best interest of the public health,
safety, and welfare. The Mirror Estates property separates existing neighborhoods on the north
and south sides. Wetland fill is necessary to implement the planned street system. The fill allows
for the connection and completion of the City's neighborhood road circulation system by
eliminating two dead -ends thus providing better access for emergency vehicles and residents of the
neighborhood. Traffic circulation should be improved for all surrounding residents. The impacted
wetland area and function can be replaced on the site to prevent detrimental effects to the public.
Criterion No. 8 — The applicant has demonstrated sufficient scientific expertise
and supervisory capability to carry out the project.
Mr. Gary Schulz is the project ecologist and has assisted with mitigation planning and has the
qualifications and experience to supervise the installation of the wetland buffer enhancement and
wetland mitigation plan. Mr. Schulz has extensive experience with this project type as evidenced
by the following:
• Landscape/Wetland/Stream And Buffer Enhancement Plan, Verizon Property PRD, City of
Redmond, WA 4/4/06.
• Wetland Mitigation Plan For Shamrock Subdivision Plat (Low Impact Development
Project) King County, WA 5/2/04.
O Curry Property PRD: Off -site Wetland Mitigation Plan, City of Redmond, WA 5/9/03.
• Wetland Enhancement Mitigation Plan For Roberts Property PRD, City of Redmond, WA
2120/99.
EXHIBIT
1
25 PAGE _WJ�L k=J_ '._ _ .,
I
Mirror Estates
Wetland Modification Criteria
Page 4
Criterion No. 9 — The applicant is committed to monitoring the project and to
make corrections if the project fails to meet projected goals.
A monitoring program, maintenance schedule, and contingency plan has been completed as
required under FWCC Section 22-1358. The mitigation plan is included in the wetland report and
prepared as a complete construction document. A performance security instrument may be
required prior to implementing the mitigation plan. After the mitigation plan is constructed a
performance security will be provided to the City to cover the monitoring and estimated
maintenance costs. Five years of monitoring will be conducted for the wetland and buffer areas
based on the goals identified in the wetland mitigation plan. The applicant will pay all costs
associated with the monitoring and any replacement plant materials that may be required.
26
ExHisrr-41- —
PAGE Aff-OF-W-
Decisional Criteria
"Structures, improvements and land surface modifications within regulated
wetland buffers." FWCC Section 22-1359
Wetland B Buffer Modification
The proposed wetland creation area will expand the area of Wetland B to greater than 1 acre
(approx. 49,000 s.f.) and combined with its buffer will be greater than 2 acres (approx. 91,000
s.f.). This sensitive area is referred to as Tract A. Use of the more disturbed portion of the
wetland buffer for wetland creation will not result in a reduced buffer. The standard buffer setback
of at least 50 feet will be provided around the wetland on the site. In addition, the entire buffer
area will have habitat enhancement.
The site plan includes a narrow private trail approximately 5 feet wide, within the buffer to provide
opportunities to enjoy the wetland as well as to physically connect the two portions of the project.
The pedestrian trail will start at the eastern culdesac an extend south along the outer edge or
wetland buffer to the south property boundary. The length of trail that crosses through the buffer
is less than 150 feet in length. The majority of this area was previously disturbed and is now
dominated by Himalayan blackberry shrubs.
The trail location is logical because there will be a storm drain line constructed within the buffer
along the southerly property line to carry drainage from the westerly portion of the site to the
detention and water quality facility on the easterly portion of the site. The pipe will be constructed
beneath a proposed trail and will result in a minor temporary disturbance of the buffer. Regardless
of the trail a storm line would need to be constructed to convey storm water to the existing
stormwater drainage pipe (outfall) at the south property line.
After the storm line is installed and the trail built over this alignment, the area will be restored.
Non-native blackberry shrubs will be removed and native trees and shrubs will be planted in this
area. Tree cover is light in this area but efforts to save native trees will be included during the
construction. The six criteria to be met to allow structures, improvements, and land surface
modifications within the wetland buffer are listed below with the explanations.
EXHI�
PAGE
J 27
Mirror Estates
Wetland Buffer Modification Criteria
Page 2
Criterion No. 1 — It will not adversely affect water quality.
During construction, the contractor will comply with a City -approved erosion control plan that will
address any temporary erosion impacts. Grading and clearing activities will be performed in the
spring or summer months and will be strictly limited to a narrow corridor of the minimum
dimension necessary to allow installation of the pipeline. After construction, the disturbed areas
will be temporarily seeded and mulched to control erosion. Permanent buffer plantings will be
installed with the other wetland plant material in the fall or winter months immediately following
the storm line construction.
Criterion No. 2 — It will not destroy nor damage a significant habitat area.
As stated above, the buffer area in question has been disturbed, is dominated by non-native
blackberry shrub covers and offers very limited habitat. Subsequent to the installation of the
pipeline, trail and new plant material, a large portion of the disturbed buffer area will be returned to
a more natural condition to provide additional habitat area.
Criterion No. 3 — It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention
capabilities.
The area of the buffer that will be temporarily disturbed (approximately 1,500 square feet) does not
currently provide any stormwater retention. Surface drainage patterns will not be affected by the
proposal. The wetland outflow elevation and conveyance channel will be maintained so there are
no hydrologic effects to Wetland B or adjacent properties.
Criterion No. 4 — It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion
hazards.
The site is relatively flat which helps minimize the potential for erosion. The clearing and grading
work will be conducted during the spring/summer months and the contractor will follow the
approved erosion control plan that will be developed for the site. Clearing limits will be identified
on -the -ground prior to construction to eliminate intrusions into the buffer beyond what is necessary
for the installation of the drain line. No unstable earth conditions nor erosion hazards are expected
with this work.
EXHIBIT
PAGE $�_OF�S_
28
Mirror Estates
Wetland Buffer Modification Criteria
Page 3
Criterion No. S — It will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the
area of the subject property nor to the City as a whole, including the loss of
significant open space or scenic vistas.
Only property owned by the applicant will be modified as part of this proposal. Currently, this
area of the buffer has been disturbed and when restored according to the proposed plan, will
provide a higher quality buffer and better views than the existing }puffer area. There will be no loss
of open space.
Criterion No. 6 — It is necessary for reasonable development of the property.
At a minimum, a storm drain line must be constructed from the westerly side of Wetland B to the
existing stormwater drainage pipe (outfall) at the southerly property line. The connection to the
existing pipe / culvert will require a new storm drain structure. The area of disturbance necessary
to install a stormwater drainage improvement is relatively small and is a necessary requirement to
prevent flooding and ensure adequate conveyance of stormwater.
ExHeB� A
PAGE O1.
29
C. Gary Schulz
August 21, 2006
Ms. Deb Barker
Associate Planner
City of Federal Way
P.O. Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063
Wetland/Forest Ecologist
7700 S. Lakeridge Drive
Seattle, Washington 98178-3135
206/772/6514 425/235/4338 Fax
Re: Addendum to Wetland Determination & Mitigation Plan, Mirror Estates —
City of Federal Way: File #05-100590-00-SU.
Dear Ms. Barker:
In response to a request contained in your May 1.8, 2006 letter to Mr. ]errit 3olma P.E., this
letter can be considered as an Addendum to the Wetland Determination & Mitigation flan
Mirror Estates Property (3/1/06 Schulz). Specifically, wetland impact clarification for
Wetland E was not included in the Wetland. Determination & Wetland Mitigation report
(Schulz 3/1/06). Wetland E is described on page 9 of the report but the area of Wetland E
(1,886 square feet) was not included in the Wetland Impact Assessment section on page 10.
Per Federal Way's wetland regulation standards, Wetland E is a non -regulated wetland and was
not included in the Wetland Mitigation Plan. -
In summary, Wetlands A, C/D, and E are planned for fill as part of the Mirror Estates
Project. If there are questions about this letter or further clarification is needed, please
contact me. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
C_ vLEcolog5istl_l
O�y
Wetland/For
Cc: New Concept Homes
Jerrit Johna, P.E. J3 Civil
EXH7W
IBIT l�� -
PAGE__t__-
o
RESUBMITTED
S E P 0 1 2006
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
BUILDING DEPT.
C. Gary Schulz
April 12, 2006
Ms. Deb Barker
Associate Planner
City of Federal Way
P.O. Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063
Wetland/Forest Ecologist
7700 S. Lakeridge Drive
Seattle, Washington 98178-3135
206/772/6514 425/235/4338 Fax
Re: Response for Wetland Peer Review on the Mirror Estates Project —
City of Federal Way: File #05-100590-00-SU.
Dear Ms. Barker:
This letter provides a brief response to the comments and requests contained in the July 7,
2005 Memorandum and October 21, 2005 Memorandum provided by Sheldon & Associates
(Ms. Suzanne Bagshaw, Ph.D.) The majority of the responses and related information have
been incorporated into the Wetland Determination & Wetland Mitigation report (Schulz
3/l/06) and Wetland Mitigation Plan (Altmann Oliver Associates 3/16/06). I have tried to
identify most of the responses and revisions in the by noting them in the text of the wetland
report. Below is an item -by -item summary that I hope makes it simpler to verify the
information.
July_ 7, 2005 Memorandtim
1.1.1 Revise Wetland A Functions Assessment.
The revised functions assessment is included in Appendix A.
1.2.2 Wetland B Category II rating and 100-foot buffer.
Peer review determined Wetland B is Category III with 50-foot buffer.
1.2.3 Wetland B outlet channel and stormwater structure.
Outlet elevation and new stormwater structure shown on plans.
outlet elevation (See Pg. 15 of report).
1.3.1 Delineate wetland east of Flags C-1 & C-15.
Wetland C's eastern lobe area was delineated and added to map.
1.3.2 Correct Wetland C flagging.
Flags C-3 and C-5 connected to eliminate the C-4 location.
No change to
EXHIBIT A 3
PAGE1_OF�
RESUBMITTED
APR 14 2006
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
BUILDING DEPT.
Ms. Deb Barker — Mirror Estates
April 12, 2006
Page 2
Jill 7, 2005 Nleinoranri«in
1.3.3 Wetlands C & D combined to be a regulated wetland.
Acknowledged and now is referenced as Wetland C/D having, a total area of 3,568
s.f.
1.3.4 Category III wetlands less than 10,000 s.f require a 25-foot buffer.
Acknowledged and Wetland C/D buffer area has been calculated.
1.4.1 Delineate additional wetland near 8`h Place S.W.
Additional wetland delineated and mapped as Wetland E. Wetland is unregulated
due to its small size.
2.1.1 Wetland Modification — Process IV evaluation needs to be completed.
Appendix C of report contains modification criteria and evaluation.
2.1.2 Provide a final mitigation plan in compliance with City code.
Wetland Mitigation Report and Plan is being submitted. Meetings with City staff
indicate the Mirror Estates project is feasible.
2.2.1 Wetland B Buffer Modification — Process IV evaluation needs to be completed.
Appendix C of report contains modification criteria and evaluation.
2.2.2 Wetland buffer revegetation required after any modfication.
All temporary impacts will be restored per Wetland Mitigation Plan (See Pg. 15 of
report).
-2.2.3 Apply City Stormwater Management regulations to activities in buffers.
Acknowledged, erosion control measures will be included prior to clearing or
grading.
2.2.4 Wetland buffer modifications require approval through Process IV evaluation.
Appendix C of report contains modification criteria and evaluation.
2.2.5 Provide functions assessment of Wetland B and buffer.
Pre -development and post -development assessment found on Pg. 14 of report.
EXHIBIT 4
PAGE. OF q
Ms. Deb Barker — Mirror Estates
April 12, 2006
Page 3
,T-iiIy-2 2005 tifemorandiun
2.2.6 Provide information and details of Wetland B outlet improvements.
Outlet elevation and new stormwater structure shown on plans. No change to
outlet elevation (See Engineering details and Pg. 15 of report).
2.2.7, 2.2.8, & 2.2.9 Provide information regarding Wetland B hydrology.
Post -development discussion of hydrology is found on Pg. 15 of report.
2.2.10 Foot -trail intrusion into buffer to be part of the Process IV evaluation.
Appendix C of report contains modification criteria and evaluation. Foot -trail is
revised to only facilitate a pedestrian connection for the east and west portions of
the project.
2.3.1 Wetland Modification — Process IV for filling Wetland C/D.
Appendix C of report contains modification criteria and evaluation. Also Impact
Assessment section of report provides information (See Pg. 10 —12 of report).
2.3.2 Provide mitigation plan per City code.
Mitigation Plan (311/06 Schulz) & (3/16/06 Altmann Oliver Associates) is being
submitted.
2.4.1 & 2.4.2 Additional Wetland — provide modification and mitigation information.
Additional wetland delineated and mapped as Wetland E. Wetland is unregulated
due to its small size.
exHiser � 3
PAGE-A-OF-q_
Ms. Deb Barker — Mirror Estates
April 12, 2006
Page 4
October 21. 2045_Mpmorandugn
This memo provided a summary of a meeting that was held on 10/14/05. Most of the
memo's contents refer to the peer review memo contents that are listed above. The one
comment that is additional is the requirement to replace area of wetland buffer loss or
enhance wetland buffer at a ratio of 1.0 to 1.0. The planned buffer loss of 20,216 s.f is
being mitigated with 52,169 s.f of buffer enhancement. Please refer to Pg. 13 of the
mitigation report and Sheets W 1.1 to W4.1 of the mitigation plan document.
If there are questions about this letter or further clarification is needed, please contact me.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely, Q
C. Gary 5chu
Wetland/Forest Ecologist
7700 S. Lakeridge Drive
Seattle, Washington 98178
Cc: New Concept Homes
Jerrit Johna, P.E. J3 Civil
�EXHIBPT n -' --
PAGE-4- tOF�_ _
Technical Memorandum
To:
From:
10230 NE Points Drive
Suite400 Copies:
Kirkland, EA 98033
Phone (425) 8224446 Date:
Fax (425) 827-9577
Subject:
Project No.:
Deb Barker, Planner, City of Federal Way
Suzanne Bagshaw, Wetland Ecologist
January 19, 2007
Mirror Estates: Review of Revised Mitigation Plan
30879E
As requested by the City of Federal Way, I conducted a review of the revised wetland mitigation
plan for Mirror Estates Preliminary Plat and the associated documents for compliance with Federal
Way City Code. Those documents included:
• Wetland Determination & Mitigation Plan, Mirror Estates Property, by C. Gary Schulz,
Wetland/Forest Ecologist, dated March 1, 2006;
• Letter from C. Gary Schulz, Wetland/Forest Ecologist, to Deb Barker, City of Federal Way, Re:
Addendum to Wetland Determination & Mitigation Plan, Mirror Estates, dated August 21, 2006;
• Wetland Mitigation Plan, Sheets W1.1, W2.1, W3.1, and W4.1 by Altman Oliver Associates, LLC
dated March 16, 2006;
• Revised Mirror Estates Preliminary Plat Map, Preliminary Grading and Utilities Map, and Tree
Retention Plan, Sheets 1 through 3, by J3 Civil, PLLC, dated August 29 and 30, 2006;
• Mirror Estates Landscape Plan, Sheet L1, by GHA Landscape Architects, dated August 10,
2006;
• Mirror Estates Technical Information Report, by Jerrit Johna, P.E. of J3 Civil, PLLC, dated May
10, 2005, revised November 16, 2005;
• Letter from Jerrit Jolma, P.E. of J3 Civil, PLLC, to Deb Barker, City of Federal Way regarding
clarification to Addendum #1, Section 1 of the November 16, 2005 TIR;
• Wildlife Study Report, Mirror Estates Preliminary Plat, by Chad Armour, LLC, dated July 31,
2004;
• Revised SEPA Checklist, dated August 1, 2006, by Jerrit Jolma, P.E. of J3 Civil, PLLC;
• City of Federal Way Final Staff Evaluation for the Environmental Checklist Mirror Estates
Preliminary Plat, dated OctobetA, 2006;
• MDNS for Mirror Estates Preliminary Plat by City of Federal Way, dated October 7, 2006;
• Memorandum from Suzanne Bagshaw and Kevin O'Brien of Sheldon & Associates, Inc., dated
July 7, 2005, to Deb Barker, City of Federal Way, regarding Review of Irletland Determination and
Conceptual Midigafiion Plan for the Mirror Estates Property by C. Gary Schulz, dated January 22, 2005;
1J
C:\DOCUME--1 \Default\LOCt1LS--1 \Temp\Barker011907M.doc
EXHIBITC
PAGEJL.OP./y_
- Deb Barker, Planner, City of Federal Way
Mirror Estates: Relnew of Revised Miligation Plan
Page 2
January 19, 2007
• Memorandum from Suzanne Bagshaw of Sheldon & Associates, Inc., dated October 21, 2005,
to Deb Barker, City of Federal Way, regarding Mirror Estates Project: October 14, 2005 Meeting
and Change in Rating for Wetland B;
• Relevant sections of Federal Way City Code (FWCC).
Memorandum Summary
Section 1 includes a summary of project impacts to wetlands and buffers, and the proposed
mitigation. Generally speaking, when the Mitigation Plan Sheets are revised and approved by the
City, the proposed modifications to regulated wetlands and buffers onsite will satisfy the
necessary criteria for Process IV evaluation.
Section 2 is a review of the revised Wetland Determination Report and Mitigation Plan by C.
Gary Schulz. The revised Wetland Determination Report addresses the majority of the issues
raised in previous memoranda from Sheldon & Associates, Inc. Any necessary corrections and
additions to the Mitigation Plan should be addressed when the Mitigation Plan Sheets are
revised. A second revision and re -submittal of the Wetland Determination Report and
Mitigation Plan is not required.
Section 3 is a review of the Mitigation Plan Sheets W1.1-W4.1 by Altman Oliver Associates,
LLC. There are a number of required corrections and additions to the Mitigation Plan Sheets
that can be addressed when they are revised and re -submitted.
Section 4 is a list of additional required information.
Section 5 is a list of recommended project conditions.
I. Summary of Project Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
The square footages included below were provided in e-mails and telephone conversations with
Jerrit Johna, P.E. of J3 Civil, PLLC and Simone Oliver of Altman Oliver Associates, LLC. See Table
1 below for a summary.
Table I. Summary of Project Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
Impacts
Mitigation
Total Wedand Impacts
7,316 sq. ft.
Wetland Creation (1.5:1)
11,254 sq. ft.
Total Buffer Impacts
20,567 sq. ft.
Buffer Addition
947 sq. ft.
Buffer Enhancement (2:1)
41,041 sq. ft.
La. Wetland Impacts and Mitigation
Two Category III scrub -shrub wetlands [FWCC 22-1357 (a)(3)], Wetlands A and C/D will be
filled. Wetland A is 3,748 square feet and Wetland C/D is 3,568 square feet, for a combined
wetland impact of 7,316 square feet. FWCC 22-1358 (e)(3) requires a 1.5 to 1 ratio (mitigation
to impact) for Category III scrub -shrub wetlands, for a minimum of 10,974 square feet of
wetland creation. The mitigation plan proposes to create 11,254 square feet of wetland adjacent
EXHIBIT
CADOCUML-1\Default\LOCALS--1\Temp\Barkcr011907M.doc PACE _$_P _OF
Deb Barker, Planner, City ofFederal Way
Mirror Estates: Review of Revised Mitigation Plan
Page 3
January 19, 2007
to Wedand B which exceeds the minimum FWCC compensation requirement by 280 square
feet. Including the created wetland area and new net buffer for Wedand B (see 1.c below), there
will be a net gain of 10,688 square feet to the existing Wedand B and buffer complex. In
addition, the created wetland will include a large snag, large woody debris, and bat boxes as
wildlife habitat features.
I .b. Process IV Criteria for Wetland Modification
Filling Wetlands A and C/D constitutes modifications to regulated wetlands [FWCC 22-1358
(d)]. Wedand modifications must satisfy nine criteria, and require approval through Process IV
evaluation [FWCC 22-1358(d)]. Appendix C in the revised Wedand Determination Report and
Mitigation Plan dated March 1, 2006 by C. Gary Schulz satisfactorily addresses the required
criteria for Process IV evaluation of wetland modifications. Wedand modifications also require
approval of a mitigation plan [FWCC 22-1358 (e)(1)]. The applicant has provided a mitigation
plan (Weiland Mitigation Plan Sheets W1.1-W4.1 by Altman Oliver Associates, LLC, dated
3/16/06) which is reviewed in this memorandum.
I.c. Buffer Impacts and Mitigation
The onsite portions of the buffers of Wetlands A and C/D (19,054 square feet) will be
impacted by the project. Although a small net amount of Wedand B buffer square footage
(approximately 500 square feet) will be lost in order to create the compensatory wetland
adjacent to the west side of Wedand B, the required 50-foot buffer will be added to the west
side of the created wetland. In addition, the proposed five-foot wide pedestrian path (693
square feet) and an offset from the southern boundary (408 square feet) will be constructed in
Wedand B buffer. As a result, there will be a total loss of 1,513 square feet of Wetland B buffer.
This is a total buffer loss of 20,567 square feet. However, 947 square feet of buffer will be
added at the southeast corner of Wedand B buffer. With the added buffer square footage, there
will be a total net loss of 19,620 square feet of buffer onsite. To compensate, the entire Wedand
B buffer (40,094 square feet) and added buffer area (947 square feet) will be enhanced by
removing non-native invasive plant species and planting native trees and shrubs. This is
approximately a 2:1 enhancement ratio (mitigation to impact).
I .d. Process IV Criteria for Wetland Modification
Impacts to the buffers for Wetlands A, B, and C/D constitute buffer modifications. Weiland
buffer modifications must satisfy five criteria, and require approval through Process IV
evaluation [FWCC 22-1359 (f)]. Appendix C in the revised Wetland Determination Report and
Mitigation Plan dated March 1, 2006 by C. Gary Schulz satisfactorily addresses the required
criteria for Process IV evaluation. The criteria for modification to the buffers of Wetlands A
and C/D are addressed as part of the criteria for the modification to those wetlands. The
criteria for the modification to Wedand B buffer are addressed in a separate section. Criterion 5
for buffer modification [FWCC 22-1359 (f)(5)] requires that "It (buffer modification) will not be
materialydetrimental to any other property in the area of the subject property nor to the city as a whole, including
the loss of open .pace." Although there will be a net loss of buffer square footage, a portion of that
impact is due to construction of the pedestrian path in Wedand B buffer. In addition Wetland
EXHIBIT.
CADOCUME-1\Default\LOCALS-1\Temp\Barker011907M.doc PAGE OF
Deb Barker, Planner, City of Federal Way
^ Mirror Estates: Reviezv o f Kevued Mitigation Plan
Page 4
January 19, 2007
B buffer will be enhanced at a 2:1 ratio (enhancement to impact) so that there will be no net
loss of functions. The project incorporates open space, including the pedestrian trail and
adjacent open areas. Buffer modifications also require approval of a buffer enhancement plan
[FWCC 22-1359 (f)]. The applicant has provided a mitigation plan which includes buffer
enhancement (Wetland Mitigation Plan Sheets W1.1-W4.1 by Altman Oliver Associates, LLC,
dated 3/16/06). That mitigation plan is reviewed in this memorandum.
2. Review of the Revised Wetland Determination Report and Mitigation Plan
The revised Wetland Determination Report and Mitigation Plan dated March 1, 2006 by C. Gary
Schulz satisfactorily addressed the majority of the issues raised in the two Sheldon & Associates
memoranda dated July 7, 2005 and October 21, 2005. Changes to the Mitigation Plan required in
Section 3 below can be addressed when the mitigation plan sheets W1.1-W4.1 are revised and
resubmitted. Resubmittal of a revised Wedand Determination and Mitigation Plan Report is not
necessary.
3. Review of the Mitigation Plan Sheets
Provide the following corrections and additions listed below. Text that should be added is indicated
by ifndcilirring and italics
3.a. Sheet W 1.1
3.a.1 Pedestrian Path: correct the layout and width of the pedestrian path so that it is consistent
among all of the site plan sets (e.g. mitigation plans, civil site plans, etc.).
3.a.2 Buffers of Wetlands A and C/D: include only the onsite portions of the buffers of
Wetlands A and C/D. Provide square footages for the existing onsite buffers for each of
Wetlands A and C/D. Correct the designated locations and square footages of these buffer
impacts on Sheet W1.1 and all other applicable drawings and site plans, including the civil
plan set.
3.a.3 Wetland B Buffer: provide the square footage of the existing onsite buffer for Wedand B.
Correct the designated locations and square footages of impacts to Wedand B Buffer —both
the pedestrian path and any existing buffer square footage located outside of the path (area
between the outer edge of the path and the outside edge of the buffer) are buffer impacts and
must be designated and counted as such.
3.a.4 Created Wedand: correct the square footage of created wedand.
3.a.5 Buffer Enhancement: correct the designated location and square footage of buffer
enhancement. Neither the created wedand nor any of existing buffer square footage located
outside of the path (area between the outer edge of the path and the outside edge of the
buffer) count as buffer enhancement.
3.a.6 Buffer Addition areas: using a different fill pattern, designate and label the proposed buffer
addition areas, and provide square footages.
3.a.7 Buffer Perimeter Fence: show the location of the buffer perimeter fence. Where the buffer
is adjacent to lots (Lots 7, 8, 17, 18, 21, and 22), the buffer perimeter fence shall be located''
HIBW-F
0
E]C
CADOCUML-1\Default\LOCALS-1\'Temp\Barker011907M.doc PAGE
Deb Barker, Planner, City ofFederal Way
Mirror Estates. Review of Revised Mitigation Plan
Page 5
January 19, 2007
along the edge of the buffer. Where the path intrudes into the buffer and buffer addition
areas, the buffer perimeter fence shall be located along the wetland side of the path. Show the
location of the buffer perimeter fence on all applicable drawings and site plans, including the
civil plan set. Provide design details for the buffer perimeter fence on Sheet W2.1. The buffer
perimeter fence (split -rail fence or similar) shall allow for the passage of small animals.
3.a.8 Signs: designate locations for critical area signs along the buffer perimeter fence. Signs shall
say that human and pet access into the buffer and wetland is prohibited. There shall be a
minimum of one permanent sign per lot. Designate locations along the pedestrian trail for
installation of educational signs which explain the important functions that wetlands and
buffers perform. There shall be a minimum of two permanent educational signs. Show the
locations of the signs on all other applicable drawings and site plans, including the civil plan
set. Provide design details for the critical areas signs and the educational signs on Sheet W2.1.
3.b. Sheet W2.1
3.b.1 The grading plan proposes a limited section of 1:1 slope along the western side of the
created wetland. This is too steep. Wherever possible, and without damaging existing tree
roots, relax the slope to a maximum of 3:1 (rurimse). In areas where the slope needs to be 1
to preserve tree roots, place large two- or three man rocks, or large woody debris (as shown
in the drawing) along the slope to stabilize it. Provide specifications to decompact the
construction access route to the created wetland.
3.b.2 Detail 1 Snag w/Nest Box Detail. Provide corrections to the text and title to include:
There is no nest box: delete from the title.
The snag should be cedar if possible, with 20-inch minimum dbh (as specified).
However, the City may be willing to approve a smaller dbh (minimum of 12 inches) if
the snag is cedar rather than Douglas fir. Because this snag will be installed in a wetland
with expected inundation of two feet or more, a minimum of 30 percent of the total
length of the snag should be buried. Extra diligence must be taken to firmly compact the
soil around the buried snag since the area of created wetland where it will be installed is
expected to have saturated or inundated soils year-round.
3.b.3 Add roof drain outlets into Wetland B buffer from Lots 18 and 21 to provide additional
hydrology to the created wetland area. Show the location of the roof drain outlets from Lots
18 and 21, as well as those from Lots 4 through 8 and Lot 22, on all other applicable
drawings and site plans, including the civil plan set. All roof drain outlet structures should be
placed at the outer edges of the buffer.
3.b.4 As specified in 3.a.7 and 3.a.8, provide design details for the buffer perimeter fence, the
permanent critical areas signs, and the permanent educational signs.
3.b.5 Provide a detailed grading plan as specified in comment 4.e.
3.b.6 Correct Note 5: "All wetland and bu er mitigation planting..."
EX14 (� --
C:\DOCUME-�1\Default\LOCALS-1\Temp\Barker011907M.doc PAGE OF
Deb Barker, Planner, City ofFederal Way
Mirror Estates. Review of Revised Mifi�ation Plan
3.c. Sheet W3.1
Page 6
January 19, 2007
3.e.1 Planting Plan: provide corrections:
• Do not install trees, shrubs, or cuttings in the channel to the wetland outlet structure at
the south end of the wetland.
• Scouler willow (Salix scouleriana) prefers drier conditions than other common native
willow species. Add Sitka willow (Salix sitcbensis) and Hooker willow (Salix bookeriana) to
install next to or in wetland areas.
• Clustered rose (Rosa pisocarpa) prefers wet conditions. Add Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana)
for the drier locations in the buffer.
• High -bush cranberry (Viburnum edule) prefers somewhat damp conditions.
• Consider adding ocean -spray (Holodiscus discolor) and mock orange (Pbilade pbus Imisiz) for
drier upland conditions.
• Areas where the buffer is less than 50 feet wide (e.g. along the pedestrian path) should be
especially densely planted. In these areas two -gallon trees should be spaced at eight feet
on center.
3.c.2 Detail 1 Container Shrub Detail. Provide corrections to the text and title to include:
• The majority of the trees will be planted as two -gallon containers. Add "tree" to the title.
• The soil moisture retention agent shall not be used in any wetland areas.
• Mulch shall not be used in any wetland areas. In the buffer on the west side of the
wetland, apply 6 inches of arborist mulch to the entire area of dense plantings. On the
east side of the wetland where plantings are scattered, apply 6 inches of arborist mulch to
a minimum width of 36 inches around installed plants. Mulch should be pulled back
approximately 4 inches from all stems. Mulch shall not touch stems or trunks of installed
plants.
• Add the note from Detail 2 for planting on slopes.
3.e.3 Detail 2 Bare -Root Planting Detail. Provide corrections to the text.to include:
Mulch shall not be used in any wetland areas. In the buffer on the west side of the
wetland, apply 6 inches of arborist mulch to the entire area of dense plantings. On the
east side of the wetland where plantings are scattered, apply 6 inches of arborist mulch to
a minimum width of 36 inches around installed plants. Mulch should be pulled back
approximately 4 inches from all stems. Mulch shall not touch stems or trunks of installed
plants.
3.c.4 General Planting Installation Notes.
• Note 3 correct: "...or in exposed areas." delete "year"
• Note 4 correct "...remove after one�r."
• Note 6 correct: fertilizer shall not be used in any wetland areas. Add text to conform
with Section 9.3 on Sheet W4.1
• Note 7 correct: soil moisture retention agent shall not be used in any wetland areas. Add
text to conform with Section 9.2 on Sheet W4.1
EAH 1 IT
PAGE OF
C:\DOCUME-1 \Default\LOCALS-1\'Temp\BarkecOl 19071bLdoc
Deb Barker, Planner, City ofFederal Way
Mirror Estates. Review of Revised Mitigation Plan
Page 7
January 19, 2007
• Add: Note 8. All irtstalled lants .shall be to ed or otherwise marked at or• lre orx installalion so that
1hev can be icletheItae- y�ear rnorr to►afrg-Period
3.e.5 Plant Schedule. A vigorous root system is the most important factor for successful
establishment of restoration/enhancement plantings. The height of the plant above ground is
much less important. Twelve inch height for the one- or two- gallon container -grown shrubs
and 18 inches for the two -gallon container -grown trees is adequate. Generally speaking,
container -grown plants have a significantly higher survival and establishment rate than bare -
root or balled and burlapped plants. Except for willow stakes, install one- or two -gallon
container -grown shrubs, and two- or five -gallon container -grown trees.
3.e.6 Plant Schedule. Trees: Provide corrections to the text to include:
Indicate that Pacific willows will be installed as dormant cuttings December 1 through
March 1, and as one -gallon container -grown plants during the rest of the year.
Most trees should be installed as two -gallon container -grown plants, except for the larger
cedars and hemlocks which will be installed on the east side of the wetland. These
should be five -gallon container -grown plants.
3.e.7 Plant Schedule. Shrubs: Provide corrections to the text to include:
• Indicate that willows will be installed as dormant cuttings December 1 through March 1,
and as one -gallon container -grown plants during the rest of the year.
• Scouler willow (Salix scouleriana) prefers drier conditions than other common native
willow species. Add Sitka willow (Salix sitebensis) and Hooker willow (Salix hookeriana) to
install in or adjacent to wetland areas.
• Clustered rose (Rosa pisocarpa) prefers wet conditions. Add Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana)
for the drier locations in the buffer.
• Consider adding ocean -spray (Holodiscus discolor) and mock orange (Philadeohus lewisiz) for
drier upland conditions,
3.e.8 Plant Schedule. Buffer Seed Mix: Provide corrections to the tide and text to indicate that
grass seed shall not be planted in the buffer areas. Research has shown that seeding grass in
enhancement areas significantly reduces the growth and vigor of installed trees and shrubs.
3.c.9 Detail 3 Cutting Planting Detail. Provide corrections to the text to include:
• "Use at least a 36 inch steel bar.... when planting all cuttings. Insert spike to a minimum of
24 inches or to at least one f al g the Length o f the cuitirr whichever is 60 er. . Insert cutting
and..."
• "Insert cuttings manually ... to a depth of at least 24 inches, or to at least one halof the Lerr�th
of the awing, whichever is deeper_. Leave a minimum of 16 inches of cutting above ground..."
• Note 1. "Dornurrrt cuttings shall be willow species as noted in Section 17.4 on Sheet IF14.1.
Cullirr s will on& be used i anting ocerrrs beliveen December If and Magh I". For planfing between
Mareb P and Dece�rrber 1" one- allon container rows plants shall be installed Naliav willow crrttin s
shall be gnown and collect d in the Carver Prr et Sound areee ronr dormant trees and shrubs
• Note 2. "Cuttings shall be at least 318 diameter and..."
CADOCUME-1 \Default\LOCALS— 1 \Temp\Barkcr011907M.doc
EXH
PAGE!ROF
Deb Barker, Planner, City of Federal Way
Mirror Estates: Review of 'Retised Mitigation Plan
Page 8
January 19, 2007
• Notes 3, 4, and 5. Provide corrections to these notes to be consistent with paragraph 7
of corrected Section 8.1 on Sheet W4.1 (comment 3.d.14).
3.e.10 Notes. Correct Note 5 to: "All wetland and lru i mitigation planting areas shall be
irrigated...."
3.d. Sheet W4.1
3.d.1 Section 1.1 - Grading Schedule. Provide corrections to the text to include:
First paragraph: earthwork in the created wetland area must be completed by August 31
to ensure adequate establishment of the seeds of the emergent species prior to the rainy
season. Exposed areas of the buffer shall be stabilized with arborist mulch, not by
seeding grass.
Add the following text to the second paragraph "Pre erenliall , planting should occur
anytime between December 1 and March 31, exc t drain errods a ►-ee i► t m eratures or
snow, to take advanta e o natyrall moist soils."
3.d.2 Section 1.2 - General Site conditions. Add the following text to the end of the second
paragraph: Clearing limits shall be la ed and TT -:SC measures s all be installed be ory the comrrrerrcement
of cra clearing oror�radfrrg aciivities
3.d.3 Section 1.3 - Existing Vegetation to Remain.
First paragraph, correct the first sentence to: "Prior to grading... -at the dri line or the
cleann ading limits whichever distance is Zmalet. for all trees .
• Correct the second paragraph, last sentence to: "Plant species and quantities to be
approved by PE and the Cily oFede►al may. prior to in
3.d.4 Section 1.5 - Clear and Grub.
First paragraph, after the sentence "Landscape Contractor shall remove blackberry... by
hand, with minimal disturbance to the existing vegetation." add: It is stron recarrrnrended
that a Weed Wrench TM ht rvww.weedrvrench.com be used to mviove blackbem crowns and roots
when the soil is moist. Non-naliw inraswe geges shall be removed roar the entire Wletland B buffer
rra and the created wetland area.
First paragraph, after the last sentence add: Reed canar e8gs can he le l in Nace i the AE
determines that removal actions M ht damn e mislin Metal
to remain - nrlierrlar! on the east side
of the wetland card adjacent to the existing wetland.
Second paragraph add: "PE and the Cate of Federal Way to designate any additional plant
species..."
3.d.5 Section 1.7 - Excavate Mitigation Area. Second paragraph, correct depth of excavation and
topsoil replacement from 6 inches to 12 inches to be consistent with Note 4 on Sheets W1.1
and W2.1.
3.d.6 Section 1.9 - Bentonite Contingency. First paragraph, after the first sentence add: The Ci a
Federal Va7 must aZrove the deli n and use o a bentonite clay liner.
3.d.7 Section 2.1 - Install Snag. First paragraph, after the first sentence add: The srra urall6e
installed according to Detail l SAa w Mesl Fax Detail on Sheet W2.1. Correct this paragraph to
C: \DOCUME-1 \Defau1t\LOCALS-1 \Temp\Barker011907M.doc
Exfil Y
PAGE �►F
I—)
Deb Barker, Planner, City ofFederal Way
Mirror Estates: ReVieav of Revised N1itiSation Plan
Page 9
January 19, 2007
concur with corrections for that detail in comment 3.b.2 above, specifically, there is only one
snag to be installed; the snag should be cedar if possible with 20-inch minimum dbh,
although the City may be willing to approve a smaller dbh (minimum of 12 inches) if the snag
is cedar; and a minimum of 30 percent of the total length of the snag should be buried.
3.d.8 Section 3.1- Place Stockpiled Topsoil. Second paragraph, the correct depth of topsoil
replacement from 6 inches to 12 inches to be consistent with Note 4 on Sheets W1.1 and
W2.1.
3.d.9 Section 3.2 - Irrigation. Add the following text to the end of the fourth paragraph: E ecial!
dry conditions or warm term eraluns way necessitale Ire innirr irri ation soo er in the season and or
PYr7 attic more fiMuegLI drarin the season.
3.d.10 Section 3.3 - Hydroseed. Provide corrections to the text to include: only the created and
disturbed wetland areas should be seeded (with the wedand mix). Bare soils in the buffer
areas shall not be seeded with grass. Instead stabilize bare soils in the buffer with arborist
mulch.
3.d.11 Section 5.1 - Soil Stabilization. Provide corrections to the text to include: as in comment
3.d.10 above, only the created and disturbed wedand areas should be seeded (with the
wedand mix). Bare soils in the buffer areas shall be stabilized with arborist mulch.
3.d.12 Part 6 - Damage and Road Maintenance. At the end of the third paragraph add: "Any
changes or modifications to this plan must receive prior approval from AOA and the QU o
Federal 1��+."
3.d.13 Section 7.2 - General Conditions.
• First paragraph, provide corrections to the text to include: except for areas that will be
graded, use only manual means to remove non-native invasive plant species from the
entire Wedand B buffer. Use of a Weed Wrench TM (http://www.weedwrench.com/) to
remove blackberry crowns and roots from moist soil is recommended.
• Add the following text to the end of the first paragraph: Herbicide use shall not be allowed in
wetland area.. L.inrrted herbicide use M be allowed in O&nd brr er areas onl with a roval fmm the
City of Federal Ilia - terrnanual coniml e 'arts have ailed. ❑nl Rodeo®a l hosate herbicide or
olher• herbicides thal are QMrayed forrise in wetland and strear)r bit ers shall be its ed. Herbicide s all
not be rcr eel in buffer arras. Wli e or arm r�rred ller�hicide on leaves or cut stems as rn note -
late sWrrrrrrer as usuall the most aTective season or herbicide use. To control blackberries in the late
srrr»mer, cut re- routs to within "o the rountl and immediate AgiLWZrvi e errl ends wish
car entrated Rodeog. Non-native inrracive geyes shall be rerrloved rom the entire Wetland B hrr er
area arrd the created wetland area. Reed canes crass can be let in Place rf the PE deterrraines that
matoval actions mi ht damn e exislin KM--ation to remain - inLatlarl. on the east side o the wetland
and a&cenl to the existing wetland.
3.d.14 Section 8.1 - Plant Materials.
• First paragraph, last sentence add: "PE and the Cif of .Federal 1 shall pre -approve..."
• Second paragraph, provide corrections to the text to include: no horticultural varieties of
native species shall be used.
C:\DOCUME— 1 \Defau1t\LOCALS--1 \Temp\Barker011907M.doc
EXHIE31 G'
PAGE-01-OF
Deb Barker, Planner, City ofFederal Way Page 10
Mirror Estale.c ReVieaw of Revised Mitigation Plan January 19, 2007
• Third paragraph, add the following text to the end of the last sentence: 111an1 itecies
srrbslitation ie uirys.a ravel figm tl e. Gly offederal il/a .
• Fourth paragraph: balled and burlapped plants should not be installed (see comment
3.c.5 above). Delete those specifications.
• Seventh paragraph, provide corrections to the first sentence: "Native willow cuttings shall
be grown and collected in the Lower Prr et or�rrd area. Csrttirr s will be an xsted ors m
elonnant willows." Third sentence: " ornra i cuttings shall be a minimum..." Second to the
last sentence and last sentence: "Cuttings shall only be used if planting occurs between
December 1 and March 1. For_NagLing between March 1 and December 1 one -gallon container -
Down Plants shall be installed."
3.d.15 Part 9 -Plant Installation. Add the following text: ,All installedLlanls shall be flamed or
otherwise marked at or be ore installation so that They can be idenai ed throe howl the rue year moniloii�nv
eriocL
3.d.16 Section 9.1 - Soil Preparation/Amendments. Provide corrections to the text to include:
the soil moisture retention agent shall not be used in any wetland areas.
3.d.17 Section 9.2 - Soil Moisture Retention Agent. Provide corrections to the text to include: the
soil moisture retention agent shall not be used in any wetland areas.
3.d.18 Section 9.3 - Fertilizer. Provide corrections to the text to include: fertilizer shall not be
used in any wetland areas.
3.d.19 Section 9.4 - Mulch. Provide corrections to the text to include: Mulch shall not be used in
any wetland areas. In the buffer on the west side of the wedand, apply 6 inches of arborist
mulch to the entire area of dense plantings. On the east side of the wetland where plantings
are scattered, apply 6 inches of arborist mulch to a minimum width of 36 inches around
installed plants. Mulch should be pulled back approximately 4 inches from all stems. Mulch
shall not touch stems or trunks of installed plants.
3.d.20 Section 9.5 - Staking. Provide corrections to the text to include: only large trees (5 gallon)
require staking.
3.d.21 Section 9.6 — Re -seed Disturbed Areas. Provide corrections to the text to include: only the
created and disturbed wetland areas should be seeded (with the wetland mix). Bare soils in the
buffer areas shall not be seeded with grass. Instead stabilize bare soils in the buffer with
arborist mulch.
3.d.22 Part 12 - One -Year Maintenance. Provide corrections to the text to include: only the
created and disturbed wetland areas should be re -seeded (with the wetland mix). Replace
mulch in bare areas in the buffers.
3.d.23 Part 13 -As-Built Plan. Add the following text to the end of the first paragraph: TheAs-
Bxrilt Ike o t t will list qmmlifies edes and i es o f 1 nis- installed in the * itiealion a�-eas. It ndll indaide a
site Ana with 11je locations o : all installed trees and shrvbs in the Grr er and created i etland • all permanani
vnonitoran lots • all petmanent hoto oants• the two ie ometers • the. sna all installed Gat boxes and downed
to es or lur a avoid debris the hrr er erir�retcr enee iyr ormatianal si ns and the edestfxan trail.
.—)
C:\DOCUME-1\Default\LOCALS-1 \Temp\Barker011907M.doc
PAGId OF�
E-
- Deb Barker, Planner, City ofFederal Way
Mirror Estales: Rernew of Kevised l�itgation Plan
j
Page 11
January 19, 2007
3.d.24 Part 15 - Long -Term Monitoring Program. Provide the following corrections and
additions to the "Monitoring will include data collection of the following items:"
• "Count all installed trees and shrubs in the mitigation areas for mortality/survival" - on
the west side of the wetland where the plants are densely planted, it is recommended that
a sufficient number of representative permanent monitoring plots be established to
count a minimum of ten percent of the installed trees and shrubs, rather than counting
all of them. Count all of the installed trees and shrubs on the east side of the wetland
where they will be more scattered. Also establish at least 4 one -meter square permanent
monitoring plots in the created wetland to monitor percent cover by emergent species.
• "Assess the health of all installed plants... for any disease, infestation, or derma e b rvildli e
e.. ra in ircllin etc. .
• "Estimate percent cover by non-native invasive ecies and specify locations, extent, an
maintenance/removal techniques in order to safi& the P onnance Standard o less than 10%
cover; arrd to promote the growth and survival of all installed plants.
• "Photograph the created wetland and enhanced buffer areas from at least 5 pernaan nt
halo aims which are desi nated by a metal ence ost orotherThe location and...."
• Asses the conditions and wildli usa - a the sna Gat hoxes and installed la e wood debris Also
note wild i e Presence and use o wetland and bu er areas. The big isl will rerorrl ohservations o ecies
and wildli ' indicators arch as scat Tints nests holes b►mr n marks etc.
• Establish ai least 2 t&Zometnrs in the created Wetland area to monitor bydrology. Install one ie ometer
in a location where ear-►ound saturated soils are Lxpmcted and the second in a location rvhem searonal
saturation i s Weeled Measure water detib in the ieMeters or d th 0(standing Waller durin each
manilarxn f visit_ Also note the ecies condition and rommale cover Gy obli ate 41ants in the c►�atecd
Wetland area.
• Observe and note genema! site conditions and maintenance actions that mast be taken inclafdin but not
lirniteel to). Gat box nZazrZ Olacenrent fence to air, trash removal and mulch re kement
• "Submit the results of the annual monitoring... following field monitoring." Each
rnorritor in . ort shall inclade: a Kato-domnientatron Tom all -permanent hoto- pints • b ercent
su9xnvcrl of installed P!ants -based on the rerrrlls o both the ananitorxrr lots on the were side the
ruetlarrd and tlae toful count on the east side o the wetland • e eral health and vi or o installed trees
and sh►yrlas c,Lpetrenl cover by eme enl Otaes ill the created wellancl monitoren lots• d results o
b Ldmlo manitorrn : water d th in the &Z meterr and reserve and extent o obli ate !ants in the
dated melland area • e condition and wildli a rrse of the snqz bat hoxes and downed la s la e wood
debris 0 twrcent aerial emrer ky non-native invasive ecies in the enlirc brr er and mated wetland area
as well as in the monitored lass conditions o the bxr er enmeter ence and informational si rrs
11 whether- tr ash is p mesent in the hrr er and wetland • i emral site conditions • an ussessrnerrt o
rvhetlaer Per orrnance Standards are beat reel • recorainended mainterrcrnce activities to ensure that
Per arnaance Standards air met • and l whelher LonfinMia measures aiv neces'sa .
EXHIBIT C
PAGE_1-OF_19-
C:\DOCUME^-1 \Defau1t\LOCALS-1 \'Temp\Barker011907M.doc
Deb Barker, Planner, City ofFederal Way
Mirror Estates: Reanew of Revised Mitigation Plan
Page 12
January 19, 2007
3.d.25 Section 15.1 Mitigation Goals. Provide the following corrections and additions:
• "1. Improve existing wetland bu er habitat and function...."
• "2. Create new wetland ... and amphibians. Ptnttfde laabital eatrrre:s inclrrdas a sna bat boxes
arid lar�e ruoorly_deGyrs.
3.d.26 Section 15.2 Performance Standards. Provide the following corrections and additions:
• "4. Provide a nrinitnu7n 0180 percent survival of all installed trees and shrubs througbortt the
five years of monitoring."
• "5. Maintain less than ten percent non-native, invasive plant cover in the created wetland
and all Welland B brr er areas thrnu horn the five years of monitoring."
• G. Establish Welland hdr alagy throreghaut the created wetland area.
• 7. & the end o the 5-Mar wonitomig Aetiod.there shall be 60%a cover b2 native eme cnl ecies in the
sections oL the created wetland where seasonal inxndalian does not revent the gLowtb oL cane ent 0 ecaes.
• S. There shall be vismal evidence that the installed trees and shtwbs air va arntrs e.. rrew rowtlJ and no
irisiblc signs ofsta�ss).
• 9. The srra bat bones and installed 1 e wood debris shall be Peseni and in gLod condition
tbrougnhout thefaue y ars oLntonitaring,
3.d.27 Part 17 - Long -Term Maintenance Specifications. Add the following text to the end of the
first paragraph: Maintenance activities include but are not limited to). arri ation• weed contrlyl•mrtich
re lacemetrt,,_ ntj�Lwhjg as necessa airira re lacirr and tnaintaanin :the srra bat boxes the bra er
cri,neter' erne and hi oiwaiional sa ns • trash rvmoyal_frem the Gu er and wetland areas • removal o .gilt ences
and other T"ESC devices when roved by 1'E rxtnarral o tree 15roleaton feggg when 4proivd by PE • arrd
removal a tree stakes when "roved hy PE.
3.d.28 Section 17.1 Weed Control.
• At the end of the first sentence add: Use of a Weed Wrench Th' (NIP. www.weedivrench.conr
to remove weed crowns and roots ntrt moat soil is recommended. Fier +bicide use shall not be allowed in
rvaland ar vas. Limited herbade use v; ay be allowed in 10 land bu er areas on& urith Mp Mval fimy the
Ci - a .Federal Ida a ter manual coto-ol e arts have ailed Dnl Rodeos a l hasate herbicide or
other herbicides that are roved or use in wetland and stream bu ers shall be used. He7iV ade shall
nolbegLayedinku er areas. t i e or dint a roved herbicide on leaves or crrt stems aj-0
pro riate -
late m mneris usuall t e most eciive season or herbicide rrse. To wwrol Glackberrdes in the late
sutmn r• cut rr:to m uts to within 6 inches qj the round and imnrediatel pedw rrri a cut ends with
concentrated Rodeo®.
• Delete the sentence "Chemical means...";
• Provide corrections to the text to include: "Undesirable and weedy exotic plant species
listed above shall be maintained at levels below ten -percent total toiler in the entire Welland B
by er aura acid the created nvelland area al all lathes during the five-year monitoring period. All
removed weed material shall be removed fivai the rite and di eyed o ro ell c "
EXHIBIT CO
RAIGE-&-OF
CADOCUME--1 \Default\LOCN.S-1 \Temp\Barker011907M.doc
Deb Barker, Planner, City ofFederal Way
Mirror Estates: Rei4ew of Revised Mitigation Plan
Page 13
January 19, 2007
3.d.29 Section 17.2 Reed Canary Grass Control.
• At the beginning of the first paragraph add: Reed canary Qr��ss can be left inPlace if the PE
determines that removal actions M hT danza e e,,aging ve elation either installed or rernatmn e:<istin
veoetalion) - barlicularly on The east .jade o11he Welland and adiaceni to the existing well, mid
• At the end of the first paragraph add: All removed weed material shall be mmoued rom the site
and dislhosed ofhroperlt±,
Provide corrections to the text of subsection 1 to include: Weed rvl�ackers shall not be used in
areas where trees and shrtr�.r were installed. Herbicide use shall not he allowed in wetland areas Limited
herbicide tfseway he allowed in upland brr er areas oil at ilh royal rpm the Ci o Federal Wa
a kr manna! control a arts haw ixileI Onl Rodeos a 1 hosate herbicide or other herbicides that
are Mroved fr use in wetland and slnazn &&rs shall he used. Late summer is uszrall the most
�ective season for herbicide zrse.
Provide corrections to the text of subsection 2 to include: "Areas shall be staked with
dormant willow cuttings... During March 1 through November 30... in place of cuttings.
Maintain and monitor these re -&lanced removal areas."
3.d.30 Section 17.3 Himalayan and Evergreen Blackberry Control. Delete this section and
substitute the following text: Himalayan and Erne Teen blackberries shall be removed fivm 1he entire
Wetland B bzr er area and the cr-eated Welland area. When the soil is moist cut and r-ezxom lox canes leavirt
a�rox mately one foot of the cane above raund. Use a bleed Wrench TM (hlt�i:I hinvzv.►veedwanch.cond
to extract cmims and roots nz moist soil.. All reproved blackb_era mate ials shall be rewoued ►npz the site
and di osed ofproterlv. Herbicide xie shall nol be allowed in wetland areas. Lirniled herbicide use a be
allowed in u krrtd buffer areas onl with royal ram the Ci a Federal Way a ter manual control a arts
or berries have ailed On& Rode& a &hosate herbicide or other herbicides thal are wmxed or use
in wetland and stream bti ers shall he useel. Herbicide shall not he OTUed in bu er areas. To evidrol
blackberries in the late stammer cut re:4 routs to within 6"o the raund and immediate aixt a cut
ends u itb concentrated &vdeoO. Re- lane all areas in the bzr er and :mated wetland area e xral to or greater
than 16 a uare Leetwhen blackberries age zrvzoved Stake wetland areas with native willow culan s see
Stakin List and Stakin S eei zealions below). Durin lUlarxh 1 thr�aar h November 30 axe- allon !ants
shall be used in Place of cuttin s. For the brr er areas zrse Q4w mate &Lajes fi= the rrriti ation Platt Mant
sc edule and.install 1 ZgLllon shrubs at 3 el an center and 2 Z111on t►-ees at 8 eel 0 C. Maintain and
monitor these replanted rensoyal areas
3.d.31 Section 17.4 - Staking List (from Wet to Dry). Substitute the following text for the staking
list: Pacific willow 6Eala c lucicla Hooker willow, (Salix hookeziana), Sitka willow (Salix sitchensir axd
Scowler nillom Sakx seouletiana .
3.d.32 Section 17.4 - Staking Specifications. Provide corrections to the text to include: Willow
cuttings shall be dormant when they are harvested and installed. Cuttings shall conform to
specifications in corrected Section 8.1 (3.d.14). Specifications for installing cuttings are listed
in Detail 3 - Cutting Planting Detail on Sheet W3.1. Willow cuttings or container -grown
plants will also will also be installed in areas of blackberry infestations listed above in
corrected Section 17.3 (3.d.30). Dormant cuttings will be installed in pilot holes to a
EX_ HR
CADOCUME-1\Default\LOCALS-1\Temp\Barker011907M.doc PAGE-0-OF
J
Deb Barker, Planner, City of Federal Way Page 14
Mirror Estates: Demo w of Devised Mitigtition Plan January 19, 2007
minimum of two feet, or to at least one half of the length of the cutting whichever is deeper.
3.d.33 Section 17.7 - Maintenance of Trees. Provide corrections to the text to include: no weed -
whacking shall be done in planted areas.
3.d.34 Part 18 - Contingency Plan. Correct the first sentence to: "All dead plants... or a slrGstitulc
ecies roiled G the CEt a %decal €ir i that meets the goals of the mitigation plan.
4. Additional Information Required
4.a. Provide design details for the outlet structure from Wetland B in the civil plans as well as in
the mitigation plan sheets. The outlet elevation shall be the same as the current outlet
elevation (288 feet) to avoid altering existing wetland hydroperiod.
4.b. In the civil plans as well as in the mitigation plan sheets, provide design details and locations
for the outlet structures into Wetland B buffer from the roof drains from Lots 4 through 8
and Lot 22. Add roof drain outlets into Wetland B buffer from Lots 18 and 21 to provide
additional hydrology to the created.wedand area. All roof drain outlet structures should be
placed at the outer edges of the buffer.
4.c. Pedestrian Path: correct the layout'and width of the pedestrian path so that it is consistent
among all of the site plan sets (e.g. mitigation plans, civil site plans, etc.) (comment 3.a.1).
4.d. Provide specifications in the Mitigation Plan Sheets to decompact the construction access
route to the created wetland.
4.e. Provide a detailed grading plan for the created wetland areas with existing and proposed one -
foot contours. Include a minimum of three cross -sections. One cross-section should include
the deepest part of the created wetland, and a second should show the widest location of the
created wetland with a proposed hummock. Include corrections for the section of 1:1 slope
(comment 3.b.1).
4.f. Show the Buffer Perimeter Fence (comment 3.a.7) and locations of permanent signs
(comment 3.a.8) on all appropriate sheets including the civil plans as well as in the mitigation
plan.
5. Recommended Conditions
5.a. Address all issues and provide corrections and additions specified in this memorandum.
5.b. Submit a revised mitigation plan sheet set (Sheets W1.1, W2.1, W3.1, and W4.1) for review
and approval and conditioning by the City of Federal Way.
5.c. The City's wetland biologist shall review the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plans.
5.d. The City's wedand biologist shall review the final Technical Information Report (TIR).
Please contact me if you have further questions. I can be reached at 425-739-7977 or
suzanne.bagshaw@otak.com.
EXHIBIT C-0
PAGE _L4f_AF_Pt_
C:\DOCUME-1 \Defaul t\L0CALS-1\Temp\Barker011907M.doc
Page - 1
February 9, 2007
J3 Civil PLLC
Jerrit Jolma, P.E.
1375 NW Mall Street, Ste. 3
Issaquah, WA 98027
RE: WETLAND ELIMINATION AND WETLAND MITIGATION FOR MIRROR ESTATES
PRELIMINARY PLAT, PROCESS IV, FWHE#06-12, FW#07-100304-00-UP
Dear Applicant:
Enclosed please find the Report and Decision of the City of Federal Way Hearing
Examiner relating to the above -entitled case.
Very truly yours,
STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR.
HEARING EXAMINER
S KC/ca
cc: All parties of record
City of Federal Way
Page - 2
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
IN THE MATTER OF:
WETLAND ELIMINATION AND WETLAND
MITIGATION FOR MIRROR ESTATES
PRELIMINARY PLAT
PROCESS IV
FWHE# 06-12
FW# 07-100304-00-UP
I. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION
The applicant is requesting approval pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC)
Article XIV "Critical Areas" (FWCC Section 22-1356, Division 7, "Regulated Wetlands").
II. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION
Hearing Date: January 30, 2007
Decision Date: February 9, 2007
At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence:
1. Deb Barker, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way
2. Bob Johns, Attorney at Law, 1601 114th SE, #110, Bellevue, WA 98004
3. Linda Brockmann, 31611 — 11t" Place SW, Federal Way, WA 98023
4. Jerrit Jolma, 1375 SW Mall Street, Issaquah, WA 98027
5. Mark Jacobs, 7731 8th Avenue SE, Bellevue, WA 98006
At the hearing the following exhibits were admitted as part of the official record of these
proceedings:
1. Staff Report with all attachments (Preliminary Plat)
2. Staff Report with all attachments (Wetland)
3. Power Point Presentation
Page - 3
III. FINDINGS
The Hearing Examiner has heard testimony, admitted documentary evidence into
the record, and taken this matter under advisement.
2. The Community Development Staff Report sets forth general findings, applicable
policies and provisions in this matter and is hereby marked as Exhibit "1" with
attachments and hereby incorporated in its entirety by this reference.
3. All appropriate notices were delivered in accordance with the requirements of the
Federal Way City Code (FWCC).
4. The applicant has a possessory ownership interest in an unimproved, 9.37 acre
parcel of property abutting the west side of 8th Avenue SW in the Mirror Lake
area of the City of Federal Way. The applicant proposes to subdivide the parcel
into 27 single family residential homes. However, the site contains five Category
III wetlands and the applicant must fill four of such wetlands to allow road and lot
construction. The applicant proposes to create an 11,254 square foot Category
I I I wetland adjacent to Wetland B, a 38,501 square foot wetland which will
remain along with a 50 foot wide, wetland buffer. The applicant also proposes
wetland buffer intrusions to include utility line installation, wetland buffer creation
and enhancement, and construction of a pedestrian trail. To accomplish the
above the applicant has requested Process IV approval.
5. The applicant proposes to fill Wetland A, a 3,748 square foot Category III
wetland located in a small, isolated depression at the northeast corner of the site
proposed for development with an internal plat road and two plat lots. According
to the applicant's and the City's biologist, Wetland A is significantly impacted by
residential development, and its hydrology includes surfacewater runoff and
shallow groundwater. The northern buffer of the wetland extends off -site to the
north and no longer exists.
6. The applicant also proposes to fill Wetland C/D consisting of two wetlands
separated by a six to ten foot wide, upland berm with no evidence of a hydric
connection. The wetlands together measure 3,568 square feet and are located in
a shallow and isolated depression. The wetlands meet the definition of Category
III and are also impacted by residential development. Surfacewater runoff and
possible shallow groundwater provide hydrology.
7. The applicant also proposes to fill 1,886 square foot Wetland E, located in an
isolated depression. Due to its small size, Wetland E is not regulated under the
Page - 4
Federal Way City Code (FWCC).
8. Wetland B consists of a 38,501 square foot Category III wetland located in a
distinct, lineal depression and supported mostly by surface water runoff. The
wetland meets the definition of a palustrine forested, seasonally flooded wetland
and requires a 50 foot wide buffer. Wetland B functions as a drainage swale that
flows across the site from north to south and includes stormwater runoff from the
Mirror Woods plat to the north. Wetland B drains to the south into the City storm
drainage system. To mitigate the filling of Wetlands A and C/D, the applicant
proposes to create an 11,254 square foot Category III wetland abutting the west
side of Wetland B. Wetland creation will include the regrading of the wetland
buffer; retention of trees; importing of woody debris, snags, and other habitat
features; and revegetation with appropriate trees and shrubs. The applicant will
monitor the newly created Wetland for five years. The City's wetlands expert
determined that the conceptual wetland mitigation will result in an overall net
gain of wetland function and value.
9. The applicant also requests approval to temporarily intrude into the southern 50
foot wide buffer of Wetland B to allow construction of a storm drainage facility.
The applicant proposes to install a 12 inch storm drainage pipe within a 15 foot
wide easement that would convey storm drainage from the western portion of the
subdivision to the storm drainage facility on the east side of the wetland and
buffer. The easement would extend 110 feet through the buffer in an area
currently dominated by blackberries. Following construction, the applicant would
install an eight foot wide, pervious, pedestrian trail over the pipe.
10. The applicant requests approval to permanent intrude into the Wetland B buffer
to allow wetland creation, Wetland Buffer Creation and Enhancement, and
construction of the pedestrian trail. The buffer presently consists of dead and
dying red alder trees and dense salmonberry and blackberry undercover. The
applicant proposes to enhance the entire Wetland B buffer including removal of
invasive plant species and installation of native vegetation. The project will
increase the Wetland B buffer by 38,372 square feet which includes replacement
of the 23,475 square feet of buffer eliminated from the filled wetlands.
11. Prior to filling Wetlands A and C/D the applicant must establish that the request
satisfies the decisional criteria set forth in Section 22-1358 FWCC. Findings on
each criteria are hereby made as follows;
A. The wetlands proposed for filling have limited water quality value
according to the Wetland Determination and Mitigation Plan (Exhibit "Al")
Page - 5
prepared by the applicant and approved by the City's wetlands biologist.
Creation of additional wetland adjacent to Wetland B will expand and
increase the water quality capabilities of the overall site.
B. Filling the wetlands will not destroy or damage a significant habitat area,
but to the contrary, will increase the acreage of habitat on the site as a
whole. The project will add native vegetation and habitat features. The
wetland report determined that Wetlands A and C/D do not contain
significant habitat areas.
C. Filling the wetlands will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater
retention capabilities. Again, the expansion of Wetland B will improve said
capabilities and will increase retention of stormwater.
D. The fill will neither lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion
hazards. The topography of the filled wetland areas is flat and a
Temporary Erosion Control Plan (TESC) will address the possibility of
erosion hazards.
E. Filling the wetlands will not materially, detrimentally impact other property
in the area or the City as a whole. While the property owner to the north of
Wetland A expressed concerns, development of the plat will direct the
storm drainage presently flowing to the wetland to the storm drainage tract
located in the south central portion of the plat.
F. The wetland fill will result in no net loss of wetland area, function, or value.
The applicant will replace the filled wetlands in a 1.5:1 ratio for a Category
3 scrub shrub wetland. The expansion of Wetland B will increase the
overall wetland area functions and values on the site.
G. The project is in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare.
The wetland fill coupled with the wetland creation will result in a higher
value wetland on the parcel.
R The applicant has demonstrated sufficient scientific expertise and
supervisory capability to carry out the project.
No evidence showed that the applicant is not committed to monitoring the
project and to make corrections if the project fails to meet projected goals.
The FWCC requires a five year monitoring period by a qualified firm.
Page - 6
12. Prior to obtaining approval for both temporary and permanent land surface
modifications within wetland buffers, the applicant must show that the request
satisfies the criteria set forth in Section 22-1359 FWCC. Findings on each
criteria are hereby made as follows:
A. The construction will not adversely affect water quality assuming that the
applicant complies with the approved TESC plan which will address
temporary erosion impacts. The applicant will revegetate disturbed areas
and/or mitigate impacts in compliance with the wetland mitigation plan.
B. The buffer intrusions will not destroy or damage a significant habitat area.
Many of the encroachments are necessary to expand Wetland B and
increase its diversity and improve its water quality, buffering, and habitat
values. While development of the pedestrian trail and the subdivision itself
will allow human activity within habitat areas, the applicant will install open
rail fencing and educational signage around the buffer.
C. The project will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention
capabilities. Installation of the storm drainage pipe will allow compliance of
the plat's stormwater drainage system with adopted City standards.
D. The encroachments will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor will they
create erosion hazards. The areas proposed for buffer creation have little
topographic change, and as previously found, the applicant will follow an
approved TESC Plan.
E. The encroachment will not materially, detrimentally impact other
properties in the area nor the City as a whole, and will not cause the loss
of significant open space or scenic vistas. The site has no scenic vistas,
but the pedestrian trail will establish usable open space and will not
impact the functions and values of Wetland B.
F. The encroachment is necessary for reasonable development of the
property. Wetland B divides the property into two sections with the only
non -wetland area occurring along the south property line. The applicant
will utilize one storm drainage system for the entire subdivision and will
comply with all adopted City storm drainage standards. The applicant
must cross the wetland buffer with a storm drainage pipe. To provide the
created wetland and buffer enhancements, the applicant must also have
access to the wetland buffers.
Page - 7
13. Prior to obtaining Process IV approval the applicant must establish that the
request satisfies Process IV decisional criteria set forth in Section 22-445
FWCC. Findings on each criteria are hereby made as follows:
A. The proposal is consistent with the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan as
it has undergone SEPA review and complies with applicable zoning
regulations. Encroachments into the critical areas will enable development
of the subject site consistent with both the comprehensive plan and
development regulations.
B. The project complies with all applicable provisions of Chapter 20 FWCC
and all other applicable laws.
C. The project is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare as the
filled wetlands are mitigated by the wetland creation. In accordance with
City requirements, no net loss of wetlands or wetland buffers will occur.
The pedestrian trail will provide an opportunity for outdoor recreation and
technical education as to the importance of wetlands and buffers.
D. The streets and utilities in the area are adequate to serve the preliminary
plat. All newly constructed plat roads will meet City standards and all
intersections operate at acceptable levels of service.
E. The proposed access to the preliminary plat is at optimal locations as
roads from abutting subdivisions will extend into the site.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
From the foregoing findings the Hearing Examiner makes the following conclusions:
The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to consider and decide the issues presented
by this request.
2. The request for Process IV approval to allow wetland elimination and mitigation as
well as intrusion into wetland buffers satisfies all criteria set forth in Sections 22-
1358, 22-1359, and 22-445 FWCC. Therefore, Process IV approval should be
granted subject to the following condition:
Prior to issuance of construction permits related to any work
associated with this application, the applicant shall incorporate all
recommendations from the January 19, 2007, OTAK Technical
Page - 8
Memorandum into applicable construction related documents for
review and approval by City staff, and include verification by the
City's wetland consultant, which is fully funded by the applicant.
DECISION:
The request for Process IV approval to allow wetland elimination, wetland
mitigation, and both temporary and permanent intrusion into wetland buffers is
hereby granted subject to the condition contained in the conclusions above.
DATED THIS 9th DAY OF February, 2007.
STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR.
Hearing Examiner
TRANSMITTED THIS 9th DAY OF February, 2007, to the following:
APPLICANT:J3 Civil PLLC
Jerrit Jolma, P.E.
1375 NW Mall Street, Ste. 3
Issaquah, WA 98027
OWNER: New Concept Homes
Christine Balyeat
P.O. Box 1229
Issaquah, WA 98027
OTHERS:
Bob Johns Christine Balyeat
1601 114th SE #110 46809 SE 153rd
Bellevue, WA 98004 North Bend, WA 98045
Herbert Mall
P.O. Box 1229
Issaquah, WA 98027
Heather Balyeat
P.O. Box 585
Gary Schulz
7700 S. Lake Ridge Drive,
Seattle, WA 98178
Wendy Easter
31601 C Place SW
Page - 9
Issaquah, WA 98027
Mark Jacobs
7731 8th Avenue S.
Seattle, WA 98106
Linda Brockmann
31611 — 11 th Place SW
Federal Way, WA 98023
Federal Way, WA 98023
Chad Armour
6500 — 126th Avenue SE
Bellevue, WA 98006
City of Federal Way
c/o Laura Hathway
P.O. Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
Page - 10
PROCESS IV
Rights to Appeal
Decisions of the hearing Examiner may be appealed by any person who is to receive a
copy of that decision under FWCC Section 22-443.
The appeal, in the form of a letter of appeal, must be delivered to the Department of
Community Development Services within fourteen (14) calendar days after the issuance
of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The letter of appeal must contain:
2. A statement identifying the decision being appealed, along with a copy of
the decision;
3. A statement of the alleged errors in the Hearing Examiner's decision,
including specific factual finds and conclusions of the Hearing Examiner
disputed by the person filing the appeal; and
4. The appellant's name, address, telephone number and fax number, and
any other information to facilitate communications with the appellant.
The person filing the appeal shall include, with the letter of appeal, the fee established
by the City of the costs of preparing a written transcript of the hearing (or in the
alternative, the appellant may prepare the transcript at his or her sole costs from tapes
of the hearing provided by the City).The appeal will not be accepted unless it is
accompanied by the required fee and cost (or agreement of the appellant to prepare the
transcript).
Appeals from the decision of the Hearing Examiner will be heard by The City Council.
The decision of City Council is the final decision of the City.
Page - 1
February 9, 2007
J3 Civil PLLC
Jerrit Jolma, P.E.
1375 NW Mall Street, Ste. 3
Issaquah, WA 98027
RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MIRROR ESTATES
FWHE#06-12 FW#05-100590-00-SU
Dear Applicant:
Enclosed please find the Report and Recommendation of the City of Federal Way Hearing
Examiner relating to the above -entitled case.
Very truly yours,
STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR.
HEARING EXAMINER
SKC/ca
CC" All parties of record
City of Federal Way
Page - 2
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
IN THE MATTER OF:
FWHE# 06-12
FW# 05-100590-00-SU
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MIRROR ESTATES
I. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION
The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval pursuant to the Federal Way
City Code (FWCC) Chapter 20, "Subdivisions" (FWCC Section 20-110, Division 6,
"Preliminary Plat").
II. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION
Hearing Date: January 30, 2007
Decision Date: February 9, 2007
At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence:
1. Deb Barker, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way
2. Bob Johns, Attorney at Law, 1601 114th SE, #110, Bellevue, WA 98004
3. Linda Brockmann, 31611 — 11'h Place SW, Federal Way, WA 98023
4. Jerrit Jolma, 1375 SW Mall Street, Issaquah, WA 98027
5. Mark Jacobs, 7731 8th Avenue SE, Bellevue, WA 98006
At the hearing the following exhibits were admitted as part of the official record of these
proceedings:
1. Staff Report with all attachments (Preliminary Plat)
2. Staff Report with all attachments (Wetland)
3. Power Point Presentation
Ill. FINDINGS
Page - 3
The Hearing Examiner has heard testimony, admitted documentary evidence into
the record, and taken this matter under advisement.
2. The Community Development Staff Report sets forth general findings, applicable
policies and provisions in this matter and is hereby marked as Exhibit "1" with
attachments and hereby incorporated in its entirety by this reference.
3. All appropriate notices were delivered in accordance with the requirements of the
Federal Way City Code (FWCC).
4. The applicant has a possessory ownership interest in a generally rectangular,
9.37 acre parcel of unimproved property abutting the west side of 8th Avenue SW
between SW 312�h Street and SW K& Street in the Mirror Lake area of the City
of Federal Way. The parcel abuts 8th Avenue SW for 194 feet and measures
1,285 feet in depth. A rectangular parcel not included in the plat and located at
the northeast corner is abutted by the plat parcel on the south and west. Beyond
said parcel, the width of the plat parcel expands to 328 feet.
5. The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to allow subdivision of the site
into 27 single family residential lots having a minimum lot size of 7,204 square
feet, a maximum lot size of 11,907 square feet, and an average lot size of 7,934
square feet. The preliminary plat map shows a large wetland/buffer tract (Tract
A) located in the west -central portion of the plat and containing 2.1 acres. Said
tract divides the plat into two sections connected by an eight foot wide,
permeable, pedestrian path extending along the south property line of the plat
parcel. A second tract (Tract B) containing 23,885 square feet will support the
storm drainage detention and water quality facilities. Said tract abuts the
southeast portion of Tract A and the south property line of the plat parcel.
6. The preliminary plat map shows the eastern portion of the plat improved with 15
single family residential lots accessed via a new cul-de-sac road extending east
from 8th Avenue SW and terminating in the central portion of the plat. In addition,
the applicant will construct 8th Place SW which currently terminates at both the
north and south property lines across the plat parcel. Drivers on 8th Place SW will
jog in an east/west direction on the internal cul-de-sac road known as 3151h
Place SW while traveling in a north/south direction. All lots in the eastern portion
of the plat will access onto internal plat roads.
7. The portion of the plat located west of Tract A will consist of 12 single family
residential lots accessed via 11th Place SW which presently terminates at the plat
Page - 4
parcel's north and south property lines. The applicant will construct said road
through the plat parcel and provide a traffic circle calming device in the center of
the site. Two, 30 foot wide, shared driveway easements will provide access to
four lots abutting the Tract A wetland area.
8. Single family residential homes abut the north, south, and west property lines
and the east side of 81h Avenue SW opposite the plat parcel. The site and all
abutting parcels are located within the High Density Residential designation of
the Federal Comprehensive Plan and the Single Family Residential (RS-7.2)
zone classification of the Federal Way City Code (FWCC).
9. Section 22-631 FWCC authorizes single family detached dwelling units as
outright permitted uses in the IRS 7.2 zone classification. Said section requires a
minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet and structural setbacks of 20 feet front
yard, five feet side yard, and five feet rear yard. Said section limits the height of
structures to 30 feet above average building elevation and requires two parking
spaces per dwelling unit. Maximum lot coverage cannot exceed 60%. All lot sizes
exceed 7,200 square feet and each lot provides a building envelope sufficient to
accommodate a reasonably sized, single family residential dwelling which can
meet all setbacks. The proposed preliminary plat satisfies all bulk regulations of
the RS 7.2 zone classification.
10. The City of Federal Way Responsible Official issued a Mitigated Determination
of Nonsignificance (MDNS) following review of the environmental impacts of the
development pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). The
Responsible Official identified probable significant adverse environmental
impacts and imposed mitigating measures which would either eliminate said
impacts or reduce them below the "significant" level. No one filed an appeal of
the threshold determination and therefore SEPA review is final and binding upon
the preliminary plat. Mitigating measures imposed address the pedestrian trail,
wetland creation, wetland buffer mitigation, and the creation of supplemental
snags within permanent open space areas. Measures also encourage
informational and educational programs and activities dealing with the protection
of wildlife for future homeowners. A mitigating measure also requires a pro rata
share contribution of $76,347 toward traffic improvement projects identified by
the City.
11, The 1973 King County Soil Survey Map identifies the site as containing
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam characteristics to include moderately well drained
soils, slow runoff, and slight erosion hazard. These soils are considered capable
Page - 5
of supporting urban development. Topography rises from the wetland area near
the center of the site to the east and west. However, the site has no steep slopes
or other geologically hazardous areas.
12. According to a tree retention plan (Exhibit "AY) the site is moderately wooded
with a mixture of conifer and broad leaf trees with red alder the dominant
species. The site contains 73 trees which meet the definition of "significant tree"
and development of the plat will require removal of 47 (64%) of such trees.
Twenty-six of such trees (35%) will remain within the wetland and buffer tract.
Section 22-1568 FWCC allows removal of 75% of significant trees without
requiring replacement. Even though the applicant proposes to remove 64% of
significant trees and therefore does not trigger replacement trees, it will plant
trees in the wetland and buffer, along road rights -of -way, and in the storm
drainage facilities. Tree retention and replanting will ensure that plat
development will not affect the appearance of the neighborhood.
13. The site is located within both the five and ten year contour areas associated
with critical aquifer recharge and well head protection areas. The applicant
submitted a hazardous material inventory statement dated June 7, 2006, which
shows that the project will not result in regulated activities of hazardous
materials. The storm drainage system will protect the water quality of both
groundwater and surface water resources, and impacts and protections for the
on -site wetlands are addressed in the Process IV application for wetland
elimination and mitigation.
14. The applicant will design the stormwater drainage system in accordance with the
standards set forth in the 1998 King County Surfacewater Design Manual and
the City's amendments thereto. According to the applicant's Technical
Information Report (TIR), the western three quarters of the site sheet flows
directly into the large wetland located in the west -central portion of the site
(Wetland B), and the eastern quarter of the site flows into Wetland A located at
the northeast corner of the site which the applicant proposes to fill. Wetland A
presently discharges through an existing, off -site, storm pipe to a detention pond
north of Wetland B and then into Wetland B. The storm system will collect and
direct stormwater presently flowing into Wetland A to Wetland B, thus,
maintaining its hydrology. The storm drainage facility proposes a two cell wet
pond/detention pond facility located in the 23,885 square foot Tract B. The storm
drainage system will also provide compensatory storage volume for the loss of
Wetland A in the Wetland B creation area.
15. The applicant submitted a wildlife study report prepared by Chad Armour LLC
Page - 6
dated July 31, 2006. The report identified a wetland habitat and hardwood forest
habitat on the site, but noted that wildlife common to the area does not inhabit
the site, but passes through the site to suitable habitat. Wildlife observed
includes the pileated woodpecker, a priority species, but no wildlife species
recognized as "priority" inhabit the site. The Washington State Department of
Fish and Wildlife (DFW) Priority Habitat Report and Species Map has no record
of threatened, endangered, or sensitive species of wildlife within 7,500 feet of the
site. DFW also noted that the site does not meet the definition of a fish and
wildlife habitat conservation area as set forth in Section 18-28 FWCC. However,
2.1 acres (23%) of the site will remain as conservation open space as compared
with the FWCC minimum requirement of 15%. Preservation and expansion of
Wetland B coupled with retention of significant trees throughout the tract will
ensure that the site will continue to provide habitat opportunities. A SEPA
mitigating measures requires the applicant to maintain the wetland and buffer
tract to protect and enhance wildlife habitat to the maximum extent possible to
include the creation of supplemental snags.
16. FWCC Chapter 20 entitled "Subdivisions" requires dedication of land to provide
adequate recreational opportunities or pay a fee in lieu of such dedication. The
City PARCS Department approved the applicant's proposal of a 1,174 foot long
pedestrian trail linking the east and west portions of the plat along with a fee in
lieu of payment for the balance of the open space requirement (1.38 acres). The
trail corridor provides approximately 2.34% of the usable open space
requirement.
17. Primary vehicular access to the eastern portion of the site will consist of an
extension of 8th Place SW, and primary vehicular access to the western portion
of the site will consist of the connection of 11th Place SW across the plat parcel.
To comply with Section 20.151 FWCC which requires a maximum block
perimeter length of 1,320 feet for non -motorized trips and 2,640 feet for streets,
the applicant would need to construct an east/west motorized connection.
However, due to the presence of the large wetland which extends across the
site, the City has agreed to the pedestrian trail as proposed. The applicant will
construct all streets to City public standards and dedicate said rights -of -way to
the City.
18. In addition to the pedestrian trail connecting the two portions of the plat, the
applicant will also install sidewalks on both sides of the internal plat roads. The
homeowners association will own and maintain the portion of the pedestrian trail
across Tract A, but the City will own and maintain the portion of the trail which
crosses Tract B, the stormwater facility.
Page - 7
19. In accordance with FWCC 20-179, development of the preliminary plat must
meet the approved preliminary clearing and grading plans, and vegetation will
remain except that removed for infrastructure improvements or grading. The
initial clearing and grading will affect 52% of the site and will include the filling of
Wetlands A and C/D.
20. The applicant's preliminary landscape plan complies with FWCC Chapter 20 and
includes the landscaping of the storm drainage facility and installation of street
trees along public roads.
21. The Federal Way School District has determined that school children residing in
the plat will attend Lake Grove Elementary, Lakota Middle School, and Federal
Way High School. All children will receive bus service for all schools and may
walk via existing sidewalks and roadway shoulders to school bus stops. The
applicant must also satisfy the City School Impact Fee Ordinance at building
permit stage.
22. The Lakehaven Utility District will provide both domestic water and fire flow to the
site as well as sanitary sewer service.
23. Prior to obtaining preliminary plat approval the applicant must show that the
proposal satisfies the criteria set forth in Section 20-126(c) FWCC. Findings on
each criteria are hereby made as follows:
A. The proposed preliminary plat is consistent with the Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan which designates the site as Single Family/High
Density. The project satisfies all development regulations adopted to
implement said designation.
B. The project complies with all applicable provisions of Chapter 20 FWCC
including those adopted by reference from the comprehensive plan. Staff
has conditioned the preliminary plat to comply with the provisions of
Chapter 18 "Environment Policy", Chapter 19 "Subdivisions", Chapter 20
"Zoning" and all other applicable codes and regulations.
C. Assuming compliance with conditions of approval and City ordinances, the
project will further with the public health, safety, and welfare.
D. The project is consistent with the design criteria set forth in FWCC 20-2
including the effective use of land, promotion of safe and convenient
Page - 8
travel on streets, provision for the housing needs of the community,
protection of environmentally sensitive areas, and preservation of
approximately 23% of the site as permanent open space.
E. The project complies with all development standards set forth in Sections
20-151-157 and 20-158-187 FWCC.
24. Concerns raised at the hearing by neighbors included increased water problems
as a result of the development based upon a development in 1990 which filled a
wetland, and safety issues due to increased traffic. Neighbors requested "Stop"
signs at uncontrolled intersections or other methods to slow traffic. Significant
changes in stormwater and critical area requirements have occurred since 1990,
and the proposed storm drainage system will release water downstream at its
present discharge location at the predevelopment rate. The applicant conducted
a downstream analysis for one quarter mile and determined that downstream
facilities are adequate to conduct stormwater discharged from the plat. The
applicant's traffic engineer and the City's traffic engineer both agree that "Stop"
signs would increase speeds in the neighborhood for those roads where drivers
need not stop. The engineers agree that uncontrolled intersections slow traffic.
Both engineers also agree that the road connections will not provide pass
through routes, but will provide alternative access for local residents. Finally, the
City has no record of accidents occurring at any intersections in the area.
However, the City will continue to monitor traffic in the area, and the Public
Works Department can install traffic safety improvements if necessary.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
From the foregoing findings the Hearing Examiner makes the following conclusions:
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to consider and decide the issues presented
by this request.
2. The proposed preliminary plat is consistent with the Single Family/High Density
designation of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan and satisfies all bulk
regulations of the IRS 7.2 zone classification.
3. The proposed preliminary plat makes appropriate provision for the public health,
safety, and general welfare for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, roads, alleys,
other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitarywaste, schools and
school grounds, parks and recreation, and safe walking conditions.
Page - 9
4. The proposed preliminary plat will serve the public use and interest by providing an
attractive infill development which will allow connection of City streets, thereby
improving the grid system for the City, and also providing an enhanced Category 111
wetland. Therefore, the proposed preliminary plat should be approved subject to
the following conditions:
Prior to the City's approval of engineering plans, the applicant shall submit
a final landscape plan, prepared by a licensed landscape architect,
addressing tree preservation within the plat, all landscaping within plat
boundaries, wetland mitigation planting approved by the Federal Way
Hearing Examiner, restoration of the areas disturbed by installation of the
storm drainage easement and pedestrian trial outside of tract A, visual
screening of the tract B storm drainage tract, and street trees for review
and approval by the Directors of Community Development, Public Works,
and Parks, Recreational, and Cultural Services (PARCS). Prior to
submittal to the City, the landscape plan shall be reviewed and signed by
a qualified wetland biologist and shall reflect all applicable
recommendations contained in the applicant's Wetland Determination and
Mitigation Plan. Pursuant to FWCC Sections 22-1286(d)(2), 22-1243, 22-
1313(3), and 22-1358(e)(1), the City may require the applicant to pay for
the services of a wetland biologist to review plans, provide
recommendations, and conduct in inspections and/or monitoring on behalf
of the City, as determined by the Community Development Director.
2. All on -site fencing associated with plat construction is subject to the City's
final review and approval of design, location, and any screening. Fencing
shall allow for the migration of small wildlife animals, where appropriate.
Any chain link fencing, if approved by the City, shall be vinyl coated black
or green and shall be screened with vegetation.
3. Prior to final plat approval, open rail fencing, appropriate vegetation, and
appropriate signage shall be installed to separate the pedestrian trail and
residential lots from wetland B setback.
4. Rockeries and retaining walls associated with plat construction must
reflect residential scale, design, and sensitivity of materials or treatment,
including use of vegetation and/or terracing, where they are visible from
adjacent residences or usable open space.
5. The final plat drawing shall dedicate all usable open space in an open
space tract to be owned in common and maintained by property owners of
Page - 10
the proposed subdivision, and shall prohibit removal or disturbance of
vegetation and landscaping within the tract, except as necessary for
maintenance or replacement of existing plantings and as approved by the
City. Additional vegetation may be located in open space tracts to meet
conditions as approved by the City. A note shall be included on the final
plat map that the open space tract shall not be further subdivided, may
not be developed with any buildings or other structures except as may be
approved by the City for recreational purposes only for the benefit of the
homeowners, and may not be used for financial gain.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is hereby recommended to the Federal Way City Council that the preliminary plat
of Mirror Estates be approved subject to the conditions contained in the conclusions
above.
DATED THIS 9t" DAY OF February, 2007.
STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR.
Hearing Examiner
TRANSMITTED THIS 9t" DAY OF February,.2007, to the following:
APPLICANT:J3 Civil PLLC
Jerrit Jolma, P.E.
1375 NW Mall Street, Ste. 3
Issaquah, WA 98027
OWNER: New Concept Homes
Christine Balyeat
P.O. Box 1229
Issaquah, WA 98027
OTHERS:
Bob Johns Christine Balyeat
Page - 11
1601 114" SE #110 46809 SE 153"
Bellevue, WA 98004 North Bend, WA 98045
Herbert Mall Gary Schulz
P.O. Box 1229 7700 S. Lake Ridge Drive.
Issaquah, WA 98027 Seattle, WA 98178
Heather Balyeat Wendy Easter
P.O. Box 585 31601 8"' Place SW
Issaquah, WA 98027 Federal Way, WA 98023
Mark Jacobs Chad Armour
7731 8th Avenue S. 6500 — 126th Avenue SE
Seattle, WA 98106 Bellevue, WA 98006
Linda Brockmann City of Federal Way
31611 — 111h Place SW c/o Laura Hathway
Federal Way, WA 98023 P.O. Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
Page - 12
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW, ACTION
Pursuant to Section 20-127, following receipt of the final report and recommendation of the
hearing examiner, a date shall be set for a public meeting before the city council.
The city council review of the preliminary plat application shall be limited to the record of the
hearing before the hearing examiner, oral comments received during the public meeting (so long
as those comments do not raise new issues or information not contained in the examiner's
record) and the hearing examiner's written report. These materials shall be reviewed for
compliance with decisional criteria set forth in section 20-126. The city council may receive new
evidence or information not contained in the record of hearing before the hearing examiner, but
only if that evidence or information: (i) relates to the validity of the hearing examiner's decision at
the time it was made and the party offering the new evidence did not know and was under no
duty to discover or could not reasonably have discovered the evidence until after the hearing
examiner's decision; or (ii) the hearing examiner improperly excluded or omitted the evidence
from the record: If the city council concludes, based on a challenge to the hearing examiner
recommendation or its own review of the recommendation, that the record compiled by the
hearing examiner is incomplete or not adequate to allow the city council to make a decision on
the application, the city council may by motion remand the matter to the hearing examiner with
the direction to reopen the hearing and provide supplementary findings and/or conclusions on
the matter or matters specified in the motion.
After considering the recommendation of the hearing examiner, the city council may adopt or
reject the hearing examiner's recommendations based on the record established at the public
hearing. If, after considering the matter at a public meeting, the city council deems a change in
the hearing examiner's recommendation approving or disapproving the preliminary plat is
necessary, the city council shall adopt its own recommendations and approve or disapprove the
preliminary plat.
As part of the final review, the city council may require or approve a minor modification to the
preliminary plat if:
(a) The change will not have the effect of increasing the residential density of the plat;
(b) The change will not result in the relocation of any access point to an exterior street from
the plat;
(c) The change will not result in any loss of open space or buffering provided in the plat; and
(d) The city determines that the change will not increase any adverse impacts or undesirable
effects of the project and that the change does not significantly alter the project.
�?¢ N019NIH5'dM 'J.'dM 1'��a�d
» aa] 4Ke 531'd153 ZIO�J�IW
Mps
N'dZd NOIl'dOI11W 4=N'd"113M W. �
p-j-I•saoecaossyaangp d an
vOv �3 Nd1d 9N1?JOIINOW S SNOIld'�Idl'»d5 3
i
Fh�f
14
, €
mi
UP
€9;�; ':3� � si � t # �� ���,[ � =i �a��' � � � a g � . s i � �' � #' s` •r,� �ar € #1 �} �z � ��
�" :3a � a � 3 �dC }i� 8$ �4 �� ��a� �2• �1 dp.2 � � i� � � �' ! � � � �� ,i �3 A
i'
aka 5pI rp`if8$ a i( zg E�. € # f i e��
. �� 3
i.( H � B. i f
�i'i =a.i :ii iP i eaw
i�iis ilii�43 2i
€m � is _
'f 4t3 f}ii€clit all i €' l _ '�'•g . �# €�€ irf
sa, 8 fR !i� f;> f, f fi fi' 3si3f �Et33 i'� i11 s� li it 'A' '
333}
if t 13 11� ra as rS;�,$i fi�
. f �'� i IHIM, � , E f€� = 3 � 8= .0 1 0€ 11MIass
{8f}�� '€ �' t; �R f}�1 �' Mkt {E-'� ;5E.ff�f 3
s€ € Ott s :k a �,: Pt� a iiil f f �1;tip'10 :k�ioi.i s i Imi ii I
$
�fr�� •�_ �� �i� i�� i i}� �t �f, � ��� °0� " a ��Y �f�! �� '� � � � i' t �I � i 9'� 4 �}i }; � , �€ _
6 $�g� €#fa'33f #k
13 112 33 1 € fg 3 3 g $ { s 3 U �- glit ii '€f €
fl
:l !�' �t 3 z$ '3 I3 r
1 a ?ia r " as
C k \ a e {�
f'if IirR$���Rf af€ to _#iYR RRl4
it
erjx 1'�ea 'f �Y �� •�i1;Y € 6
jig
,ir.�1
fi:g,:{( i= = Skli 1 ] t'� k l iF,
lit Fii i. ge l ;{ k lII lit I i e
GONSTRUC71QN SPEGIPICATIONs
of
PART I - t SPECh=iCATIOtb
d O Erdntanite LSoiy Ivor % Yw•(N-ea, PE Yell dA% for lkspr h yte 15a16 wah
I
crier W tss eaearveted�oeMg 514' d 200+'ioth laeN.anie C enJ
Larltl:6ap9 C•Os4'Pr�Or }itpFl tally tint .fat tYCallaJnlr c 7tGb rare '+Nta a IaMhh t1b
Nall raY to o}LrL
nY: :sea wtl� aa. A tnbwailaC dR:a4s 5.a G*r.Ci+b
ice' a4 Pre y ta^y �
PART II - FINAL ACCEPTANCE
I- - -
dlO la5l yid 1
ertlprt VF ..aanreelor shto 1 t,narrde P>=.�1. w x[ or
Ypa+ �+ P ^3
p, ,Vro• NnA pe yteked w'JI i.x[MLJS (see StneMq Llst a10 r l g -r'oF 0.) .0 b sad
h d 7 SrmY be used :n
II^n of^ts bu+h6 1� !r b
Oif•�l 1 Novemyf 9D. oneba ., y
t}f
� ��
C.rnmtnuctlm wnl >R dmn n aTordaca with tt,4 OGp'a'4e rmslmd t YdJ,
H4_I Joked 3/I6/06 bJ Altman Dlhar'•-N.-'<�. I.LL (lent•
�,......,. OCnb.Em,•.
_
over 11P;r1 � Wd SIIIIrIrJ tM>y Ytl tap b-0O' d whf�Y+'Ja sdh- LvvpPGL LIWd npllelay
4: s�xk I.h.yt randltb4s d¢4�.ngKa1 to ague y era �xkered. SUYJ+ yr nkOFv 1111,
�cr' ran5+4cFn-
CFCQAI II�kaS pr>trs CesN�►g the �"�� 1prqueny pill flan:filns aF prtl:lkpa WihTl hlv
n�Fgp{.1Gn ardnf. LpldszaP•+ GuNrecior •hnFl keep a 6ofplvte L� 3. W
P'wa o �.tYgs
W21. W3.1 aril prepared
nt+4ra Ia a dy CertRy al VG1k rT4 94°!ar/r�e1 ane4' Yell Gppnv✓a ea,poeHa. prat
Fa [e•.mtent Ma4tlt fella aLiY •-cP
adrerw draYngv cenelW'0. ssgr�lY,od o�6vGtidy. Lm�r.°Pd
JWn IpMy Pg !a W WrY�] P7 jtr ] d Nw4. Camldt<9h 4S-0pluL¢ d ralCCben
of PrM1@a y'�b
Y1F4 darng C4„pV1nc[bn fLN tln ¢rrPOfe tlr 4aa•fryg• rjlpF+ge1 P• at'tlWlcattSra :e VN
n9 • WK"VAX AA EV E t 0-%!:
i 1 - snwrlas a^r�.xrrf p
ar e:4rth-vr✓< r•JYn W M!tdet W+ Peres •htlu'A be e¢rp�atea dj 5cptdrt er 9p1r to enpv!
papquaia eslabtNrser4 Pr q•ae• feud pr1� W tlw .[+Yy svmeFr� Hi ¢+epobp aauri shall
b¢ •ae�w tarneaatey wv+l tlpnptaspn or g-eerrg. •hue[Ltd. ell rryawrl tat �hnws
fgyyy } IheWd p(el,r e�ytYr.O bet+.aCa Ma MMIMW Ist and MarCh 319t to kata adradage of
lMs,s plme valor,[ (ace Fla4rq `-vneAttof Ions belo.J-
�3rAL. 5[Yf cchw, tlld .
t OPrerelua Neon 4"v the proyt,tt eGvloglst (PS a m ion i of ion 00) days
r_ or to Yierilan te, proceed .A}h rarpfLclU.
1b tamimKtbn.�k rlun eertsi.eitce wdrl th- M p meeLig deb.e¢n the Glepd. nE. oind
pei,epx'ag tameape Eararcwtor. T^a oppraraa plans spee,frmlar» .Fran b0
rpaTewda W dwM Parties Yn•.ltP0 W d;d ad IW cve and f}a > eC>rIG dASols] related
W w ca.erwukll rawaa,fA, vreGuamw.it. eta sum eo.eualncs.
L4rettatn of ePalOig snag HPvv aSnn a%tot,nvae vi ra,d au�vy ar atr,M4d Fran
ovnala}oIa .pe.adf and fra.:e bra a:prade'aad t¢pra.'snP•A P''!•J dd w: eeLaS Iy
e.e�-prne. a �. t+te wea ranFio.nrbl:y d xe Lacy: to Gw.7«N.¢-xw IF
rdapan+wtt§
vmlfy 'ire otL.r W tnlNg :eeptkns ere (2V d V, and are+d .may N11Ne0 waYMs h
nvt'�n15a'i area ia. *R 4d rat'cl Ira W alrec tad by wcA "It of snit pl4a 5v4i saes
Wa kk be Laory WLO :n Ira tN >' friall reavwe my c6Mllc!y �Ji' Ihf apprwOa
gvvMg p>°n �' W our: or earmlrreile.4
eomwcbm r„ae fJo perroriwee I`acaordaKe with Pelletal way standards, codes, parnYt
The oppry h f46perslbls for obtalnhg any ol,,e rolated ar requred pvr tts prior to
the RIP' d Lp•4ktitUen.
A copy of the opprwrad ,La W"o Vr�ta rs, paNM:a, VYN F490ra1 Hey appr*-.A mrst be
m site whenevx L,,3Wwpm Iv n prpgrevs aM Rued temp an slte MUI pra�WLt
canplatlan
A Lpallnad PE VON tss re+ •I,, as --ay. a --tor conswctlm ad
approve minor rot O" to d+c plan.
rappgropltle vlevadaes rap. MnLad ?r aw pten are
Cased %pan tepcgrepllw mope
sapp,oed h>y It Levu 'd6posrata Pnpr elrrvehtOro r[rY a0pd••17Mf art Nlnym'"
e:apttbre. I: A the rAslTavO�liLy W f[.P ludsaapa�4YrY- aLtr to +arty Arv-co,elnctsan
fapOgroph.0 plyrptbns rlyd bee Ipc.lWa {x oCYaty prMfr b Lord:cdpd
CPW.clar nN.dl xl,ly PE rrttewdLey N and .aavlcol xm to fad iwJ fro e�s�••a<-;
ern La srstcrcc'ce OF yid uijkel > -�. ---. - . _ .
19 - : -4`I G V61a FATION TO F6MAlX
Prat to e)+]mrry IadaLLSS4 Oor1+"e4:.• shad nYAut ror-Faa: uP, )A e¢rertLtfae tom"
ar�e�arid. ryctNb.tktg traafMngafOilwr trr remgM. fat Ne e•ip1W rm atrrMtlrfn d Site fN+te W
a Kant Nor 4WICil Ls rra¢'tpr 14e1. rotCm oFrcil realm In p"D LWA ilia
ew�b W eabwa.'b, ramaial to Be omamal ey
am[bcop0 rw:rY,•[.:Jar yWf be rospane6a {a praaatg Rybrbeliae to era1S•i9.��cfeefaan
Gated oWada rhp Ihw W��drd F:a rOnldnJ! et, rargaleWa atoll aacnr N.ttal
FE. Arem`etLelde efe a� 9 r IdvfaaPtj
i1aa,'a4 1 nsahal I�*Lgeo-Md cae•laeenL Wk r sae d x ae a pat d
grit [oeLraet, Pt TIP Rldr. cart to lha eraser. maC spaces and grarJny. to to appw.•ed
Di PIE prior to %AblydlvP
Ihk� .coolly W[ b •Jirlag e:o•aveCUvn Nall ba Nailed wldtkr 24•he.rs
r erAr+w+aa. PE elan trekwytN�. Pbcc`1 er v¢iec+ri- Kalw'a sF'ePri3 free3tx.t
.oral to date. rlatnd d¢P d :.Lads. tat n rot °Ind¢d m• ¢vAnhy ae[t1y tavkor y J.as,
�tncype roots tfV1 apnxp tray bat b ea1e.y dw I— tat. oars named panto
111r, tJrrrDaa4;f rafmnd and Pd6tldbl mpospea atoll b0 -0MOZ vA eppraprate, b ail
1.4 - FLAO EXJSTll43 YeSETAT1rr-N' t sy1yD" V.A-52 4L r0 3E R LOGATFED
pE vWj frog etrlsLrg Vaal, Sttrnpc, 40WI TM!arrives wart, Gd Cy ¢tray Necftet
faK dt.e wNl ba rekw,.W ttW il•p rdlryalton d•¢Of- LlfiarYg GraCtreLPr Shill raldy
P? at bast 2 SQp tp s JfeOured ylezl•Mig 40 Jtat ewoxd IaaAYes 'a de relvcasea
�b¢ raor�,fe rvrtdr.pd prkr }a aka Llpa-t ig. ±b>a Cenlroc'-a'• shall _P-arwy
taLgf4a fFaGre. For Idler reaacdmt by LaaacaPa e'.afix.ar.
1t 14 ltrl ratfe•at1(Ilpy PI fire latlrcg.e Corltr'W'tOr N er.aG eanuF Vane No asotu.
%Yen [xv Pere 2 below efn hWhaL IMr,ra Ploaemdiy. LadALap'e CernroLlar shall
I;_ .�, ^teat 1 haba S feattr�ea W aw+d IfreakFlg laa�'Ntas. -W fr'9 6-k. ar
t y eta.
eohraa gait ba rer[e.md p.!cr to Mil ptaara.t a mega=tat Qom- Ary
lewtrrw deenwd uYptls[pctay dN PE frse b da..atp e"'^9 mlotatlarfl dtakl be
r greed wM kpa'•bsa mpLCrra of L-W..ope F;pnYcesab eqer,,s- Ther.Fam. 4 hLdHtOL
feahrel canto[ be navdA all W pa^ra`anL I",naMia. La.eocvo Carm•Pctar aholt
ate XP if�t ebeiyAle a ta- b\ rP'rf. is laf to bedtt to 7WP -0-
r<sW:kiq n st�aNrAra yrmr.F Ia-ravage re
Wog lYry bytdMg me e1 �gfavg et,y itrn•maMntau:e dutr>e ftnoa tress.? 1•aa,
atcl re! tivM9 A.perled For so,. vttolf va Larar+d Dp Ito a.wa rJgva fit•meat. eve
pas-iktvl to, kvUv Vse oe mulch mood pklaod Veer ord sdrstds MOM Ube mllrprlvn CraPs-
C[wrhg Gad+'altar ar II •loeiplla onsaa ar jan'e aOPs¢n rrgn n4.'rwaaay oceQa W Utla
dwvaleprtn k TPr lOFgr p' -- -- Msa y.a gadv'd perlL,m W tiro m4lgattvn DaP'la
aid 4uan11etea sFrtl11 va eeeannei.d bl the LPnta[4ga Cetitrxler. G7ea•Yg GmerdraeLor tAo11
/I.Ir2a IydrrF eaPleas from the rrkpira 9 t0 p1 nitetl p `d h U L Ca tapA 'Fran
¢aa�aeeay upkrd areas m •Aaakplre eyart4W rQaebd by Je ! ,---'3"' Cmtreeeor.
;tectpflo weed LhW and orgmk Trap%dl ad nes •y mlthgaym a em oa P.ieble. IC es the
slaeret414.y W Ua eUP•a J CuKr.ets w f1,00ty fa wood eJYps end WPIh tar later
r5 - CLEAR Ah►J 6FaP
Otto
a,, Car , to NaII width dta abP-1ng Rnib d the arr:k)enen
and tat, to 0 iota �exaep C 6 6to, %-va Y'�raf m .+e-ry n ar¢a6 of exl4ilria
vageegl5en to r,#lily .._ U, I COL w shill .E'aW¢ bl¢cFi+erry aril etlr FpeWkd
tT.TPrya 4ppatea ill hew, wnh eratl.el PDG+7eY4 to ih¢ ¢mting vpyemltai Gloorpa are
err/i, fad .c-.gewlWrr NUII 7a OgJ.xtAd F-am 'h¢ a7ta. 1'artY.Wm• Core trust ba eJNen !a
¢rErre aelfpb:a rema.nt a[ teat Otrd rppy hp ebpol d iD`Y or rtfaa � P1aL4
y.d ay oilier 1xoaJwlexotfa pain epee s. IrHmtrWpmtrs Pleat sp¢�las 1a be r.moveG
ad 4eafad N Uia imUg%tid. ell bather munb � � F g+WiME aril
�Ran kNpctE.utny rated cator.s, Pw-P
y^^ Y• .k>poraae iFre[a,aiaal Wslte, brda[vo[ RaTon and u`..pYrg nitfPJl.pda.
FIE to deslgmta ay addlttmd plant specks to be re sdi/treated prior to
Ib - J1RVS7l5Th1rF_liJi6 PROP05m GRADES
f1•a�eaa su•vaym f.P ChSV N1p11 •AM•uny, rteMY, aW Ileg IrDYed gredna raUw tale
nwJ[FgJ¢k[Fort twid a4i respa"M mar wta+Ge IOAawnq gtlea =betty- ylr+'oj.' !Fall
Pp err gpr¢par4y,°Lp.wrfeTn q.aRa teak4r at 20 Cc.1�nmrealn e� y mill'e prop4aed�
rate pe.fnAter P5p tf bann hdcaltae. It b l.e Nary ere ft pf th. 9atpvl G.w• Jar
W t4eata RiiFer b¢inr3a-Ivir vdtraa he ere aetrA�,.pK.ii PE shall °PP�'e 4�
.Led" OIe tL owi2'Wo. = rl rmMlOr
bWAWL
ra, gr dryad. xoF 1 W-2jraR eaawtLa. prodvta..-M3 gvol0 't -Fl Pro .eTTnnd F"Ur
w gadrg skrbFF, the � �•- Cs.hrroWr shot nippy enfAAIL yV4c rekMg ftae
below.
'.l - EJrGAVA7C 1'Qr7G4rlON ,Vtf'A flmgorg .alb erne)
-sw• Ceenraeter •Ndll ^�.-�-�^ Ut¢ rtYllgaSfeft into fAA .PPi'�'0d �� Phi
�loFrafN✓ag gNaa FtaLra (ipe PIWTy idJ}. B[e -Lod Vaad ¢¢ IiN
FgRtm 1 the altar IF ppSANwe, oVarwda t 5iW1 UO a art 'Joe. kfMf-
faid edyYslayids w g.dMig pkri Fp prGu-a proper rattan of mR4Fpkbt [et6 5h011 Be
ntod. ordy try cbtoNeq p•4sr app.vtc! d PE
the er-eeeN m,, altrPxad wa,, nd ate gaged br.Ffer wooer tavo�.Ler'.b¢ W baler
irNnFcd cwt ut she- en plans For
molar plxaeerd a 6• rx ecaeLpNred orayY, tw ePptod.
I-0 - RYIhElN OP 71F36f4OE
7}�yr ompW WTI of drWavPtbe{ P'E still route.. tby�P n rdkcbn fe a{yldl r!•'-
ai r ff spde ta4e1 vn rpepvep p9er to oppr-o toi by FIE. a cd cAVair.•sy Wll bP
.-root
OaddlJaaol C A ts p" Op. The Ga-t1We +trrdy by o Ike Mlft.-raga^ '
a-[e%aervatT FNArvub WUr spot. efeSaSlxe O+MOA am Lf•a Pahea. pariau-r.ca
i .ta.+rorm a�wsav, ad t5a mtltpeleti weticrd Rfrrdr+'y.
v t{�ade b egprwpa7, ftlnikryeter'fall ploea hems•- Fa.Lrea PM taP,an fc¢a Port
7 and 3i per pion PE flipll ePpre.re hcCRo4 Frawra artd tegrfaY pfotarnrd. Altar
fe ftblT- dtl L#itl•WFa1 Lanlraelar atoll rtl4sTb low g+adv ae[t01
1,4 - WWON[TE 0011"VIEW-V fpro. des isn emt pte aq ys ae !alto d nuV
UPm aaP'PiOyO'• d arxWPUon wWh tie mi t=In tiedprcf error o tsAinaalta atwW( iMor fney
Ps rtgrat-ea- v se. fhv tax .raft Petard rrvm e• atgve u.a proposed.oar sirtsa
ebveegf.e ar►- W erdlre paM tw5tanrf. The Proms 9P.kclydt1 t CrSr+ia°r sFW raHai
frp�Pda material 1a dplertmt+. rafnpi0r P or+Laria clay ih.r :dll ah raaeG•cd !O relay
-rater rrrnbotwn trratq�ffertd bau . a- Ir ra�'re0. me ctq IaKr grill to pl«ce area re
Molallel+on d syt¢lir-a1, }aL Iu rsa4rda. 0`0 4,10A,
W eleuehPe fin nPtafA p rr f�bfaetery mPre•'� ❑+alw oro Van waaee fatal warwa=an Pi o dory deft,. !I"" pplckoii farms a . 37 meta m pv 9'L°o'vd ae. Sorg* Reps {r3.s 'i.7 -doll m W arc
PART 2 - STRI1CTtRE wtd HABITAT FEATLIZE PLALD-ENT 5PF6,I1FIGATONS deM New We fvpp.oe 6• M ba spol,proyed .1,1,
Plmtr V.stalad In urdeturbetl �eae Shall ba hFagated with exlstttg natNe vegA[ptbrL and PE shorts oppravaPLOr4'vl I* tl: *r LW4 see 'A vs com¢ate4-.Pt•th Nit •nail bP aayrio-•p ea`tarilra4,
�71 - INSTALL •SAA6
_w - s:arpaHPs PF l -ad, aaaV--k m rxatbe dep1 an (]rating
'� . f:tl4fnaerorr SFali tottpna sn y d,ro.lq n.
F'eeLMs'ae, the 1.ad�aPe G¢rr aeeor ,troll kfNdl the •nags• �w9 rr
fpecbf, lY afh m.�naa 9m m bs anchored Ma wp3pd' p nNmth aF �the
er Ne
fowl 1v�1� web a mtfmm d E moll Y.:;:4i n ttrl, an dep[ctad Mu+o av1a1 on Fxe+J^9
kp,l, PE-�1iw1 �a•c+v arty TRr9tsofi prat W :ardlatlon,
72 - PLACe KABfTAr FEAFL;MS
rttrmat Fenste¢e Cda.rt toga Spay ,I Wlr be 4LtlLDQ,r4e tat Nhp ryl ate Cy ind GIMF�
WMr-to, roe rile ty the Landsr/y4 Carinxm-. Adds' -Nana[ r4a4ens Last 64
Wilted rta •teat pees lie as will the I tlml f Mtk]oiltln Lrm Pbc¢ ttae RnCAOt
1¢obX6o �m �^ d aOld-k fpr-0.• to plaei4trPnt of wf'� . a!
+aralbre rasa On 1 PE shalt rp a'.w.cv--• PF hct7fiat IuP:leea .dN
w i = T car+ scr.
Donn wgf yd11 W e m9gnnt d 2D Neat n Ie"9W trd W n rAfC SCaI nvr>.rom d whkA iu}ra
rOowaPm. 6'•L^'Pa m be a1Ura^ wall-daCpjaa Iowiad nturps, Pit 1wa raobeae .stl1 p
n11t1wc vl 9 Neat d lrraic eM NO' Wt AddWonvl InItV4R f¢elaal may bC leaoi.d wSFb
the mlegatts, mess, IF available. that me -1d sp-1 led slzes-
AN Rd.Rdtra war i2' h dtnermbn Foiwd A1• Wa du•ny -tan OF 11t4 ttArLNq slha ar the
SeimY de[Rai,AA stockpile beWlorla. Ste[kpnad tx kr-s, if -stint., %awl by plea: h
Utica ql el rain! 2_ aEep. pd n e n1A!>a'• !fiat prwldas both rJ.�.-.real s1 EIFI� ad
F`�y_' ytemel oath. Fp fM11 re plaenient of bouldc piles rWo die�"=r""'
L.er#rocirr.
2.:g - rNSTN-l. McSTI!t WROJ;STlm& E01¢5
LaiiLhaupe C.atf.rw_twr shall 4Pasbrci a0 1f4Ip11 best, to sYq IDAXes (2) within -
tlle nYtN3otbn ore4s [d do Y.twts f1�Kyetl 1111 PE n Ira flt+a. Ea/ea slmn rnnsrrveted
pa Slid deWN m pcsrg H21
' - Ibe ream bare tram cvrpreradL Pt, Ptair rer,art ilia prPy.ct Fp^ TMa+ aL: eptaoa d atoll
13 - LOCATE/5TAKENERJFY PLANTING AREAS
LondloC4w rANr Octor shoo field IPGPtC. 4t4k'e. dd velSif P hit praeL and conFlguratlorts
p.•for p Pla,w$ FE shall revte.i and oPPr tov v k.-lana Pear to p[ortaey.
Prvpe5ed locatluft at 'fa¢4'ed fbSW s *ll be at¢ked anG ldenynod wah of vpprared
ef4 fir at Va y-yry MFerlpl. Par et, e s I
`spa of YrW. aritpo calkr«:ar muj aPWra trq P xg" zxu "� e
ewrw �w cpprova laa.asrrr w W: pl s. a+s Pia 9'v P`or
7.4 - APPROVE PLANTING LOCATIONS AND SPACING
F•+aarg l4a,raanti trawl art pf.uLy plans err apprpasnC.o. !+area on ak:t¢w:pa ace
COnmtUm. Acyt.+planrg bcyJarr ndyhaw yPsc thgr+t dW W rYat Stta Band ltbns
and lazayety d ¢W'Jng � J��l¢n. 1¢va. py �'t�re F•Om 'S�¢ plaxt� plan wnl
require prior approval oy PE-
Punt •p ,M far tpeatas eslad b W to r 4i . t'inb.ene W. oaa -I 1110 rogAer q 4f
p.tfarrt, e�rce.ttar kamnA tdlta PS en pMe rimwI. Ln Wartlge rpaarig
Far amrrreale, ./en the pten all• Fa• T4.66. •Ymn3 ✓'aq fay frwn r8'•5o' Ob.++nh r..
ordre[p aparrrg d as +lace.
PART B - PLANT MATERIAL STANDARDS
B 1 - RANT MATH21A15
Pt, Nb11 eniPrate phrL r•pea+gf prier t0 pbtrq, My mNarbl ape met,t+q grit ra4rr4a
FE 4wi el.v Intl be tamedaF Pr femvred Trpei tln ate alp reptecaa w ill 1M1a moter'dl
yid: nree[a }Ia regJt-ad ytu.dodj. P.04 m 1&rIel swl rKve the _qWd ntf atSlate
ad Peae.vi rp.,a wx„ rO5,15 W Plas d%asc and MLpatotspa. oota rt C¢rwbenea.
rdgersa oy 1er, yiwr aeeaa'y,ay e.ov
an
ad every Jfperid_ d Nan tit,
ha'alta,l se FE
epm LprYHsepe eprdroctx'a r �t w plant nwta+d. pE ,+,nn pne�ppa+a x wrrg
dry srnr�l+-vn w ws,! metarwb v"� to a-rdwTg wnlae,4ri pay+•.
LaWf4 pa Gseractar etnn aLlaOi 1 bat rvwfLg 4P+r4'J. a ms,ron d IS -feat dF Me
q�xM, ant¢ !li¢ ace..-�st aide d Wo ea,niMg colliery to ravfoFl par f7eFon 3 m LfrawIng Plant materlae shall be bCpig Wl pe nrrwl feaam tY1,w¢at6ril OR -.5
Flag Iraea da kJ. Ifte be rvos" 10 . qad
=- o petd rahratdp0pyl. y
Ir
a4e4 q e,e w 4-trwittan dw." x poll relate
PART 3 -FIN1514 SPADING. IP Z16ATION INSTALLATION, AND SEMIN6 nNt am ml r yylot[wt the •TAM. tp"kti, Prd gwafeios iholl Ott aq.W My 4."46
FwlahTv p[mts. or as Ydkatnd vn the via-
9J - FLA4E STpp P0]EV TOPSSL
Fi• •Isall epprvw wtyolda dr.v# d dte mnayebm and bAW areas prior ta
pLscemat eF benluftc fR rraoe•ayj aidFa' stall -pried topwt.
n ill gPdep r•Yej.lan ad lAfltr spas, 6' d •Iaeyfrad to I altell It, placed Dvm-
stagdda laaa PAi 1 abv rat.t�TFOpptlaep1 altar b. y Ifaak+lp�ad M fbpvd aew W
"A" floe HarteraF Pletirg 1" Wickloo Woliv on D"wyg Re-11,
9.2 - II2fb6ATIOM
A tprpprnsry eb°'°o'9r�d 4tigplbn apt- shall tad eeeignt,d ad Iralallad Mf LPMMr'¢v
Daneroet¢- upw bsfan of Ttyµl ����yy ud pprrra• to t�fnlNbn of p,prrtrg• wlNh41 wl
pkr{a1 i+`roAarpw'sy MrrOst,l6h •yes Aio114PmdLt w Be 96^ad •rpts'e ter gyre
ate. All gelled areal Ahafl rVLCN'a F,atld-W a�iaad 1'r'Igellni r,trvaralja a' 0"q-21a rho
rersage, 0-,p. fe pmi> city P°^y4d sue- P located withal 4'W"
vegetrwad area] all t1¢ walarea ve a•y lYsgt4.bn.
Prwlde wR14a ..prtfraerwr to PE 1rfL aPeylpse P•v'm^ per coda Pns[e yr lire Ma In
I used ae O peLx d LOr.isLLLlori fiat the rren IF .vrlfiLotsGl comet be made,
prwde bottfaw pratarnn,l Gar Coda m a plat Mtfre t+atatfaflen.
Santa! Go,ra,W shot pravrd4 hater and w.ctrWbj Nor tfa x/sle La ¢sccpa
CalivaCtar sTWf pra.ta. eeolat[rt Valve and ccr.taUcvel to -1Z1 e1Mt rgrir¢Ile, GTe(ytoklm
%rtAgq ep worn the nrdw !area 10, of leaaL » 9V" addsOo• Fold -Mg plpYng to
odayuaee aahsY d pkr+. etala.•I¢I,
fie frrrgaelarl aPt^'e eriWN W s.e log [Atrdsenpv [Abater Iv elW.a tar V2' .I
prtlalpRaett\t F•3 ttrga. ispk RpWdan am lath rwsd a gobrar 3ls[ d 1FIo F- iloa-
"d[ar pwncuig. The _. r� r rgnV'attp^ WTI dd�uft tOC Cmb-a1r t0 wlvw tar 45 w
praclplwl7wT caw to :wlr uenrJi�rap4ca, Jry ro[ Lra Ixtoaar lot d Lte swore year
prPtLMtg. 1r P1¢n'].g accwr, tercel! Y(y Prd r1e'eFipr, dten Yf�pLmit ta111fe aodmded
to throe growlr.3 semore.
LrrrJ:+ A Cenle aLtaY le re�pensQrf. Iar eltltra%g p Tor Fr ttand Gore W at Ito
.S�tenri 10r.4'!Jv irW.n do rlfU'yaLpn mom. dad Fa 1.Mxedze' Yr_tW11pa yr �aGon
P•tar 5a OLtd]er 9tst.
1t A le l.o+dscaate rraNrmtarJ reaponeylN�y to ntaen.tn Iha rrigau.n fyDLo'n far 4a
duration d the d.sP+Je.rf ( ya-ePl n rdrvJi c R raep�rpd. Ac the aril or the LrlguJon
period, uta r plan reemalrJrnm tf sur�afdlLL os dpfa'xe'tsd pl PE tha Lal+dsca[»
C. A'aeta- sM4 PensPq.tlg r.p P9Pv doHeslydPn a Iraldtal vahw. eitd then enareemble
and remove le anyallon zPL"'n tram wrtleT Ito arlek�c4br Leas.
93 - IfrTJfaOSEEP
AFte v+gottfn a`P1e'n WslolblbL PIe Pryer w Myd-osvertiy. tl•a lPdsreiov CarttraCre-
tAe1l wale eho,-oai�Py on ernaaad •oas_ HYPn09aed wah freed efrnfs epacAlad nth* f•'cnt
SLNrdP'b {LYpway Y9Ji. FaeV seeW moat v.•otr�wte Vi4 `]�+ sovsare Sved "Wrb4d
ot,x age" fay hvs+dl IaltwetT4y ploy- ryrmkAwA
Grsadaul r.etled eem shop !1¢ SG6C d.«•.1r Wv tMtbtd la8tl ode apP44bd en Ve Plant
Whoytc arrd wa & 6r.d¢d IS,Nre- a4as ahwl ir¢ %eddad Wth the beret
seed m•[ sPaeri4d w. &.e Amt 5alteaul¢ cad Lhprew�iti wde.cd.
seadits Far mires shah Awe to- hat isaea a n.afntm of d.,P q%4 prior to dote at send
appvcvw.t dad ne`arNad or OdwaaN6e prtac¢aaed tO ertsre apLM101 gOr.ralbn rG.'v.
rZ4atp I; oc M-dlafaly upon ronpl¢tlm of [jadlrig, StrtKtNn. Ord GTigOtleri
trm'�1
PART 4 - GONSTR.I'.TION INSPECTION
4A - Pp$1'-6RAWf1W EVALUATION pr
PE shill f!{1prM0 gTPtgig mark fabltat FaPbrp 1`YOWWLbM1 W43.Ya Ina aaadr�7lf pants
pK.+r. mtuiaiNar b warm tat the malg.Ilon were preparly
ea W ha Pxr'aLtP4 d pwwh fWe slnlf be p�p-� Cy Ft, sd bRSW W W
Lexbr�P Gentt,oCtor ear oompleWrt. Afar P ar IRE nOv Ovens
been Cie-dataa v
yipel review ate pmjecL rrr trot Mlestel ccuaGk.n- d 5•dp^g P� npleniWalfdi and
ptl •nv! 1llan prxeed.
PART 5 - CONSTRICTION DF1AY5
PiPSa stall I be reraary grown, w11•r0W[d. M Mi''iliol gMrdtl acid hdsrG eta free from
a1¢Oae Or Mr.SWlJet- PE rc e s dtv rk}L tv rega'a rapbaempneor yWttnfrtbrt of
my plan Ls deemed uneultOble-
irate
.1-, arrt6dl, aNall hero rAClema b-orcFM.ty aingie ovary.! f+u�tn. (✓'Tear+ spvcRraa as
te !hA auadrel leader Gxelst me i,rmaw¢d. Ik[led aril brrfapped >
04, h.ve , a, r.vt-pruea at sox once Wlfirl the prevlaa Iwv yad^s. C ju,rer Neck
shad be AWI rvatcd I Mt Neat-bawd. Pkz* materiel wI h ds g;Ae Novi twat or bokm
reef W[le wrl Net be aCCaptdd.
renlforeud Vees Shah Noe tek-ke.y Fy11 and drehhtt v+acn• watrarifhfig ma o 141-1
roll-eheeY¢d Fo.rl� GILgbW a�s¢r nos W IYaP'Ihl P+d ocla-aged- vue ?oP
netw w chtq Owl not aK..%d 8•. and laynl of Wp taxer own not *Y d a•.
Shrubs shell IRA . minlmmi hak I, of IB MrJ•as.
!szlNa plaA GR1,ra» shell Ifs rev^ mtd wltEGtW M do emrRtre PaeJfit 14b•1h.leaL
faau 3• fltdt be o -tin tw•yAar.ald wood, 9/D' Q-a. mtNtrrit W atoll bo a
nieO of 4' in IWiLit' IdIIi 4 lateral d,ds a pDLed ob0ra geLtd dtar a Cite Gap d
OWA VAUIrq alydl Eta a mN' • er 1• oltPve a ioOF Wd. Na L+ottam ew{ 1 !ache a tu0. .
basal arils d Vtv eaititga Lndl bV ey! eta 46 doge¢ mgle clef rd7rkad ekady ae Ulf!
the rw[rg aril ro planted n yu aPIL CeUhg• met ba fiat catered tt,d ntfyS a<rLlg
Ia'TgF and vampvr end n. cl d 1F atoll Pe ►S b mare 1h a dYav data from dote W
uil.]�g utu= ar.an�a.+! d4 ,notl 1Fplailvg acute bebrerr. Dera'rcar let aril April
her •✓Melling uet n AWM nL ma nUoober hill, reared Nut ]f or tmi" ovi be Iaaa.
YIgM+ 3D tloya d P.Wa of the L•ddwape LWCrKL. t e -cave feettr¢etaf Chad -4-11
der Ne:bv that ap.MW plmb i ~Uis have k n 4r04 eft axved. A Imt of
stppne rwittea, aalcYoasaL, r.vbe+v erd the vtmow •wn4 la -ban OF tl%%
.f4er101r abaci ue Ip AOA WrfJn 3d der er Lonaw:ro tanlatsfar weed
62 VEMIFY NURU rzT STLY.K covlrk2s
P_ O wPecc pies m.[elo1 at the 00 at;e, bfaFaidhctgprb.Aevay ta99ed boon. lrr
aempfeaPn wrJt raqutea sKrdarPs Far plait elm rgr+dd tv plwxing. This.
rcWdes. WI y n(N, Irimied S., 4Jra Otd condlt5ca *1 -Walls mat rEC•Sys�ma� pprrP -. of
rdew. Irene b; ay a a aafaetti tread mne be v4 ea eta aepaafed Tor rdpaet a ro
AOA rAsa.viea aw right !a Nervy aayleil plan nalerbf aiy tote prkT to fMwFr ^�•-• Nr
n s rb m nb%a yet sxT mCcrw l dins wL meal La epeLV to a n as deasYted he ell.
Rayeetad molartot ol.ofl lao rirppPotaly renaovad Ire'n Pr JAGS vas.
B3 - VERJFY STORAGE 517E A O METHOD
Stale pla 1n Ito master neenfdany fa dtcLtSnmdele elI¢r he•aiwlev.l re eendrte.
F oWt aMa4 mpyeral vlair pi>-Ny Frain waaJvr dotage, ap.fametrm a and Ve
114 13p11ed .mil tArsappcd trNrerlal a.h[eh Gaon[ b¢ e'a[Nbd lntemamy !e
taefn• Lv asap «am cue pror !v plerdkfR• Prvl.e[ rawLavfls qy earerrg rein
mdsl sell F er ac.,dbvl. eS+tar rd4 fired tv Seep eeafhPlM mitt.
�^P P+� sk.eL tarn moat &cllatd apeL,cs sopretaW ad dh dad vtd l.A akal theta of
tralolltlltoft it Par'% -rear_ PbtA a¢ tSsaLViad soot n .N.r me~ ndemra prior
W plm�erq Ete7on¢ aril dfy p--IM, Mx-dbtvy sok-A. Ito aetf h U.v Fiat" Orr.
W arc. era .cr�IPw•3 amofi
D4 - 5W,5TTnfTIa�
5rbaLih.Wne W p:at ap¢rAes or sues may tre p.rn led Rased m plme -liability, but only
ash prkr a.ntren gspranl bJ F•E and the CItg of FAearal lLoy.
sarareoe SWL at .gal f5ra W sp¢ ffl od ca tar=aw .r B45 ei rLrgs rat ve sioA hJ d
ter decldx.n LCTtarter a BtB p5mt[r p ,rn., a.widtLa fcde.y. AcAr tpecln ate ru`ran'J.
tfr•. oei4 r113r prier aPP•a.n: '�i PE hu Yvcn pGax m�Prid aleall ba sevd9AttF., 4nilPmr
a cad
PART 9 - PLANT INSTALLATION
9J - SOIL PI�pAfrltTlCWAr�I.bF�rF'9
Pi'nr m tetdAftgf aF pLontryf. erdtre rrnplesa ryKnyl al nslrri.t•ra fYl niaLvlal vretl
for yle tmrpa,•sy coratrutdJcn acLEesps. Treva ad shrubs yell ba f* plad¢d m Shea n
detmla pt DtJN- rrLktds N w plartMtg 0.a "J . far'.0bi ro-tardren e5}ait.
1pvynerl per maaFp,<yv.S .pec9feae:ea fees 6erbral rim" 44twlorroa Not- vn
rxa.tg s�D.
5.1 - 501L STABILIZATION 4i - SOIL MOISTWE RETEMIOFf ASHzr
IF there e . d¢by n ePvlrfveMon far 0'g realae LorloSCrr,Ja I:antFOttp-. rrl[ass othoewlse Add rrfgRAT{2% SfnkfolsS a OpFXwtld equal. sethe ttlp- II Rxrdl4 ax at plan Lg pits.
stated In rrtiLy sheet low r¢apwlniero For mCrMWt.r+ d AroaaA ree8nal Felt: =vkwlFMa fp- mreLtbfe For use ovf eppt,caUrn rotes.
hpbmmdaLbt. AfGcr oecapwnce I.F. seen oyeeaaod, lardseepo Gvisrese than proves
of bAll rM`atttga to PP of plaice mwar�fl,
Ft N'OL n et 0et-flw with O rapresatlptNe of Federal Way for review and
^_ ^- ql at Itn rdtlgatbn plop velalk !loll.
llt • dale of Fnal oca spi--e shall cantsUhia the b,91IM ig OF the --%-
wrwrlyArahtenariee petIod,
PART 12 - OeFE-YEAR HAIHTENA.NGE
Ladscapa cmtrOcmr shall review landscape-.teroae -..-do- with F•E
LwafdFeonet, ra to bo prWded tl°w'9''-"e Vret ion and For one-year
dmk" co atxtbn hvgr dTg o! FMOI pq.ee.
LPrdsctev Cemtri:M W %welt rto!MmIM keva.od drk4e m =V.d to r-o'rlah haalVy
ga.lh atd habitat diverluy. nit may aielyde tl�fW �oro leper Of vea T1cYe•,
e plaits ta propx get, tad vp^igt; pokwy _ Pas yid fn•,arce eaYrol. Crtl
Ln'rVC! ysria3a prabhians as rawreG Derstg trta ar.s•yt,m rcp keneaee plarbv.
xy+een racy Is and s¢pc¢eer.• ts. hall seed al p•ewvsvy seeded rem ..Fat show tram
LJxaawp1 CaNrLw[or 11007
1 be raapa+yhra For aorrYSeaif; ad w¢gr2a attar applaaeam
yrv.�ark :tin g•rA.Yy •eater!. Lar[, �o Len4¢cmr fAell uMerffa eM reraWn ayftpn
n aprMg ax p.se•Sp vid rapot,, Lry zt melrtee•wc¢ p�nbd. I.rk�4wn n
requt'ad wlafA IMtllaXl nrseg v a•ae. a teak[ or I La WrCj seaaaaa felhDwrrg
[N fO-ngr.ra papcLwte ee:atl[lalrne•C- At Yw end of Ihat WA IFn Lad34apa
CcnVaGY xi.all r.ndvle Me rrfgoeras ryrwsee pre- V-10 ion rd Z_ bpfare the
Ir,gotrm syswn rs aatllNaetarty rmtavea
LD 2waptt C.Pnlreetw shall i-oct Pmean aril drautege problaita as speGFled m fha
rF'r- f-a tJrac)WA them laa-rWrae.iPlta pdrax
r.ntill-Wo COtUdstor VIChl faMwa sin Fgyt� of the a 1 of Iha nantvasmce ppried wd
reatdre the line A•aa Ittr seedag aNa+e¢rt April Ist did 04WWr I56, all tOrd Oraas,
arearev' riceo
anA se�+Pry IovR
PART
113�A.SSeWLT PLANr.
g1pv�q br�9T�W 1 fie II A: flbt tb+N, the sea r tl�ibrnl lefe P netdew of Lho
Pern aid Ycppcl Itte iMLpibrr a-av to ocw55 rvnlPfiA•cA LarnlfvnF d iutalh4 y°aPn
ad =Fnm drat tlWW ftmm the apar� plot" ple" IN W noted or n'dpP�. h
rerwre aF rarrolla0e, sla al dallcleKbe ens •er,dV-W*, wlll La PfoPP•od avwg
wth Ito en -deli plan far ha W Pedp•pl Yky wuln 30 Ls", dray PlmWg 14
completed.
A retollPLtlrr PM 20 oa ptalrwA U+e fi'ss tyryNRJatP rlw�aa.g %•.Ara ware occvr
rw" o' vq' y n Vw tv a.ag ilanpl4mhe YYryry��. n4,ratan ��aay�a
temLvrl �rppa•Ntg, and martalaica wA�Ielraw Ura t1�FprMg Praa�pn AF ] Vte i gees
leilewhg tallauan. LLnd�y¢ cw.lrsclar h respmsbn Far alai Ye•"�ncnim and
man:pidnca o rWl iywr Wrw [:w CpprOuMi r.ataLalLp.t
PART 14 - Pf-RR FOwAWGE SEGIRITY
Par d-a C& rrY :r .rely rnrW t71-LG 72-1958 4J.. parlLrnw.Cc 4va�rilq e.- qutpr
aisle mpere y requred W ja•axe� m+llep'bn !access. generglly r4aF esrx.Teeatl NW
Msratloaat ai rsa:.Y.:a. attd matt avtg end tread Wpyfav,ance QaC '4 P4hk 1 oa•X>
Iripy nay dep.addg an tvres'a! fgLll arch OD 1) novae of plan+wtaio, 2J *U
Prppei•aeJvn wale 5) Conb-act lo.caceper. aid 4] caquaw�t brae tar saraLvrrlg. Aa
esJvat.e Lvat er fA--"!^•;" aRW IP' 1NLlejxten rr.dtta-enK wokmay a coed w
detarmsaa o petrFPviaee deatr4y. A1lgmplNeay, the Gty may pr. i Rand Wrt+ Ct.
Lnitabtlnn melted to detemire fec[r9y.
PART 15 - LOWS
-TEP-M MONITORING PR0 M 1w�y
fMa- aAlml I�mAnt (Ol 5 y01�P'•DeQlalbte11 reelbrtl ejrl IOG41IIav1iO wcWd W(f reta:lePan.
eodle:'4fa+ot% pfatrrga .Aq !sa mode Mks ye�y h Ifn aprlrq aril fill d Ire N•rt. second,
are INN gars -a ad rJwf 0a Wry p IhF fr�i rcr dr rovr]r �d fgtl. yaera.
Manitorng will Include data collectlon of the Fono." Items=
- Camt all Ms Wiled trees ad sh1A s In the Initlgdbn areas far tOrt1AIbY-1,-I.
Aedee/ Uic health of all Yletaned trees and snubs M the mltlgatlrn areas Far any
poitlLteal! or inFeslellai.
- una4h0 peraene Laver d Weal, by speciean s, d ePadr.O erry ..mt / ran 1
L--%"iaf n order to prVMOLv the growth and survNa[ d dI Mstalred planb.
Phgmt3•aph the era.Led r Ftfrd w d! aaimepd bdfm• e•.m from x'aoft 9 W41- es_
»b lacatkn ad dre"loo a 00.1, phWI,.y ,,h "I Va raaeyran[ tlr4Ty Rollie Y�
pek t b¢ rapPc%o0*twn of crcWA4 era WRXV4Ad areas, 4-0oa rpprpfenGtd an e
^ivP IIa. propery located mv! L:b¢1ed.
9A. the reO,ll4 or p l monitoring ta the GUM of Feddral way when 30 days
fallo
w"
Field nianxarkg. - -
15.1 - HITI6ATION 60AL5
L lnprw0 xmerg rreHana hablwt a fmctbn by addrg specled dlvershJ aril strtraure with
halve bees OIId strypl.
Z Create new, wetlad habitat with e,Thm6 on attracting aq He amertebrat s and
3. Ramwe Invasive a rvnrative species M ells d! wetlo d buffers.
4. r� r PtImd f-trove of hood orator storage ma water cprddy niprovement by
rYeolry rcw wctkmd taco.
152 - PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
I. ProN9e wetkmd c Uon having a kobol area OF at least, lo,4T4 sq a Feet 05 to LO
m1llgaebn racial.
2. Provide erhametvw t In wetland buffers havhg a total a-aa OF .[ oast 20216 s Wind
reset.
3. ESLdalbh at least 7 ratNe tree spades and B n.U- snub speaes-
4. Prbwdn LO permit wrvhal OF all Installed trees and shrubs by ft =0 of He 5 yeas
of rra.vNrttirg,
3. M21*W loss tlm I0 pen:ant "rill-riOk,ve, MNaslve plmt cover h platted le
roFad on the TE:i4. PIPm}. tranyv ad Letrporag v uptbn al,"tsnsIr-Lim delay
43 - Fwerilk'm7.
are el faro' y5ae OF mpVlarMrg
period.
Oarshvd ISd P-e.s n ..4aGh L4TW.>'ralfenlipA tMf sadynn[bd fa- sd deep a< mvrd
ParLllm rotM; plmfr'g• wfh en agwnc 6Ww-ralama fD-. -W. Ngh nitrogen yowler
LerllY i713-71. wM •TrrnnT.xr..n .rrt.s ie epeaSfed by rs.nJeriirar.Iauen
PART 16 - co"NSE NCY PLAN
pw0.I'> tpmparlve_ J wrnl rvpkia4 all trees and
will ba tmteaatoay 1pro•aaddd reUl tIq recta¢ spdcJFied n 11sa Play SrJnaala face
i"or
�.
are dr r9 ['"
orrnerg Ifl.U- 9t,eded etas shoo W L'tygptea W fJt . Hotpr pecY (F Yr#�nk}t rem hwr
__ _clad. lone! hA[ullad m.dfetled wttE'^-.:.ai'='�'--i w gelr*Y�bn'h.s ECan ddtanlftied by. _-
,IPPLy ferletaar dtar piateig ptt H LTs(J'�IIta4 and prior to Oi llLaLlan f muldl. DO rot
-_ �pyy FeirWlar'bet+.vCn Tap+remva-'mil Y •Lh. _____a_ _.. _ .__ _ " .
..
. _ -. tfa deet-ad rNIL�Nmk raft ad Paf6_l, ea etvder -nil CC atYsaWC. a
aril
PE
-IA -
dahaaro+aym WTI ie nndc by o Goy praaut'�tNa, The Pi'Pja[k eco5vgltt, Pip the
pr¢yawt propalaN to +'rP1°r*'e st . epn�er% .y plaA The ecOlag'e! MN aces• nmws For
Lpw LtlrtlVVLllpn epphenart Lee:la{fa CanOnactor shall --ad all a+Wasad 910-W
,_,oed brand spec gsplYal,ore] ..4h Via aced nlLeas sp-road h the Pam Ss"aul..
PART 6 - PAstA« AND RaAP WaHT0Qw6E
Ibfdscapo GaeitrPator %bran area-o that aanLwLllan nardad oewlaee des nee Lka*Pga
"Ohs,fepW-ae Oe d k,. 1' Vp 1011l11 l PE ptgn be .100-d 141st'°t ,
dmltage aeeus lEea Pax feplPeemaa ia+lPvan1e^[O n ebortYy feeeitlN.
Lpdfeapp ( at+aat¢r ."g, paws II.A adj.4arL r¢ad> cra na14ansa" 9 kw Al sell
orator otAa• si6[i•b .L all tries arrg Lam^^..-w•�•lgy WKbrtlp] rorMOclOr flan mok
lenw4 give d and ccaemmppy wnA radan.r 14y Lpdea regrdrg af.taai
aphvmiaeeRcfeawyltrvrlk Lartrtel drFeg CpftsbtieLler4
Any cha�ges m madffkaL,ae to the plait mist race Ne prior approval from AOA.
PART 7 - PLANTING 5FEGIFICATlON5
TA - PLANTIN9 5G"M L K
pla0.tng broraa acrAr m� " between Dec-b r Ist and Minch 31st Lo take 'a'a 1v of
Rfryr-root pbni molart.l.
T2 - GEr82AL corminoNs
In the rvl,gaPOii area, the LmtlsLOPe LONractar Shall remove wvLtif] w exdk, Mn'akha
species r g. Sr-0tr. txaaet pegllah Ny (bftabya%and evargeen beoekyrvn'y. rood
eavjysa. p.rpb ipaaa0trN0. FOd'2° bi'ewci^%. •S} anaaa izraMPea eft and bull
libtb, b•deroat lolled sd e"saPMr9 IiL "hodol by 4renrol Pr chemkd meal
apprawd by the f da l way a% P15 Fria- to pre.'! MWI ton
n grWea !seas by. a 3• LaJm- a' fl v bark MIs h %halt iM pkd d trataa Ira ba- d riaw repeutdd rallaea Ind nnkn r m Yte Gary
a•rd ib' ilia ratgl aril atrW plattrga (24• ilia. rngf her prPOtae woad rq.bal, aril
aNatyef rr-}r/iilan.
45 - 5T, M!5
traps •fan I O ataraa wth aL Feast and stek4•, 3/41l hW jd ae 00 trey. I-midsla s
Wd,ectvr shall rgetpvp stakes at the Mil of the ¢n¢yee• gaspie¢ pwfod.
Rb - RED 9f5TUitliEv APE..9
^^- CPttrOGlA^ Y911 Ryd'Gsae•. ma thprp'aJiYj w.tpr plpafAa opal with the aced
mbee ap-ined .t ii Put 9cheerb Fall" W WJAW M-Wrwtloe mad ogaa (Oy hind
failowry prat homllo"m to ill ern Oa gotta w foe . `.lead Gy hind again
y prior tc cA vetil C.-Fe 4L
4.7 - AESYME LCST.aq NATGP.N_ OR LAbVW_APEn AREAS
Bmlatg nveral pr ar.xeaPLd w¢te tat �me ae.raged drag c^^er^--=W. sltetl be
reyuree w liter OrlgMtel caa�tnrl, n5.n e^Ywnemarte or maWrlcay¢4s Ira 1pxvad FP-
Ihsee a+em fsaa P� ^^ra'd aaeab n olnaMg aCr�ard•
98 - Y1 R co rat the reaa'ral of ewisLMAve . •ralaraa aril
IaW �q Cgotrpefq atoll be
%earn m ye one rallv..ttg 1•e}a{I eat oL ptP L .a'arnlr mid Fwtaa eonwvatUn
PART 14 - >iA'PPANTf
lies .re•.vey yql! rrakp¢ rapsacrnetn d peetes ! -its and IpM1c'ra a,v m the
A•wngal MO Pia enters W be atylPaalaa yr 1aY.WbQN1¢ m W P+p'+L IrtaarSpt atoldad:.
Erupt for lacy d.p to pfceSa[vdy errtra eltaamlegrCd LoidSllaPs f6ebrpaebrpd lay
Ip-yam i-e�era .ralrwf tlratT}. nsh411Ad p1aC m�ar411 m•a •dq•red is be yxkp+fGAd
Fa ottn ge0^ pgavml defects a j vwrtWo4t,ary pa+M1h mrc'apt far SmAs ar ri.RldeL b+
e[ivlef a arv.alaakrza�e Ri otliyl. Plants TpplaL scroll W ratitLlaTaa I.a.a¢r p�aK
4amlae rxsdord,
Polos3al tanW )arty b t+frfald, FKNdMg "I rop:xeumN d pk»ls that Np nx Syr Ned
.t eceaptsJe pe.fertnaxa Ra+dvnds arI, Nv 5-Svar moNeerhrg py-le, era pJl
dptarr Nathan .Id rpelYlcpll4el OF the calla d ekrff e t tnerfallry 50 perce3 Orgroo5el d ay aar.altan.anl a•cd
Or' Urns ape'aie0. PL f dpssari oltd MrQ3amaNPSeat will proceed •aUi City approval, and IF
rwed¢Or, tdallonGl n ell iI,WlP'•rg
PART R - Lams-ri la N'AwTENA + 5PfrjP CAiiow7j
hdattLanitCe will ba to nd,CWd alb a rcatim,yAs� raced base. AadnWiar ntsnt. nary need-
Mp GO '.,d,w'rmd are aad-esead falto.Ng a'twlti+Jem^by irnYleprla+ea rmTe•L GX.FFIQES rvJJ
L1,4 cw 4 Pip f411he ova imaan eM Its rim Me114¢ 4eplemene¢d tln Cvr w+.wac i R?lf pL
![.¢ tlrcatran d the weliad taYaISOr4 or the %tier.
nA - L® CONTROL
edam¢ remtretl end o ilral of rt4riw•WlNe end otter to sn P pkM4s (eg• Scorn, bream,
reed earta)W-14, Ndlnol q- era avargramr bww" i - Llfoe. .A fargleah I• �,
mtag gray, t::1, dad -- M9 tan be parlernlad Try reawl riAete
wlar.ava.- ptrlf4W- F' n'1ca, neevDaeaYs FWY1Lpl1 r.m only Ue uwd R naKaaaay
Woft2roble ell wer<t1y ewmlb plPii apves¢a that! ba nreftarted ell Ievgls baler dolt +otal
f.one. Qy gr an Abalen of anJ lkae dAiy the !ra-yaw 'rronnor' J Peffoe. The
all. g eAlhnc treobitmt Iw ay�Wla syieesee
112 - R® GANARTSRASS CONTROL
beta rlRfh facto cafM. t..+pu ad wllli o 5, or p procax, w � � Pwv.os
that iY i' yI.1
1. AYLGe %hair to .aecd�kad and seyelfwly yprlypG w@fr IaNda'p ono rI deaigWed
spray eefy f pondne sam1. 5prPYYq shell ne d%rrF d. a tl r�f+en �y period OF
pia w.eka tier'¢ h Ipreee%ea0.
n.4 - srArrsls L15r Froty �r ro v t rr
91.cc G''�'ry 11411cprb'nyplyl:rpol,=�Lgvler wnlow c5allx scaularloia). Black cottonwaaa
IPoPi't'r tridipce,--pal
:ta - STAKIS* SPg[dFIGATIpN5
G.tt p car se p rnra¢e r got,. d fray vV--d r.mv-a vaera¢a. r„ecrgf ,Man t»
>nslyrad et, I• D&. cpxly war t/ sieMted reed [or4ti+3d'i>t areasC1n__g.,r.� n
eeYh aa-aeseaa trt,eS4 a'JVraa•e apacRtea. G.tlaYp !foal 2 old wooer 4- . l2,
dlattv.ar. war art, W.I. R[n.Pie% r4mlvred arrd nsmGW U a mlia t.p. d e7 ie++e-F
rf8.1Rtr5AssGN Trom .f.•a Ww CwUftorN
Ttrs e.nar Sr,a1[ eae„•n !!to-' y1 Wa•'U are rrrt�aad tli Dc 4
ye FMft 7� altar frif:a:[.I1nA Yrirdot'on >a�d Ooc✓ M. a rota of V2• PF .eater two W
!trod !totes C.evek w.rg vac aaeana year a!:er tatvlbYst r'•IP••an dNzsd vicetr m .
Nato erF V]' M we• enea a re¢L �p.4var. N +qrs J.wr IO>< 4F arrow' repbeamw': ¢ucr+,
-to" rot 0*06 to saktak ad at V2. OF raptor aieo a w kL
11.71 . M'¢NRPJNVCE OF TREES
Rpeha mru+tenerce of plan-d trees It ba 1-1 - 11 M4awe> hcwdc refeieffg
pkrdl topreptr grades mdvF gl[ TWf 3wwa 1Talt ka weeded ea! !re base
d Utah {u arvrtrm4.F zP,pvbra Ma.:y b¢ p�'vnaed bq: roll ramaval.
"b0'rAarC'.]ttTaarre'nrrai"+RJ�'OrsL!wct:•'as -1-0"- v-
amaa-•iac" is, owe mad. great care shall L; ]talc-n to prevart all Mdesired
ntiWe ,p sn artier ptaitwo or ro--la,l-al
n6 - PFWIW OF S 0011 f >'1t••fTSI
Fill any p Md dl. the dirscuon of the wctlard conwltank or to remove
usL T'rEsrmmnl [la.:arY yaWp14--k
PART Ia • COFrrFFIfj.kw,. PLAN
An dtsd pMstls w11 top rFplewa .75 the aP'sa re,¢Jea x w -ad "Dwit,Aa apecbf
CAN. M1+seke tits a;aof ffF :ne rrl• plRt - •pr_ nYl.C[al aldll ibo6t'te same
fpWraeon a• vrgwl>y.,.ateileo ntoter'a[ p.�prp.'try ion Fne auwr dal! aF:er rew�ln
Fa rnwre Ma dsaA Jocn:+lee f¢g_ mo'M}re re.ga+tP. ion^? *�� �• - _^
CardAlorn•.tilAlll. dttrogA. o1LJ. PtP'�ey,p shall trl :arpiveea IinPcr tNiF draalaDn of die
.mtle'd rmr.Ref2. Lxfj e7 Feeenfl Hog a' fi.a
EXHIBIT
PAGEA-OF.
r1 pp3:
� :y f
STATE OF
NA5HINSTON
REGISTERED
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
ONE OATHERIHE OLIV
CERIFIGATE NO. 144ER
EXPIRES 625/07
z
PAE rl
Proles #
C 1C}t"O�daOpG.
TOP. O
�A�..� �+
t�la��o O
rl
•il^�;# DODO � �
` y � -77 —
% P
41
` \ ._
o
1 • ■ • v �/ �V /� v per V' :b +p',` W \\h=- �7W r.J/�'�`$y,�'W�T vq - � \ [L
- ■ ■ u `� v / � W v 'v v W W W W .y �L\`Y•L O !C/iJ"��.c= W/:/ IN.O �W 1 \ \
L T�4�fit ��j'\y ,
�N8
. • .y • .� ��\ o. ,n .� �� �. w \\
- ■ ■ w .y �� .. .I. W tea. w .o \ a Nr ,H .I.�l,(D V
y
ro
o
/Y/(]
r i
QQ
r
• , , � .. .. .H w .I, w .H N. wig �I � �
• � ■ v .L W v .L v W W W - �f � Q
��-��.- v�sGaY4 \
7r 1_ �.��jl
WTI +;
i�
a `
I! ®►li�rF-t35P�i1�
"'-pf b�ITINIT PI bi.l
1. 1-= 20'
PLANTING PLAN LEGEND
r41
a /
W�
Dt
rf
r � pjdler4pR
F 1
�. J
IL
itgpa 0�� �. ✓D•
►���. .�����-l`i^a� � .L�: �. ,s.���1a'�!'R'��o�O)G .,�'��.F�alllfill*�'.
-------- EXISTING CONTOIA2
PROPOSED CONTOUR
• EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN
WETL-AND MITIGATION CLEARING LIMITS
00kN LAG, 5Tui-v (see specs)
SNAG (see Detoll I, H2.1)
Is /
NOTES
I. BASE INFORMATION AND CIVIL ENGINEERING PROVIDED
BY J3 CIVIL ENGINEEIRIN5 - ISSAOUAH, HA.
2. SEM CIVIL PLANS FOR DETAILED INFORMATION RELATED
TO kETIAND HYDROLOGIC SUPPLY, DETENTION POND
DESIGN AND GRADING, OUTLET GULVERT5, ER05ION CONTROL,
51TE DEVELOPMENT 6RADING AND DRAINAGE.
3. SEE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS (W4.1) FOR DETAILED
INFORMATION RELATED TO IMPLFNENATION OF THIS PLAN.
4. ALL 6RADED MITIGATION AREAS SHALL BE OVER -
EXCAVATED 12" FOR PLACEMENT OF 12" OF STOCKPILED
UPLAND AND WETLAND TOPSOIL FROM DEVELOPED
PO6RTION5 OF TTiE SITE.
5. ALL WETLAND MITIGATION PL-AWING AREAS SHALL BE
IRRIGATED FOR AT LEAST 2 YEAR5 AFTER PLANT
INSTALLATION.
6. HetLAN] DH.INE°.TION, CATEGORIZATION, MAINTENANCE E
MONITORING REPORT VERE DONE BY C. GARY 5GWIl2,
ECOLOGIST - SEATTL E, NIA - 206712.6514.
T. AOA 15 RESpOW13LE FOR TF= DESIGN PORTION OF THE
HErLAND MITIGATION ONLY.
r
i
r'r
!
GONTAl NER SHRUB DETAII- t
` 3 5EL SHRW STRAIGHT AND PLACE ROOTdALL
"�. ON SOLID GROUND OR ON COMPACTED BACKFILL
I
] lNGCrILL PLANr,Ms itlLE IYJ! i'LLL WTNi
I �
I
Aps' NATIYC Zpli. YAI•>a Spll. m SrABu.ltc
RN1�m+9P6i
�
G, ;
r 14 O
IN T E INSTALLATION T SL AS IYIIP'J
(..., 2EEP
�4"GIA RITE
n�
T
S
1 v
r
�
I
NAALN 3' DE'
24' DIA RING
FINISH GRAOF
5GARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING HOLE WIRE
E
HOLE HAS GOOD DRAINAGE
,,,5T1H6 NATTY SOIL
70T PLr4NT1 NG DETAIL (twp.)
P
A NATIVE
5 FLANGING HOLE 12 PULL WITH
N
ROOTS SOIL LIGHTLY
PACT SOIL ARONO
ROOTS
7d (5 AIm ALLOW HATER TO SETTLE. Do
NOT LEAVE AIR R'1 S HOLE
BACKFILL
�y • S>rTUIIIIIIIII9FISA K�NIOI15. NAM HOSE PN7L
IN THE INA ALL . AMEND NOT BACRCRILL A5 N10n3J
IN THE INSTMIATION NOTE--,
4
FINISH GRADE.
SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING IDLE MAKE STARE
HOLE HAS GOOD DRAINAGE
T FOR BARE ROOT PLANTING ON 5LOP'L5. IFGTALL
PUNT UPR16Nr ON LEVEL SOIL TO AS5URE COVER
- OF ROOTS ON COI'=MINI SIDE OF PLANT.
COACT SOIL SUNDER ROOT MA55
EWSTc 0 FAMM ETL
C-7ENERAL PLANTINS
INSTALLATION NOTE5
I, PLANT TREE L(OR SHWIB 12' HIGHER THAN
5_ fNAi6t L47971AY�1Y NP TigmiCtLY, H'FAVI ER
DEPTH 6ROHN AT.
AT N'IRST, ; a 3 TPC` i'ae s.EEC 7HROE5511
I
2 FOR CONTAINER TREES C/OR SSRLB5. SCORE
FOUR SIDES OF ROOTBALL PRIOR TO PLANTING-
WTTERPLY RODTBALL IF ROOT CIRCLING IS
1!E ORY SEASOIL THEN LT55 UNTIL
ESTABLISHED.
6. FERTILIZE ALL TREES AND 5HRIfBS WITH AN
EVIDENT.
APPRDI'D 5L.OW RELEASE FERTILIZLYR APPLIED
--
w
r
3. AFTER PLANTING. 5TAKE TREES ONLY IF
NFCIMSART' (9—.g — &..pTnq) OR IN EXPOSED
YFA2
AT t~AGTURERS SLR56E5T® RAT
T ALL PLANTING PITS SHALL BE AS•END® WITH
A SOIL MOISTURE RETENnOH AGENT TO ASSIST
4- TREE STAKES TO BE VERTICAL- PARALLEL.
IN 1333,WG THE SOIL MOIST DLRIN6 THE
eAN-TOPPED. U`L5GARREO AND DRIV54 INTO
ORY SFASOW
I1HOI5TURBED 51JBGRADE REROVE Aft ONE
'
k r
r
0 10 20 SO b0 `I
GUTTING PLANTINC7 DETAII- (WP-)
NTs.
NOTES:
USE A 24" STEW. BAR OR MARLIN I. cvrnNr, SHALL BE SPECIES AS
SPIKE AT LEAST 1/2' DIA AS A NCTEV.
PILOT WEN PLANTING CUTTING! 2. GLRIW TINSS SLL BE AT LEAST 12' DL .
IN DENSE OR GRAVELY SOILS. AND 4' TIMI) IN LEIGTK
INSERT SPIKE TO A MRR OF IB'- 3. CUMN65 MUST BE ALIVE HT1 SIDE
ES CLEARLY REMOVED ANDINSERT CUTTING AND TAMP 501L
AROUND BASE BARK INTACT WITH CUTTINGS SHALL BE
PLANTED WITM ED N 24MORNS OF CLEANLY
-
INSERT GUTTING{ MAWALLY 4- THE AT AN SHOULD A GIFAW_7
r,TM PILOT HOLE TO A D�fH CIlf AT AN ANGLE SO EASY
AT LEAST IB", LEAVE A INSERTION INTO TSff SOIL 51 TOP
I MK OF 30, OF CUTTING SNiOLLD BE CUr SQUARE OR BLIIHf.
ABOVE 6ROWdZ SURFACE 7I k— I I 5- CUTTINGS MUST BE FRESH AND �f
MoSTAFTERCIfFrIMS THEY SHOW
TO ALLOIN FOR —OJTIN& LEA R� I 13E YR8R�J INSTALLED NSTALLED THE SAME
DIP BOTTOM OF CUTTING IN A RANT
ROOTING HORNONg PRIOR TO
INSERTION INTO THE 501L
PLANT SCHEDULE
TREES LARGER CEDAR AND HEMLOCK WILL BE RANTED WITHIN THE EASTERN WETLAND BUFFER
SYMBOL 5GIENTEFz 4J1 W
609- ON NINE
SPAGINIS QTVSIZE
NOTES
• AGER CIRCINATIUM
VINE MAPLE
AS SHOWN 64 3' HT.
MULTI -STEM, 3 MIN
MALU5 FU5GA
WE5TERN CRABAPPLE
AS SHOWN 24 3' HT.
MULTI-5TEM, 3 MIN.
• LJ PORULUS TRIGHOGARPA
BLACK GOITONHOOD
A5 51-10WN 13 3' HT.
WELL -BRANCHED
• P5UEDOT5UGA MENZE151I
DOIUGL.AS FIR
AS 5HOHN 22 3' Air
FULL S BUSHY
• 5ALIX IA5IANDRA
PACIFIC, WILLOW
3/5YMB0L 243 4' HT-
I/2" DIA
O THUJA PLIGATA
WESTERN RED CEDAR
AS SHOWN 41, 38 V, W HT-
FULL a 5U5HY
T5U6A HETEROPHYLLA
WESTERN HB-ILOCK
AS 5HOHN 23, 18 V, 8' HT.
FULL E BUSHY
5HRU55
SCiWnI"tG NAME
COMMON NAmtE
SPACING OTY 5L7E
NOTiS
0 — CORNUS 5ERICEA
RED-051ER DOGWOOD
3' O-G. 11T 18' HT.
3 CANE MIN., I GAL.
.Q- LONGERA INVOLUCRATA
BLACK TWINB62RY
3' O.G. 59 IB" HT.
3 CANE MIN., I GAL.
MAHONIA AOLIFOLIUM
TALI OREGONGRAPE
3' O-r— 151 18" FIT.
FULL a BUSHY, 2 GAL.
�-- PHY5OGARPUS GAPITATUS
PACIFIC NINFBARK
3' O-G. 5T 15" HT.
3 CANE MIN., I GAL.
-_ -"-- o- RIBE5 SANGUINEUM
RED FLOWERING CURRANT
5' O.G. 30 1&" HT.
3 GANE MIN., I GAL.
0— ROSA P150GARPA
CLUSTERED R05E
3' D.G. 1g4 10' HT
3 CANE MIN-, I GAL.
v 5ALIX 5GOULERIANA
50OULER WILLOW
3/5YM0L 3n0 4' HIT_
B
1/2' DIA.
� �
a— VIBURNUM FDUI F
HI6F1-E15H CRANBERRY
5' O.G. 21 IW HT.
3 GAME MIN, I GAL.
AETLAND SEED MIX In the mitigation Fletkvd6 and In the detention pond below elevatlon 405.
u&Vng I T NAL•'IE
GOMMPN NWT
20% 5--A CAREX OBWPTA
SLOUGH SEDGE
HYDR05EED
20% 3.57E GLYCERIN F1ATA
TALL MANNAG1ER-LE
'
2OAi OJS# ,I1NC.U5 ENSIFOLIUS
F RUSH
DAGGC-R-LEAF RUSH
� ��
��
20% 0.25# _IU IC U5 TENUIS
SLBDER RI151-I
20% 05# SGIRPIUS MIGROGARPUS SHALL-FRIUITI37 B)LRU51-1 SUFF�yAG �V/�
ER 5EED MIX In tha n$tlgvcjoA upltnd5 and h the detention Pond above elevotlon 40
CONNI�R'?N NAME
100% 50# RE .RIEEN
STERILE t"E-EAT 6RA55
50# HYDR05EFP MIX
1000# HOOD FIBER MULCH
I�
Ir
ul
Qz O
Z J F-
F a- z
�O
a,�,K
Z
A
w
ZJp�[Ul
IL K y- H-
PmjecR# 3 15
'- "
WYOFH A
si,_WILDI . .
- J —0 i
SCALE, I'
IE=207.0I w v w\
- � 1 ,y /Y� y. .y y � .}v / v v W .V � v w �'JI,`y v `w\ \ y • � � (`r'�+`.r�
-41; W v v W v` L- v r•L� 1 •Y J. �,�� ` �q 4 .!
/ 1y % � .,, � mow/ � .,. .. w v W V :j I( -. 1�` % u ��: aY� .�yl� '%�� •+ � /� J111...ww-
)o
r � W W w W / 1e. v �f• .Y \v W I•Y v •� W .y `ti. .r v ti- � ` 1 ' ��
� .J „ / ,✓ w v v ... r, v s w .� � w /
, y W J' w W w W J•' � I
JW v v v v W W w .✓ V Y w W/ � 7
0
5 y v W v v W •Y W w W W �. i
T wf w w
I •L I •✓ v W �v^} w xl�tr
w� �{
0
. 1� % � 4 1 w r v W w v •v v .. v w v .. w YyV v
v W.
0
w\ •Y w W w W 1W w� ti
V v I -
\
W y v w w W
w Y
3-
.0
/ � � v Y W ., w N•� W/
W
Gi?AD I NG PLAN LEGEND
— — — — EXI5TING CONTOUR
PROPOSCONTOUR
• EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN
--y WETLAND MITIGATION CLEARING LIMITS
DOW LOG, 5TUMP (see specs)
5NA6 (see DetDll I, W2.1)
NOTES
I. BASE INPOWATTON AND GML EN61Nl ER1N6 P20'AV D
BY J3 CIVIL EN91NEE 14 - 3�+'[81A41. 1'IA.
]. 5E£ CIVIL PLANS FOR DETA[LED INFORl4AT10N REL.,°•T'ED
TO Yen A IiYOROLd61G SUPPLY. DETENTTON F:7ND
VE518W AND 5RA17]?16, OUTLkT CULVERT$. �N GONTFLDL,
5tYE DPVEiOPA'EHT F�F2AflIN6 AND � AIKA'ce
3_ SEE CQNsTJ;04T[ON 5PEG[PIGATION5 (H4.y FOR DETAILED
INFORMATION RELATED TD Ih7PLHH0NAVON OF T145 PLAN.
4_ ALL &RAVED MIT[6Ai10N AREAS SHALL BE OVER-
E=-AVATEO 12' FOR PLACEMENT Cr- 12' OF STOCKPILED
UPLAND AND WETLAND TOP501L FROM DEVELOPED
PORRON9 OF THE SITE.
S. ALL HEII_AND MITt6ATION PLANTING AREAS SHALL DE
IRRIGATED FOR AT LFA5T 2 YEARS AFTER PLANT
IW2TALLATTOK
6. NETLAND PE3JNEATTON. CATE50RITAYION, MAINIENANGE Q
MONITMNG RI�ORT HERE DONE BT' G- 6AitY SGIa° y
EGOI-o515T - 5EATT E PLA - 206 TI2J$514.
-L ADA H. R99PON54BLE FOR THE CM16N PORTION OF THE
kETLAND MITIGATION ONLY.
nil
o tO 20 40
i
_ - f SNA,G sw EST 110?1 DET.'4I L
1 W t ' -1�9 � 5�1. IKVE A H96: Al•14F EIGHT ~
� A6lg4TID :.�
j i � 2.1MMWF1 3•'R1PL D�tl+ OF 2556. , �
1 , I g yr(l�q ro 9E IISrN.LO As NEAR ro
v�R c� u Po55nxt_
PLA.:EMB�IT i ()
O
+� II
I FINISHED ELEVATION
1- I SA4CFC.L HIT. EXCAVATr� SOILS
3D V NATIVE 501L5
n I�
"� `'
IZ• min. ' I I I F �.
I
12" 1 1/4' CRUSHED ROCK
r
l\
2)51 LT PENCE DETA I L
.XJQ[T5 IN,y WK FAMUG SHALL BE Sm-w-w
AT PO9T5- USE STARES, 'MIRE WeYf OR
0=VALp},T TO ATTACH PAgpl✓: TO yOSTg.
2'a' BY 14 5A. HIRE OR
EdlMALLNT- IF STA
FABRIC USED
5TRENGTH
FILTER FaOrxIG
WL
N i H!NIKH 4'.4' TRENCH
6 - BACK LL TRENCH HITH
NATIVE SOIL OR 3/4'-13'
K-,SREV GRAVEL
/
' 5PACd HAY BE
INCRBA,55D TO D' IF MIRE 2Sc4' HOOD POST5, 5TEEL
gACACAK Is V5B7 FENCE POSTS, REBAR OR
ELEVATION EOUIVALENr GRO55 SECTION
1 SILT FENCE MAINTENANCE STANDARDS,
1. AWr CAKA4E 5HALL BE FSPO•MEA Q'nwWIATar.
—_ __.�-----__- 1-IRxONGC!RRFTlIO.IYAI•BA-Aff EDE8T-U LORE.OF
THE FENCE. THEY MUST BE INB:C.EP AND
'
(gNJErM TO A 5n2WVrT POW,
3. cc"mmYGl2 %cAu drw< THE IR5LOI E SIDE OF
11-'P FBICE FOR vath5 OF GLC "** 0 5U65EWENT
/
C WQ8L12ATION OF FLoli5 PARALLEL TO THE FENCE
IF THIS OLCUR5, REPLACE THE FENCE AND/OR REMOVE
THE raAPPM SE91Ia°.liT,
4. 5ED*4 U EEC F9'1O.'ED WFEN AGCI.MILATION
&'
I
DN DEPTH.
EXCEEDS
pj"glns
0
STATE OF
KASHlN6TON
REGISTERED
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
NE CATHERINE OLIVER
ERIFICATE NO- T44
EtPIRE( b/25/01
BAT R005T1NG BOX DETAIL 0 D�y _1
N.T5 z z IL d
t < F Ck
of iu
- %D K
DQ'E-T OI
A - ROOF, F, iI'XIO" -
B BALK, B'2Q2'
LiD SIDE, 4' IN FIN BACK AND 9 I I I 1 I 1 B' ON , O IN FRONT
E FROM, ARTI'lal V4' Om j I I
F FIRST PARTITION, PARTITION, 5I'
G THIRDSECOP PTlOO15 X5'
N THIRD PARTITIOµ B'X3'
SPACING BETPEEN PARTITIONS,
FRONT TO BACK, 3/4', 3/4, 1', 1 3/4-
PERSPECTIVE SEGTIO�,
1. AAT ArH W.V5 ONTO TIE TTMdC OF MI 45' . 01& LIVE CONIFER TREE, ��
7. gA4A BOXES AT LMST 15. AWVE TIE 6RNiO IN A LOCATION 14ERE ENTRY .�
ly UNO9� }{p,G7� �Ujq 9pT5 NAY'E EAST
3• LO1157rs�'r BDD�s Dui 4P I` 59/4' AL.TUALA K
4. USE ONLY 6ALVATII�L"P IW L5.
PAGEA_OF-! s
CITYC fE A
BUILDW l
z
If n
k;
sky 31.4
TH PL
a
TRACT B
5TORI-I DRAINAGE j'
0
1p N)=286 95
I 'E
'C,E)=-99. 15 9
MIRROR H06D
VOL. 121, PC, 11
6
-za
r
7, 77. 737
r
HETLANI?
2-n
AW
3148 Sa FT--
4
ma-
< 25
-fck. •
21 -38t 50, r-T.±-
WETLAND "CID"
3,56& SO. FT.`--7RAC,r A'-
a-p
p-1
, F
-- - - - - - - - -
T
jA
T 4- t/ a. 1.2lam' r4
'/3
rD
v
7
----------
MIRROP, OLEM Mfxl..
r I
i, - fj
P6. 62
VOL 19, 36
VOL. fWF&. &q
-J,
11
jj
'T
J.,
ju 5H 316TH FL
I Al
22
tea.;7a
5 r
(L F
EXHIBIT
lu
PAGE-L-OF-I'- >'
ri K IL
OVERVICH PLAN � � � � � I I I
5CA,LE, V m 50'
OVERVIEN PLAN LE6END JACTLAND IMPACTS HETLAND MITI&ATION NOTES INDEX OF DRAHINC-79
----------EXISTING CONrOUR WrLAbiD IMPACT - '016 sf r 1, BASE INFORMATION AND CIVIL ENGINEERINO PROVIDED 5, ALL kETLAND MIT16ATION PLANTINO AREAS SHALL BE PqIJ OVERVIEW PLAN -AL5
IFXISTING VETLAND BY J3 CIVIL EM51NEERINC- - 155AGIUAH, KA IRRIOATED FOR AT LEAST 2 YEARS AFTER PLANT HZI GRADING PLAN 9 GRADING PET SCHEDULE
2. SEE CIVIL PLANS FOR DETAILED INFORMATION RELATED INSTALLATION. H3 I PLANTING PLAN, PLANTINC, DETAILS 4 PLANT 51-
PROP05ED CONTOUR NZI-1 0/20i TO WETLAND HYDROLOGIC SUPPLY, DETENTION POND 6. WETLAND DELINEATION, CATEGORIZATION, MAINTENANCE a
EXISTING TREES Uillltr�Tf�l WETLAND IMPACT - le,&6 sF WETLAND CREATION DESIGN AND GRADING, OUTLET CULVERTS, ER0510M CONTROL, MONITORING REPORT HERE DONE BY G. GARY SGHUL7- k44 SPECIFICATIONS
BUFFER IMPACT - 23,415 9f BUFFER ENHANCEMENT - 35,312 sF SITE DEVELOPMENT &RADING, AND DRAN,4d,-E- ECOLOGIST - 5aATTLE, HA - 206T72,6514.
3. SEE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS (H4.1) FOR DETAILED -7. AOA 15 RESPONSIBLE FOR T14E DESIGN PORTION OF TIE INFORMATION RELATED TO IMPLEMENATION OF THIS PLAN. WETLAND MITIOATION ONLY- 05-100590
4. ALL GRADED MITIGATION AREAS SHALL BE OVER -
EXCAVATED 12" FOR PLACEMENT OF 12" OF STOCKPILED RESUBMITTED
Dm 311610b
UPLAND AND WETLAND TOP501L FROM DEVELOPED scdo I'=c;n'
PoR-noN5 OF THE SITE. JAN'23 Zoo,'
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
13ijil-DING:0EPT.